Directories are indexed now (except for some) so it takes a lot less time to just search everything. In windows 98 or XP it wasn't indexed, although XP added a search 4.0 addon that added indexing that wasn't till after vista came out.
Yeah...except you don't know if your index is up to date unless you specifically dig into the control panel and check, there's a *huge* performance hit if you have to re-index for any reason (like deciding 'no, I don't want to search inside encrypted files, thanks!'), and hey, how about that huge security/privacy hole that is your indexed data, all nicely collected in one place for an attacker (or, if you're unfortunate, a police investigator) to riffle through? Sure, it may not be easy for them to get in there, depending on how you have it set up, but if/when they do...
Okay, that site tells me how to set up global options for all searches everywhere in my system. Sure, some of them could be useful, but what if I change my mind? Maybe I don't want to search inside encrypted files under this directory, but I do want to in this other one? What if I want to search inside files in my C:/windows directory, which is *never* indexed, ever? (I see that Alt-T gives you a *few* more real-time search options [under 'folder options'? WTF? really??], but it's still pretty anemic)
I think it's mostly the indexing that's the problem. I don't really need another database on my computer to track what's in all my files, and where they are. That's what the filesystem is for (well, tracking where they are, at least). Besides the security and performance hits, it isn't terribly reliable and has to be rebuilt *from scratch* if you make trivial changes to the way you want things 'searchable'. Sure, without indexing, sometimes a search for a phrase inside a file could take a half-hour or more...but at least I knew that a) if it was in there, it would find it, and b) it's not copying the contents of sensitive files to another location for my 'convenience'.
Thanks for the tips, but I think it'll be a third-party solution for me...now I just got to get out there and try some, instead of bemoaning the 'old days'!;)
I'm still mad about the (basically) neutered search capability for desktop/LAN files in Windows 7.
I keep a command prompt window open and use DIR a lot. Or, if you prefer, you can have a bash prompt (e.g. using Cygwin).
-- Don't just get off my lawn. Get off my neighbour's lawn too.
Unfortunately, my typing speed is approximately 10 wpm (yes, I'm a two, sometimes four-finger typist). While I can muddle by using the command line, I definitely appreciate a well-designed GUI. But thanks for the tip!
I keep Windows' indexing service disabled and use Everything instead. It also works over a network pretty easily, and can double as an ftp server in a pinch. The latter two features can be disabled, of course.
You probably know already, but the Windows search has options to disable the index. That kills some problems because metadata is no longer sought. Then you click around and set it to only search by filenames rather than inside the files, and it's done.
I still miss the old no-nonsense search that came as its own separate program back in the Windows 95 days. I swear Windows 7 still hides some results that you can find manually.
Yess...however on the rare occasion, I do want to be able to search in files. I haven't checked: can you tell it to search inside files with indexing off? Does it have to re-index *everything* before it can do that?
I too miss the no-nonsense search, even if it did take quite a while if you wanted to search inside a bunch of files...although looking at some of the replies, I appreciate people suggesting their fav. third party alternatives and workarounds. Thanks guys!
In Windows 7, search Windows Help for "Advanced tips for searching in Windows":-)
Good point...however it begs the question: why didn't we have to do this in XP? Answer: because it was *much* more intuitive!
I mean, c'mon, who's going to be trying to run Win 7 on a tablet, or something else with a screen smaller than 10 inches? So 'waste' the real estate and give your users easy to configure search options! Or at least have an 'advanced' search option available!
I'm still mad about the (basically) neutered search capability for desktop/LAN files in Windows 7.
What used to be a consistent "right-click, choose 'Search', enter 'filename' OR 'phrase in file', tick off search parameters, optionally expand and enter detailed parameters, hit 'Search' button->Results"
workflow has been 'simplified' to
"enter your search string in this little text window and we'll search inside every goddamn file in this directory/subdirectory (oh, and across teh internets and rifling through your emails too, if you want!) for that search term, no matter how long it takes -> wait for freaking ever -> more results than you ever needed, or no results if it's a system file, not in an indexed location or Windows simply doesn't like it for some reason. Oh, you want additional search parameters? Good luck finding any besides filesize and date modified!"
