Actually, both Windows and Linux offer you better solutions, but that's beside the point. The point is that you're clearly in the very small minority that legitimately needs admin access. Clearly someone is going to need it. It's just that the folks running exclusively Word and Outlook aren't those people.
Why on earth would an organization wanting secure desktops give their users full admin access? That goes for Windows and Linux. There is *no* reason that a corporate user needs to have an admin account. Exactly like on Linux, limiting Windows users to a non-privileged account greatly limits the damage that they can cause.
I hate the fact that Microsoft charges an arm and a leg for Windows/MSVS/everything. But I like C#.
Don't know if you're aware, but you can grab the.NET SDK (which includes the runtime, command line compilers, and so on) for free from Microsoft's web site. That doesn't give you access to VS, obviously, but it is a really nice way to do some light-weight development in the language without having to shell out.
From my own internship experience there, this is *highly* group dependent. There are groups where one might be expected to pull 60 hours a week, but there are many where 40 or so would be perfectly acceptable.
>> However when it really comes down to using my PC I really prefer a keyboard over a pen & screen combo.
Why on earth would you have to choose pen and screen if you're doing something where a keyboard is better? Sounds like a convertible Tablet is right up your alley: completely normal laptop keyboard, high-end laptop specs, and you can rotate the screen into Tablet mode if you like.
The fun of my Tablet is that I can take notes (I'm a CS student, being able to make diagrams in my notes is key), but that if I want to type an email, I rotate the keyboard into view and *type it*.
They didn't start their business on a raid rack made out of Legos. They started their research project on a raid rack make out of Legos. Back when google was http://google.stanford.edu, they were running the server out of their dorm room.
By the time they cranked up the business and got funding, the lego rack had been retired.
If your school is part of the MSDN Academic Alliance (MSDN-AA), the deal will have been with the CS/CE/EE departments, not with the bookstore. Try talking to the IT admin for those departments and see if they know anything about MSDN-AA.
Actually, that's not true. Microsoft donated something called the MSDN Academic Alliance program to several hundred colleges and universities, meaning the school not only received the software, but received the server to host the downloads as well.
You're right in that providing artificial gravity is a possibility, but the amount of fuel to accelerate at 9.8 m^2 half way there is huge, and there's not really a reason for doing it like that.
There are two good alternatives, though, which have been tossed around, and have the same effect, though with very little fuel use. One is to send a cylindrical ship, and spin it about it's axis, so that there is a force pushing the astronauts to the outside walls. Like in 2001.
That works, but it creates some weird design problems, as far as headroom and living on the walls.
The other option is to let out a tether with a countermass on the end of it, and then spin around a central point on the tether. With a big enough countermass, or a long enough tether, this works really well, and it's comfortable for the astronauts, as they can stay oriented to the 'floor' of their ship.
There was originally a plan to put something necessary at the other end of the tether, like fuel for the return trip or something, but it turns out to be much more efficient if you can just put something disposable on it (like one of those big boosters you used to leave Earth). That way you can just pop a bolt when you get to Mars, and don't have to worry about the tether snagging when you try to reel it back in.
A book that talks a lot about this is Robert Zubrin's "The Case for Mars". He's the president of the Mars Society, and is pretty knowledgeable about this stuff. I highly recommend the book to anyone interested in some of the design challenges, and why we can beat them.
I happen to really agree with your #'s 2 and 3, but your number one gives me pause for thought. To grow the Linux userbase (and here we're not talking about developers or servers, but rather casual users) you need an easy, consistant install for games and drivers.
It's extremely important for there to be GUI support within a control panel somewhere for driver upgrading and installation. You need a casual user to be able to pop in the game CD, download a new video card driver and then just go. No one wants to deal with their X version, dependencies, or whatever. It needs to just work. There are projects out there for this, but until they're to a more complete state, and relatively widespread, you're not going to get casual gamers. There are relatively few folks out there who get a kick out of compiling drivers and then going through a painful process. It's another 'it needs to just work' situation.
In my opinion, that's what Linux needs, an easy way to handle all this stuff, and keep your 3D drivers up to date, as well as all the things they tend to depend on. When we have that, Windows gaming won't be able to keep their clear lead for long, because casual gamers will just be able to click 'Upgrade my driver' and have it work, instead of mucking about being frustrated.
