Someone here knows what they are talking about, now please go tell Corporate America!:)
I work at my computer for a living, I spend 8 hours a day at my computer. The cost of the monitors over 3 years is peanuts compared to getting more done.
So I have three Dell 30" monitors for a total desktop space of 7680x1600.
Frankly, the minute a decent 30" monitor with 4k resolution comes out, I'll be all over those.
Why people put up with cheap monitors when they use a computer for a living is beyond me.
This means that mass deaths in USSR were... legal?
Yes, of course. Not everything that is legal is right and not everything that is right is legal.
What Hitler did was "legal", the rest of the world disagreed and decided to do something about it. They didn't take him to court, they used force and power.
The Indians didn't live within the borders of the United States at the time they were killed, at least not most of them. How do you call someone a US Citizen when they live outside of your country?
If you measure "efficiency" from a corporate-centric perspective, as in "what maximizes returns to the rich ruling class," then yes, it may well be most efficient to create a horrendously stratified and unequal society that turns the majority of workers into interchangeable labor drones.
I read this several times, trying to absorb and understand what you're saying or thinking here.
The first question I'd ask is, "why do most people become interchangeable labor drones?".
The second question I'd ask is, "how does trying to make white collar workers do blue collar jobs help blue collar workers?" Are you planning to have the people who currently clean toilets full time become scientists and engineers?
However, considering efficiency from the perspective of a whole society, which means taking into account everyone's quality of life, it's OK to decrease "unit productivity per time" in exchange for giving a lot more people opportunity/ability to live richer lives, rather than a tiny lucky few.
I read this several times as well. What it sounds like you're saying is... "rather than lift up the toilet cleaners of the world, we're going to make everyone clean toilets so everyone seems to be equal".
I fail to see how making a white collar worker clean toilets changes anything, because you sure can't give his/her job to the former toilet cleaners.
And what is your solution when the white collar workers all say "no"? Frankly, the blue collar workers can probably beat up the white collar workers, however the white collar workers can hire a much better army than the blue collar workers can.
I'm not trying to justify murder, but there is a difference between killing your own people and killing someone else's people. You may not like the difference, you may not think it matters, but there is one.
Regarding your example, that isn't the same because it involves someone who was a US Citizen and had it removed. The Indians never had it to begin with.
There is a basic truth that gets overlooked by people who want to live in a happy, fuzzy world:
Those with power and force rule over those who lack it. All the pretty facades of civilization don't change that point.
European explorers showed up in the new world about 500 years ago, found various civilizations that were more primitive than they were, and began to exploit the situation. Once the local people figured this out, they tried to various extents, to stand up for themselves. As the people from Europe had guns and cannon and the people from America did not, the outcome was easy to predict.
Now you can make a case for that being "right or wrong", but it doesn't really matter, the person with force and power doesn't have to listen to your moral argument.
If you want to make a moral argument that sticks, get your own force and power, then people will listen to you. It sounds crude to say "might makes right", but it sure does seem to be effective.
The USSR killed millions of Russians inside Russia.
The USA kill millions of Indians outside of the USA. Those Indians were not US Citizens.
Did we steal their land? Yes, but then again they were unable to hold it, didn't believe in "ownership of land", and so forth. So maybe we didn't steal it since it was "unclaimed".:)
They aren't paid at home, I'm talking about at work...
At work, they are paid by the company for X amount of their time. Should that paid time be for doing their jobs, or for cleaning toilets?
As for home servents, actually I'm willing to bet that most scientists/engineers can afford a weekly cleaning service. I have one and haven't cleaned a toilet in... well, forever.
If you don't think that moving millions of intellectuals from the cities to the countryside during the Great Leap Forward was a primary factory in its failure, then we are simply going to have to disagree on that one.
1. Forcing engineers and scientists to clean toilets is a horrible waste of resources. It has also been tried, learn some recent history, read up on the "Great Leap Forward" in China and see how badly that went moving "smart people" into the crop fields.