You used to be able to re-enable old-style search on Vista (somewhat), but I guess they thought it was too much of a dinosaur (or too useful, perhaps) to include in Win 7. Bah. Get off my lawn!
Who put you in charge to say? People have picked random mishmash from the beginning. IMHO, Christianity is like a Chili cook-off. Every one is a little different recipie, but you can look at all of 'em, and and say, yeah, that's chili.
The problems come when the habanero recipe tries to convert or destroy the jalapeno recipe. Or the kidney-bean sects declare that all those who contain brown beans are going to chili hell...that they're not really 'chili'.
I believe GP was making that statement ('You're not a true Christian') as an illustration of that fact, since some other flavour of Christianity will truly and wholeheartedly believe that statement. From what I can see, for most religions, it's an 'all or nothing' thing: those who believe the same are saved, those who believe anything else are damned, and often portrayed as less than human.
People take their chili quite seriously, but rarely are they willing to shun or even kill others for preferring a different flavour...and who, exactly, gets to decide which recipe is the 'True Chili'? Or, to refer back to GP's post, who exactly gets to decide which portions of the recipe are meant to be interpreted literally (teh Truth with a capital 'T'), and which can be substituted without harming the overall recipe (metaphors)? Sure, each can decide for themselves, but don't be surprised if someone else feels differently than you do, and rejects you and your recipe because of it.
The important part is that your chili help you feed yourself, and that your Christianity help you build a relationship with God and Christ.
That's the important part to you, and the more power to you. Others can and do place emphasis on other aspects of their religion/chili. Some simply believe it's not 'right' unless it's painful and/or has inconvenient social consequences...;)
We were looking for something for travel, and this did just what we were looking for. My husband's 17" ACER laptop even fit in there, albeit it was a snug fit (i.e., we tore the flimsy zipper extender tag off while zipping it up...but it fit, and it wasn't going anywhere!). Lots of room for a couple of lenses, external flash and cables, even with the bulky battery extender/grip installed on the Canon Rebel. What I liked best is that we could stow the camera with a long-ish lens attached (our longest is 200mm and there was plenty of room to spare), and it was all well supported and cushioned. Interior partitions are adjustable to allow you to fit your gear. Quick access to both camera and laptop compartments for airport security too;)
As for the tripod/monopod - we got an extra slim/short version and stuck it in the laptop area for day trips. It stuck out the top a bit and looked kinda goofy, and wouldn't have been good to hike with (the tripod would dig into your back if you were wearing it as a proper backpack, instead of just over one shoulder), but it was a workaround that we found useful. It would be nice if they added some tripod straps, tho...
Yeah, now that I've had a reason to give them a look, CSM does seem to be a little more levelheaded than many other sources. They don't appear to skew things based on religious views, at least in the articles I have read so far. True, that sort of thing can happen in any forum or media, so it's nice to see that the editorial staff there isn't being pressured to keep things 'christian' in nature, despite the title.
As for the American comment...no, I'm not, but neither am I one to measure my self worth by the number of newspapers I read, or how far away they are 'printed';) Does that mean I can't ever be European? Am I banned?:)
As I said, I have about an hour a day* (actually, no hours this weekend, since I was AFK), and in this time I choose to learn about what may directly affect my family and I before seeking information on which sheik is building the new mega mall in Dubai (or in Texas, for that matter). If I hear about some interesting national or international news, I sometimes google around for more info than the local papers have, but even that is getting more tedious as one has to wade through the ever-deepening piles of wanna-be 'journalists' who think that Wordpress, a copy/pate icon and some sarcastic comments are all it takes...