Those first three links were really interesting, and your point is well taken. The Marbury v. Madison is interesting too, but what that case was about (I'm a junior CS student, so take with tablespoons of salt) was the Supreme Court (of which Marshall was the Chief Justice). Judicial review as I understand it is the power of the Supreme Court to look at any law passed by Congress, as opposed to laws that need to be taken into account when a case comes before them.
I think the difference is that the job of the Supreme Court is to examine the constitutionality (sp?) of a case, and the laws which brought that case about, while the job of Circuit and District courts is to look at the procedural flaws (or lack thereof) in a case. Apparently (and I screwed this up) they can also question the validity of the law as well, but that's not their main purpose, whereas the Supreme Court exists to make sure citizens of the United States aren't subjected to unconstitutional laws by Congress.
Thanks for the correction, though, I should have looked it up first to be sure. Thanks!
Actually, that's not correct either. The job of The Supreme Court is to determine the validity of laws. Your average Circuit court just decides whether you've broken a law, without regard to the validity of that law. That's why only the Supreme Court can declare a law unconstitutional, and circuit courts aren't blasting acts of Congress left and right.
I'm a junior in Computer Science at Stanford, and we've essentially got five majors that span everything from NP-complete to building logic gates.
First, Computer Science. It starts out with programming in C, then moves to Java, and a healthy dose of theory. Computer Science is where a lot of people learn to be programmers, as they pick up enough of the theory to be able to really design an application. There are also classes in hardware, but only the extent of "how do I program for this."
Next comes Symbolic Systems. This major is for people who want to learn a little bit about programming, and then a lot about the ethics and philosophy of machines in general. It's a little abstract for me, and tends to be looked at as CS for non CS folks, but that's not necessarily fair.
Computer Systems Engineering is the cross between hardware and software. You'll learn to program a little bit like the CS folks, but without a lot of the theory. You also take a bunch of circuits classes from the Electrical Engineering department. It's a pretty cool major for people who want to go on to systems design.
Science, Technology and Society is sort of a technical major for managers. It deals a little bit with engineering, but not mch past C programming. Certainly not much in the way of theory. It does, however, have the advantage of a bunch of classes on business, entrepreneurship, and so on, but you can take those from any major here.
Electrical Engineering is for the hardcore hardware people. Everything from signal processing to chip design. EE is one of the biggest majors at Stanford, and it's prettty involved. They are also likely to learn a little bit of C, but the focus is definitely on the hardware.
So, where do you fit? If you love computers, my guess is CS or CSE. CS allows you to pick up all the programming you could want, and here at least, teaches you some hardware as well. CSE is neat in that you learn a lot about hardware, but you also miss out on some of the theory (which can be a plus or a minus!).
I think that's a wonderful point. I know that at Stanford, at least, as a Computer Science major, the practical classes don't even count towards the major. I take the first two theory courses (which are among the hardest at Stanford) and then I can take the "193 series" which are things like C++, Windows Programming, Java, Internet Technologies, and so on, but are, of course, not part of the core major classes, so their units don't count towards my major.
But still, will I have the facility to creatively play with code? Maybe, but if so, it will only be because I had a professor somewhere along the line who taught us how to think about things in a way that leads toward creative implementations. It's frustrating, though, that the only practical skills I would have learned taking a straight major track are coding in C, Java, and Lisp.
Actually, I can give several good reasons this would be true (having played both FFVII and FFVIII on both PC and PSX). First, they were designed from the bottom up to be console games, with all the faults (save points) and advantages (tight, fast-loading game) thereof. Secondly, the PC versions were done poorly, only porting the PSX version straight over... graphics, sound, and everything. This means that you end up with artifacts in your picture, questionable backgrounds and so on. While FFVIII's graphics may be state of the console art, with 3d characters and 2d (but beautiful) backgrounds, they pale in comparison to exquisitely made games like Half-Life and Quake 3. All that being said, I think the big problem with playing it on a computer is that the power of the computer makes any flaws that would have been invisible on the PSX visible on your monitor. -Rg
Computing power would be the least of it. You would live a healthy life for as long as you cared to continue. Poverty, strife, disease, famine, all would go by the wayside. You could go anywhere you want, any time you want. Cancer, diabetes, Lou Gehrig's disease would all be irrelevant. Computing power is the tip of the iceburg.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, both Windows and Linux offer you better solutions, but that's beside the point. The point is that you're clearly in the very small minority that legitimately needs admin access. Clearly someone is going to need it. It's just that the folks running exclusively Word and Outlook aren't those people.