2. What happens when those people simply don't want to clean the toilets and simply say "no" when you ask them to?
The problem with your idea comes when I say, "sorry, I don't want to clean the toilets, I'm not going to clean the toilets, unless of course you put a gun in my face".
Now today a company owner doesn't have to employ me and I don't have to work there, but if "everyone has to do every job" in your dream world, then who is enforcing this?
So you're welcome to clean toilets, but I'm not going to. Unless of course forced to by the threat of violence, but then we just have moved from money to force as a class system.
99.99% isn't good enough... Not to me anyway, which is why I don't care for the AR-15/M-16/M-4 line, unless you keep them clean and buy a high quality rifle, they just have too many jams.
I own an AK-47 that I purchased almost 20 years ago, in that time I've put well over 10,000 rounds though it, cleaned it twice in all that time.
I've used Wolf ammo, Eastern European Mil-Surplus ammo, and every other junk ammo you can imagine.
Never a failure to feed, never a failure to fire, ever. Damm reliable gun. Not very accurate, but it does go bang every time and if you're shooting at something less than 100 yards away, it is accurate enough. Beyond that, it is more spray and pray, or covering fire.
BTW, a family friend served in Vietnam in the Marines. He once told me about finding an AK-47 burred in the mud, looked like it had been there forever, was rusted shut. Took several really strong boot kicks to the bolt handle to bust the rust loose. Dunked it in to water, slapped a new mag in, fired the whole mag without failure.
That attitude is why so few businesses in the world are 100 years old or older, they keep going out of business.
The problem is, any business that takes your worldview gets run over by a business that takes profit at all costs.
Walmart is a perfect example, many "old-school" businesses thought like you do, until they were all run out of business by Walmart who started selling below their costs.
I'm sorry, but perhaps I'm just old-fashioned...
But ditch the laptop for full time use and get a desktop with 2 or 3 real desktop computer monitors and move on with life.
The cost of doing that is minor compared to what you are, or should be getting paid.
I've done similar work and I use a trio of 30" IPS displays and would never, ever, ever go back to less.
The amount of work that can be gotten done on such real estate cannot be under estimated.
Yes, but it is much easier to fly a small airplane into a ferris wheel than it is the L train. Knock the thing over, what a mess. From the terrorists point of view, it would look good on TV (for them).
My first thought on reading that it would hold 1,440 people at once... in New York City... What a tempting target for a terrorist... Yea, I've been brainwashed, I know it...
Which OS sucks at caching? For desktop use, there are two OSes to pick from, Windows and OS X, and OS X is a very small part of the market, about 8%, but it does have a strong consumer penetration. (No, Linux doesn't count, at 1% of the overall market, and for primary desktop use, is just a rounding error)
I suspect the demographics at SlashDot are not really a good spread of the *mass market*, for the average user, a SSD is such an amazing upgrade, people don't know how they lived without it.
I have installed a SSD into my mother-in-laws laptop, my mother's desktop, friend's computers, everyone, without question, are amazed at the difference. Everything is just so much *snappier* compared to before.
And people really do open and close programs, my mother-in-law often opens her laptop, does something for 10 min, then closes it, which hibernates it. Then later she'll open it again, do something else, then close it again. Even just the speed of hibernation and waking up is huge. Then when you launch new programs that were closed...
For always on, everything always open machines, I see how it matters less with everything cached in memory, but I don't believe that is how average people use their computers.
Running a computer that you actually use, not a server that just sits there, but your actual desktop or laptop...
If you haven't tried it, you don't understand, if you try it, you will never, ever go back to spinning disks. The difference is so far beyond night and day, it is just amazing. Much greater than the jump from single core to dual core, much more than most other tech jumps over the years. Take the move from Pentium 4 to Core 2, then multiply that jump times about 50.
That is how much of a difference SSDs are over HDDs.
Slashdot Mirror
The cost to do business in Denmark is high, or do you think all those wonderful government benefits are really free?
They are now old, LCD monitors aren't meant to be used for a decade.
Someone here knows what they are talking about, now please go tell Corporate America! :)
I work at my computer for a living, I spend 8 hours a day at my computer. The cost of the monitors over 3 years is peanuts compared to getting more done.