I do appreciate the link someone provided to Al-Jazeera, though, I hadn't come across it before. It looks to be (maybe) a bit less sensationalistic and biased than some other world news sources (read: BBC), and their english language site is quite accessible. I'll give it a try now and then, so I can discuss Dubai mega-mall politics with my friends;)
*Oops, that was a comment I made on another thread in this discussion. Sorry!
Extrapolation of results: If you're not on FB at all, you either have immense self esteem or you crave rejection? Or, you know, you have RL friends to interact with, ones who already know the important things about you, and you them...
As an exercise, why don't you choose some news topic, and go read about that topic on various sites around the world.
That's what I have informative and helpful posters at/. for!;)
Seriously, I actually have very little time in the day available for 'entertainment' reading. Sometimes I'll cast my net around for something new and (hopefully!) interesting, but overall I spend *maybe?* an hour a day reading news and articles. This is actually a lot of why I like/. so much, even if the editorial and summary quality stinks sometimes, because it does pull some 'other' news sources to my attention, which I then add to my 'for later' list of reading (like CSM!). (News aggregators are both wonderful and evil, evil little things, btw)
When you went to the store did you skip over anything sold by 3M because you weren't in the mining industry? Do you skip BBC because you don't care about British news? Do you skip Al Jazeera because you don't care about Arabic news?
Umm...yes? At least to 2 and 3? (FYI. 3M is in much, much more than just mining, but I probably wouldn't go browse the industrial/mining supply section of their website. Their electrical and electronics supply section is a different matter entirely!)
I don't get your point: if you're at the magazine rack, do you compulsively pick up and read (or even skim through) every single magazine on the shelf, in alphabetical order, or do you prioritize on magazines that relate to your interests / environment? Would you tend to skip over the 'Kids' section, or the 'Knitting and Crafts' section, for that matter? (not to imply that you don't knit or do crafts;)
Same thing for me whenever I see the words 'Christian' or 'Religious', even if it's conjoined with topics that do interest me, such as 'Science'. Religious discussions are not a topic I am generally interested in, so I don't tend to seek out sources offering them. If I come across a well-written article that comes from such a source, I don't hesitate to share it with friends, I am just less likely to actively seek them out for news without other endorsements.
CSM has amazing articles and unlike most of the drivel coming out of places these days is actually well written and researched. The "Christian" part throws a lot of people but it shouldn't.
Indeed, why not? If I see a publication titled "Kids Science" (or "Seniors Science", or "Science in Mining", etc.), why would I assume it's not tailored for the identified audience? Sure there may be some interesting nuggets to be found, but I would expect the majority of articles to be shaped to appeal to children (or seniors, or miners, etc.). Since I am not a member of the target group, without further information why would I assume there is anything in there to appeal to me?
That being said, now I will check out an issue or two of CSM, based on the comments here. If they can truly keep religion out of the science reporting, then I welcome an addition to my reading list!
For the record, that's a rating of medical safety. So having something that does nothing is medically safe. IN the US, probably in the EU as well.
Great! So I can get my silverware certified and brag that I'm using 'certified medical devices' to eat my dinner? Maybe they'll make me healthier...or maybe I can convince others that they are, generating a market for my new medi-ware. Cool!
If the minimum bar for rating is that the device doesn't actually harm the person using it, then that's what the rating should be called, i.e., 'certified as medically safe', not 'certified as a medical device'. The latter implies that the device actually does something medical, and strikes me as intentionally misleading. But whatever, anything to keep the certification fees flowing in, I guess...
2) Pay attention to her every nuance, her reactions to what you say and do, her favorite ice-cream or wine, where she likes to be touched, anything. Everything she does is data to be stored in your internal database. Pay attention to detail like you do with code, it's an underrated talent that programmers have but don't apply to anything else IRL.
Also useful advice for the aspiring stalker-on-the-go! Seriously, sometimes having someone scrutinize your every move and memorize your every preference can be pretty off-putting. Some women like this, some don't, just like guys. YMMV.