Why on earth would an organization wanting secure desktops give their users full admin access? That goes for Windows and Linux. There is *no* reason that a corporate user needs to have an admin account. Exactly like on Linux, limiting Windows users to a non-privileged account greatly limits the damage that they can cause.
Well, yeah, but that can happen with grad students, too.
I hate the fact that Microsoft charges an arm and a leg for Windows/MSVS/everything. But I like C#.
.NET SDK (which includes the runtime, command line compilers, and so on) for free from Microsoft's web site. That doesn't give you access to VS, obviously, but it is a really nice way to do some light-weight development in the language without having to shell out.
Don't know if you're aware, but you can grab the
From my own internship experience there, this is *highly* group dependent. There are groups where one might be expected to pull 60 hours a week, but there are many where 40 or so would be perfectly acceptable.
>> However when it really comes down to using my PC I really prefer a keyboard over a pen & screen combo.
Why on earth would you have to choose pen and screen if you're doing something where a keyboard is better? Sounds like a convertible Tablet is right up your alley: completely normal laptop keyboard, high-end laptop specs, and you can rotate the screen into Tablet mode if you like.
The fun of my Tablet is that I can take notes (I'm a CS student, being able to make diagrams in my notes is key), but that if I want to type an email, I rotate the keyboard into view and *type it*.
It's good to see they've scaled the hole up to human size... That would be an expensive playhouse otherwise...
;)
Right, 'cause this way it's a perfectly normal place to live
They didn't start their business on a raid rack made out of Legos. They started their research project on a raid rack make out of Legos. Back when google was http://google.stanford.edu, they were running the server out of their dorm room.
By the time they cranked up the business and got funding, the lego rack had been retired.
Reid
If your school is part of the MSDN Academic Alliance (MSDN-AA), the deal will have been with the CS/CE/EE departments, not with the bookstore. Try talking to the IT admin for those departments and see if they know anything about MSDN-AA.
Actually, that's not true. Microsoft donated something called the MSDN Academic Alliance program to several hundred colleges and universities, meaning the school not only received the software, but received the server to host the downloads as well.
You're right in that providing artificial gravity is a possibility, but the amount of fuel to accelerate at 9.8 m^2 half way there is huge, and there's not really a reason for doing it like that.
There are two good alternatives, though, which have been tossed around, and have the same effect, though with very little fuel use. One is to send a cylindrical ship, and spin it about it's axis, so that there is a force pushing the astronauts to the outside walls. Like in 2001.
That works, but it creates some weird design problems, as far as headroom and living on the walls.
The other option is to let out a tether with a countermass on the end of it, and then spin around a central point on the tether. With a big enough countermass, or a long enough tether, this works really well, and it's comfortable for the astronauts, as they can stay oriented to the 'floor' of their ship.
There was originally a plan to put something necessary at the other end of the tether, like fuel for the return trip or something, but it turns out to be much more efficient if you can just put something disposable on it (like one of those big boosters you used to leave Earth). That way you can just pop a bolt when you get to Mars, and don't have to worry about the tether snagging when you try to reel it back in.
A book that talks a lot about this is Robert Zubrin's "The Case for Mars". He's the president of the Mars Society, and is pretty knowledgeable about this stuff. I highly recommend the book to anyone interested in some of the design challenges, and why we can beat them.
I happen to really agree with your #'s 2 and 3, but your number one gives me pause for thought. To grow the Linux userbase (and here we're not talking about developers or servers, but rather casual users) you need an easy, consistant install for games and drivers.
It's extremely important for there to be GUI support within a control panel somewhere for driver upgrading and installation. You need a casual user to be able to pop in the game CD, download a new video card driver and then just go. No one wants to deal with their X version, dependencies, or whatever. It needs to just work. There are projects out there for this, but until they're to a more complete state, and relatively widespread, you're not going to get casual gamers. There are relatively few folks out there who get a kick out of compiling drivers and then going through a painful process. It's another 'it needs to just work' situation.