So I have three Dell 30" monitors for a total desktop space of 7680x1600.
Frankly, the minute a decent 30" monitor with 4k resolution comes out, I'll be all over those.
Why people put up with cheap monitors when they use a computer for a living is beyond me.
This means that mass deaths in USSR were ... legal?
Yes, of course. Not everything that is legal is right and not everything that is right is legal.
What Hitler did was "legal", the rest of the world disagreed and decided to do something about it. They didn't take him to court, they used force and power.
The Indians didn't live within the borders of the United States at the time they were killed, at least not most of them. How do you call someone a US Citizen when they live outside of your country?
If you measure "efficiency" from a corporate-centric perspective, as in "what maximizes returns to the rich ruling class," then yes, it may well be most efficient to create a horrendously stratified and unequal society that turns the majority of workers into interchangeable labor drones.
I read this several times, trying to absorb and understand what you're saying or thinking here.
The first question I'd ask is, "why do most people become interchangeable labor drones?".
The second question I'd ask is, "how does trying to make white collar workers do blue collar jobs help blue collar workers?" Are you planning to have the people who currently clean toilets full time become scientists and engineers?
However, considering efficiency from the perspective of a whole society, which means taking into account everyone's quality of life, it's OK to decrease "unit productivity per time" in exchange for giving a lot more people opportunity/ability to live richer lives, rather than a tiny lucky few.
I read this several times as well. What it sounds like you're saying is... "rather than lift up the toilet cleaners of the world, we're going to make everyone clean toilets so everyone seems to be equal".
I fail to see how making a white collar worker clean toilets changes anything, because you sure can't give his/her job to the former toilet cleaners.
And what is your solution when the white collar workers all say "no"? Frankly, the blue collar workers can probably beat up the white collar workers, however the white collar workers can hire a much better army than the blue collar workers can.
Regarding your example, that isn't the same because it involves someone who was a US Citizen and had it removed. The Indians never had it to begin with.
There is a basic truth that gets overlooked by people who want to live in a happy, fuzzy world:
Those with power and force rule over those who lack it. All the pretty facades of civilization don't change that point.
European explorers showed up in the new world about 500 years ago, found various civilizations that were more primitive than they were, and began to exploit the situation. Once the local people figured this out, they tried to various extents, to stand up for themselves. As the people from Europe had guns and cannon and the people from America did not, the outcome was easy to predict.
Now you can make a case for that being "right or wrong", but it doesn't really matter, the person with force and power doesn't have to listen to your moral argument.
If you want to make a moral argument that sticks, get your own force and power, then people will listen to you. It sounds crude to say "might makes right", but it sure does seem to be effective.
No thank you, I pay someone to do that...
If you try to force me to do so, then I'm going to use force to try and prevent you from doing so.
So it comes back to force rather than money. I may or may not win (along with those who think like me), but we'll sure give you a run for your money.
Side note: this is the sort of mistake that such people make when using such thinking. You assume that my only two choices are:
1. To go along and clean the toilets.
2. To live under a bridge eating rotten food.
I have a third choice...
3. Remove you from power by force...
The USSR killed millions of Russians inside Russia.
The USA kill millions of Indians outside of the USA. Those Indians were not US Citizens.
Did we steal their land? Yes, but then again they were unable to hold it, didn't believe in "ownership of land", and so forth. So maybe we didn't steal it since it was "unclaimed". :)
At work, they are paid by the company for X amount of their time. Should that paid time be for doing their jobs, or for cleaning toilets?
As for home servents, actually I'm willing to bet that most scientists/engineers can afford a weekly cleaning service. I have one and haven't cleaned a toilet in... well, forever.
If you don't think that moving millions of intellectuals from the cities to the countryside during the Great Leap Forward was a primary factory in its failure, then we are simply going to have to disagree on that one.
A great number of those "American Indians" were not actually in "America" at the time they were killed. Something to consider...
I see a lot of ideas tossed out by people who fail to take into account how human beings actually work.