7) Layman's terms, layman's terms, layman's terms, I can't stress this enough. You can't connect with a girl if you can't relate to her. Even with layman's terms, most of our professions are still to complicated to understand. They are just fine with hearing that you really love your job and consider it like an art form and how your work helps people (depending on the profession, that is).
Or, you know, look for a woman who's into the same things you are...not all women get bored discussing code optimization;)
1) Hold yourself to a high standard (hygiene, fashion, confidence [the real kind, not the knock-all-others-down-a-peg kind], health, well-roundedness [have lots of other things to do than obsess over girls and sex])
Yes! The more interests you have (not 'pretend to have', but actually, truly enjoy), the more likely you'll have something in common. My husband and I enjoy picking apart the latest Star Trek movie for flaws as much as we like traveling, diving, or seeking out the perfect cup of coffee. Sure, I prefer console over MMORPG, but it would be boring if we were only interested in the exact same things!;) Try many things, and if you enjoy it, keep doing it!
6) Don't be negative and don't rant about shit she obviously isn't interested in. Some girls DO think nerds are cute, even hot ones, but don't want to hear a long-winded passage about the Prime Directive (whatever that is, I'm a Star Wars fan:p)
You get a gold star for this one. Seldom have I seen truer words on/. Negativity is/should be a big warning bell for you, as well as for her. Who wants to be with someone who just bitches and moans all day, or who can't stop telling stories about how they 'really showed that guy!'? Trust me, it's as tedious in jocks as it is in geeks.
These devices, much like earphones or should we say 'earlumes,' are registered medical devices.
WTF? Where, in Singapore?
Oh, I see, it has CE certification as a 'medical device' for sale in Europe. Well, nice to see the US isn't the only country lowering the bar for snake oil salesmen everywhere...(yes, those magnetic bracelet-thingies are registered under MHRA as 'medical devices')
...I find the idea of charging more for access at 3:00AM a little backwards; I'd expect to pay more for a gig of traffic transferred during peak hours than for a gig of traffic at 3AM. Sure, the 3AM traffic is delivered faster, making it "better service", but I think it makes more sense to incentivize people to make their big transfers at a time of day which is less disruptive to other users.
Of course, there's a whole 'nother/. article on the front page right now about dynamic time-of-day based pricing in the electrical power industry.
That's a good point. Varying the charge/GB throughout the day, then tracking and charging on actual throughput during those times would perhaps make more sense...very much like the power utility is proposing;) That way customers who schedule their heavy traffic during the wee hours still get a price break, but ISPs still have some incentive to boost their overall bandwidth to allow more customers to stream large files during peak hours at a reasonable speed...if they're willing to pay for it, that is.
Not sure if this would be practical, though since not only does it increase logging burdens on ISPs to track realtime usage, they would also have to make that info available to their customers. But I suppose phone companies do this already...hmmm, 'daytime MB' plans? 'Free evening and weekend MB' plans? That could open up a nasty can of worms for the customers...
GGP did. Maybe you should try reading the thread before replying. Oh wait this is slashdot.
Yes, GGP knew it was supposed to be wrench...perhaps because he had already seen that particular indicator? Just because it looks like a wrench to one person doesn't mean it looks like a wrench to others. I work with Lotus Notes, unfortunately, and I still don't know what the icon for 'Document IDs" is supposed to be. To me it looks like a beanie hat with a propeller on top...WTF??
You had a chance to feel useful as a husband; instead you made your wife feel useless.
Feel useful when you realize your wife has never seen a wrench in her life?
Who says it actually resembled a wrench? I know I've seen indicators flash up, especially on older cars, that took some creative squinting and lots of thumbing through the manual to figure out what they were supposed to represent...