In my opinion, that's what Linux needs, an easy way to handle all this stuff, and keep your 3D drivers up to date, as well as all the things they tend to depend on. When we have that, Windows gaming won't be able to keep their clear lead for long, because casual gamers will just be able to click 'Upgrade my driver' and have it work, instead of mucking about being frustrated.
Those first three links were really interesting, and your point is well taken. The Marbury v. Madison is interesting too, but what that case was about (I'm a junior CS student, so take with tablespoons of salt) was the Supreme Court (of which Marshall was the Chief Justice). Judicial review as I understand it is the power of the Supreme Court to look at any law passed by Congress, as opposed to laws that need to be taken into account when a case comes before them.
I think the difference is that the job of the Supreme Court is to examine the constitutionality (sp?) of a case, and the laws which brought that case about, while the job of Circuit and District courts is to look at the procedural flaws (or lack thereof) in a case. Apparently (and I screwed this up) they can also question the validity of the law as well, but that's not their main purpose, whereas the Supreme Court exists to make sure citizens of the United States aren't subjected to unconstitutional laws by Congress.
Thanks for the correction, though, I should have looked it up first to be sure. Thanks!
Actually, that's not correct either. The job of The Supreme Court is to determine the validity of laws. Your average Circuit court just decides whether you've broken a law, without regard to the validity of that law. That's why only the Supreme Court can declare a law unconstitutional, and circuit courts aren't blasting acts of Congress left and right.
I'm a junior in Computer Science at Stanford, and we've essentially got five majors that span everything from NP-complete to building logic gates.
First, Computer Science. It starts out with programming in C, then moves to Java, and a healthy dose of theory. Computer Science is where a lot of people learn to be programmers, as they pick up enough of the theory to be able to really design an application. There are also classes in hardware, but only the extent of "how do I program for this."
Next comes Symbolic Systems. This major is for people who want to learn a little bit about programming, and then a lot about the ethics and philosophy of machines in general. It's a little abstract for me, and tends to be looked at as CS for non CS folks, but that's not necessarily fair.
Computer Systems Engineering is the cross between hardware and software. You'll learn to program a little bit like the CS folks, but without a lot of the theory. You also take a bunch of circuits classes from the Electrical Engineering department. It's a pretty cool major for people who want to go on to systems design.
Science, Technology and Society is sort of a technical major for managers. It deals a little bit with engineering, but not mch past C programming. Certainly not much in the way of theory. It does, however, have the advantage of a bunch of classes on business, entrepreneurship, and so on, but you can take those from any major here.
Electrical Engineering is for the hardcore hardware people. Everything from signal processing to chip design. EE is one of the biggest majors at Stanford, and it's prettty involved. They are also likely to learn a little bit of C, but the focus is definitely on the hardware.
So, where do you fit? If you love computers, my guess is CS or CSE. CS allows you to pick up all the programming you could want, and here at least, teaches you some hardware as well. CSE is neat in that you learn a lot about hardware, but you also miss out on some of the theory (which can be a plus or a minus!).
But still, will I have the facility to creatively play with code? Maybe, but if so, it will only be because I had a professor somewhere along the line who taught us how to think about things in a way that leads toward creative implementations. It's frustrating, though, that the only practical skills I would have learned taking a straight major track are coding in C, Java, and Lisp.
Actually, I can give several good reasons this would be true (having played both FFVII and FFVIII on both PC and PSX). First, they were designed from the bottom up to be console games, with all the faults (save points) and advantages (tight, fast-loading game) thereof. Secondly, the PC versions were done poorly, only porting the PSX version straight over... graphics, sound, and everything. This means that you end up with artifacts in your picture, questionable backgrounds and so on. While FFVIII's graphics may be state of the console art, with 3d characters and 2d (but beautiful) backgrounds, they pale in comparison to exquisitely made games like Half-Life and Quake 3. All that being said, I think the big problem with playing it on a computer is that the power of the computer makes any flaws that would have been invisible on the PSX visible on your monitor. -Rg
Computing power would be the least of it. You would live a healthy life for as long as you cared to continue. Poverty, strife, disease, famine, all would go by the wayside. You could go anywhere you want, any time you want. Cancer, diabetes, Lou Gehrig's disease would all be irrelevant. Computing power is the tip of the iceburg.