More room for my pinball table collection? And my robots will clean it...
1. Forcing engineers and scientists to clean toilets is a horrible waste of resources. It has also been tried, learn some recent history, read up on the "Great Leap Forward" in China and see how badly that went moving "smart people" into the crop fields.
2. What happens when those people simply don't want to clean the toilets and simply say "no" when you ask them to?
Now today a company owner doesn't have to employ me and I don't have to work there, but if "everyone has to do every job" in your dream world, then who is enforcing this?
So you're welcome to clean toilets, but I'm not going to. Unless of course forced to by the threat of violence, but then we just have moved from money to force as a class system.
So in all fairness, you don't have a moral leg to stand on either...
I own an AK-47 that I purchased almost 20 years ago, in that time I've put well over 10,000 rounds though it, cleaned it twice in all that time.
I've used Wolf ammo, Eastern European Mil-Surplus ammo, and every other junk ammo you can imagine.
Never a failure to feed, never a failure to fire, ever. Damm reliable gun. Not very accurate, but it does go bang every time and if you're shooting at something less than 100 yards away, it is accurate enough. Beyond that, it is more spray and pray, or covering fire.
BTW, a family friend served in Vietnam in the Marines. He once told me about finding an AK-47 burred in the mud, looked like it had been there forever, was rusted shut. Took several really strong boot kicks to the bolt handle to bust the rust loose. Dunked it in to water, slapped a new mag in, fired the whole mag without failure.
Amazing weapon...
The problem is, any business that takes your worldview gets run over by a business that takes profit at all costs.
Walmart is a perfect example, many "old-school" businesses thought like you do, until they were all run out of business by Walmart who started selling below their costs.
Hmm... Since I am a reasonably rich white guy, perhaps I should move to 1913... :)
I'm sorry, but perhaps I'm just old-fashioned... But ditch the laptop for full time use and get a desktop with 2 or 3 real desktop computer monitors and move on with life. The cost of doing that is minor compared to what you are, or should be getting paid. I've done similar work and I use a trio of 30" IPS displays and would never, ever, ever go back to less. The amount of work that can be gotten done on such real estate cannot be under estimated.
Yes, but it is much easier to fly a small airplane into a ferris wheel than it is the L train. Knock the thing over, what a mess. From the terrorists point of view, it would look good on TV (for them).
My first thought on reading that it would hold 1,440 people at once... in New York City... What a tempting target for a terrorist... Yea, I've been brainwashed, I know it...
Which OS sucks at caching? For desktop use, there are two OSes to pick from, Windows and OS X, and OS X is a very small part of the market, about 8%, but it does have a strong consumer penetration. (No, Linux doesn't count, at 1% of the overall market, and for primary desktop use, is just a rounding error)
I suspect the demographics at SlashDot are not really a good spread of the *mass market*, for the average user, a SSD is such an amazing upgrade, people don't know how they lived without it.
I have installed a SSD into my mother-in-laws laptop, my mother's desktop, friend's computers, everyone, without question, are amazed at the difference. Everything is just so much *snappier* compared to before.
And people really do open and close programs, my mother-in-law often opens her laptop, does something for 10 min, then closes it, which hibernates it. Then later she'll open it again, do something else, then close it again. Even just the speed of hibernation and waking up is huge. Then when you launch new programs that were closed...
For always on, everything always open machines, I see how it matters less with everything cached in memory, but I don't believe that is how average people use their computers.
Running a computer that you actually use, not a server that just sits there, but your actual desktop or laptop...
If you haven't tried it, you don't understand, if you try it, you will never, ever go back to spinning disks. The difference is so far beyond night and day, it is just amazing. Much greater than the jump from single core to dual core, much more than most other tech jumps over the years. Take the move from Pentium 4 to Core 2, then multiply that jump times about 50.
That is how much of a difference SSDs are over HDDs.
But if you have the space to have both drives, the amount of time you won't waste by having the SSD boot drive, is a lot...
I suspect a lot of people here dissing SSDs have never actually used one in their primary system. Once you go SSD, you never go back, it is painful.