It's like playing WOW and someone comes up to you and tells you the level of your character, the strength of its spells, don't matter. And all this time these were the things you were aiming for. A lot of people, me included, want to see Linux have 100% market share. What the summary seems to be trying to say is to not treat market share as the main goal. It is going one step beyond what timmarhy is saying. The article does not say that it is the number 1% that is faulty. Instead, it is the desire to know the market share that is misguided.
The market share is not fragmented so evenly as the summary suggests. The majority of the market share is composed of people who only check email, browse the web, etc. I have heard plenty of stories of these people moving seamlessly from Windows to Linux. Linux should be aiming specifically for this group of people because they do not need the proprietary software that musicians/artists/etc. would otherwise need. All their needs can easily be satisfied with Firefox and Thunderbird. There is not much more to the data point than how many people have experienced Linux and found that it satisfied all their needs without the heavy price they must otherwise pay to Microsoft. What Linux needs to do is get itself out there through advertisements, etc. There needs to be more commercials on television like this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwL0G9wK8j4
If you want to show that real life is not that much better than the game play, you will have to pick an example of real life that most people will associate with real life. The real life where people interact happily with others, get married, have children, have good jobs, collect stamps, take walks, etc. This is the replacement life that the OP want his addicted friend to lead. And this is the life that you will have to show is bad, if you want to justify the addicted person's game play.
Maybe I interpreted your post wrong.
Current weapons such as "an M-16 rifle, a machine gun, and a rocket launcher" are optimized for human arms/hands/body. For example, a pistol's handle is made to fit a person's hand. Robots do not need these things, so weapons can be completely redesigned for robots. Therefore, it makes no sense for the summary to say "One bot can operate an M-16 rifle, a machine gun, and a rocket launcher." Robots' weapons, at the very least, do not need a handle the size of a human hand.
Just something to throw into the discussion. When you rent a basketball court for an hour, you aren't allowed to do anything you want on it. This is one extreme. The other extreme is when you buy a transistor, and you have to right to do anything to it you want with it (including short circuiting ground, source, and drain).
Cannot Apple place their product somewhere in between these two extremes? Can they create the deal with the customer, and have the customer make the choice whether to accept the deal or not? So instead of selling the iPhone, Apple is semi-licensing the gadget to the customer.
Having something in your hand does not necessarily let you do anything you want with it. First thing comes to mind is passports. This post is starting to lose track.
I'm on a 12.1 inch x61, so every inch is important. I removed all the toolbars to see more lines. Once you get used to open office without toolbars, it isn't that much different. You'll learn the shortcuts for common things such as superscript control-shift-p, bold control-b, new document control-n, save file control-s, etc., and I've found that I never really use the toolbar enough for it to constantly be there. If I ever need a small function that I never use, such that I don't know the shortcut, then I just unhide the toolbar and look for it.
Also, I think the File-Edit-View toolbar has all the functions in them already.
The way I see it, high skilled visas are a way for a country to get better educated people to come into their country and do useful work for them. If I were anyone without an advanced degree, then I would not apply for a high skilled visa but for just an ordinary visa.
Slashdot Mirror
It's like playing WOW and someone comes up to you and tells you the level of your character, the strength of its spells, don't matter. And all this time these were the things you were aiming for. A lot of people, me included, want to see Linux have 100% market share. What the summary seems to be trying to say is to not treat market share as the main goal. It is going one step beyond what timmarhy is saying. The article does not say that it is the number 1% that is faulty. Instead, it is the desire to know the market share that is misguided.
The market share is not fragmented so evenly as the summary suggests. The majority of the market share is composed of people who only check email, browse the web, etc. I have heard plenty of stories of these people moving seamlessly from Windows to Linux. Linux should be aiming specifically for this group of people because they do not need the proprietary software that musicians/artists/etc. would otherwise need. All their needs can easily be satisfied with Firefox and Thunderbird. There is not much more to the data point than how many people have experienced Linux and found that it satisfied all their needs without the heavy price they must otherwise pay to Microsoft. What Linux needs to do is get itself out there through advertisements, etc. There needs to be more commercials on television like this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwL0G9wK8j4
If you want to show that real life is not that much better than the game play, you will have to pick an example of real life that most people will associate with real life. The real life where people interact happily with others, get married, have children, have good jobs, collect stamps, take walks, etc. This is the replacement life that the OP want his addicted friend to lead. And this is the life that you will have to show is bad, if you want to justify the addicted person's game play. Maybe I interpreted your post wrong.
Current weapons such as "an M-16 rifle, a machine gun, and a rocket launcher" are optimized for human arms/hands/body. For example, a pistol's handle is made to fit a person's hand. Robots do not need these things, so weapons can be completely redesigned for robots. Therefore, it makes no sense for the summary to say "One bot can operate an M-16 rifle, a machine gun, and a rocket launcher." Robots' weapons, at the very least, do not need a handle the size of a human hand.
Just something to throw into the discussion. When you rent a basketball court for an hour, you aren't allowed to do anything you want on it. This is one extreme. The other extreme is when you buy a transistor, and you have to right to do anything to it you want with it (including short circuiting ground, source, and drain). Cannot Apple place their product somewhere in between these two extremes? Can they create the deal with the customer, and have the customer make the choice whether to accept the deal or not? So instead of selling the iPhone, Apple is semi-licensing the gadget to the customer. Having something in your hand does not necessarily let you do anything you want with it. First thing comes to mind is passports. This post is starting to lose track.
I'm on a 12.1 inch x61, so every inch is important. I removed all the toolbars to see more lines. Once you get used to open office without toolbars, it isn't that much different. You'll learn the shortcuts for common things such as superscript control-shift-p, bold control-b, new document control-n, save file control-s, etc., and I've found that I never really use the toolbar enough for it to constantly be there. If I ever need a small function that I never use, such that I don't know the shortcut, then I just unhide the toolbar and look for it. Also, I think the File-Edit-View toolbar has all the functions in them already.
The way I see it, high skilled visas are a way for a country to get better educated people to come into their country and do useful work for them. If I were anyone without an advanced degree, then I would not apply for a high skilled visa but for just an ordinary visa.
It would be bad with binary. All numbers start with 1's.
It is interesting because advertising its own products is not something we generally associate with Google. And this one is especially nice. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNnrFwlTPvY&feature=channel_page