Slashdot Mirror
Directories are indexed now (except for some) so it takes a lot less time to just search everything. In windows 98 or XP it wasn't indexed, although XP added a search 4.0 addon that added indexing that wasn't till after vista came out.
Yeah...except you don't know if your index is up to date unless you specifically dig into the control panel and check, there's a *huge* performance hit if you have to re-index for any reason (like deciding 'no, I don't want to search inside encrypted files, thanks!'), and hey, how about that huge security/privacy hole that is your indexed data, all nicely collected in one place for an attacker (or, if you're unfortunate, a police investigator) to riffle through? Sure, it may not be easy for them to get in there, depending on how you have it set up, but if/when they do...
more results than you ever needed, or no results if it's a system file, not in an indexed location or Windows simply doesn't like it for some reason
windows Explorer -> Alt T -> folder options -> Search.
Oh, you want additional search parameters? Good luck finding any besides filesize and date modified!"
It is a pain in the butt that the search has been dumbed down so much, but most of that can be restored to its former functionality. eg a quick google will find you stuff like http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/129437-windows-search-configure-use.html
Okay, that site tells me how to set up global options for all searches everywhere in my system. Sure, some of them could be useful, but what if I change my mind? Maybe I don't want to search inside encrypted files under this directory, but I do want to in this other one? What if I want to search inside files in my C:/windows directory, which is *never* indexed, ever? (I see that Alt-T gives you a *few* more real-time search options [under 'folder options'? WTF? really??], but it's still pretty anemic)
I think it's mostly the indexing that's the problem. I don't really need another database on my computer to track what's in all my files, and where they are. That's what the filesystem is for (well, tracking where they are, at least). Besides the security and performance hits, it isn't terribly reliable and has to be rebuilt *from scratch* if you make trivial changes to the way you want things 'searchable'. Sure, without indexing, sometimes a search for a phrase inside a file could take a half-hour or more...but at least I knew that a) if it was in there, it would find it, and b) it's not copying the contents of sensitive files to another location for my 'convenience'.
Thanks for the tips, but I think it'll be a third-party solution for me...now I just got to get out there and try some, instead of bemoaning the 'old days'! ;)
I'm still mad about the (basically) neutered search capability for desktop/LAN files in Windows 7.
I keep a command prompt window open and use DIR a lot. Or, if you prefer, you can have a bash prompt (e.g. using Cygwin).
--
Don't just get off my lawn. Get off my neighbour's lawn too.
Unfortunately, my typing speed is approximately 10 wpm (yes, I'm a two, sometimes four-finger typist). While I can muddle by using the command line, I definitely appreciate a well-designed GUI. But thanks for the tip!
I keep Windows' indexing service disabled and use Everything instead. It also works over a network pretty easily, and can double as an ftp server in a pinch. The latter two features can be disabled, of course.
Hmmm...thanks, I'll check it out!
You probably know already, but the Windows search has options to disable the index. That kills some problems because metadata is no longer sought. Then you click around and set it to only search by filenames rather than inside the files, and it's done.
I still miss the old no-nonsense search that came as its own separate program back in the Windows 95 days. I swear Windows 7 still hides some results that you can find manually.
Yess...however on the rare occasion, I do want to be able to search in files. I haven't checked: can you tell it to search inside files with indexing off? Does it have to re-index *everything* before it can do that?
I too miss the no-nonsense search, even if it did take quite a while if you wanted to search inside a bunch of files...although looking at some of the replies, I appreciate people suggesting their fav. third party alternatives and workarounds. Thanks guys!
In Windows 7, search Windows Help for "Advanced tips for searching in Windows" :-)
Good point...however it begs the question: why didn't we have to do this in XP? Answer: because it was *much* more intuitive!
I mean, c'mon, who's going to be trying to run Win 7 on a tablet, or something else with a screen smaller than 10 inches? So 'waste' the real estate and give your users easy to configure search options! Or at least have an 'advanced' search option available!
YES! This!
I hear and share your pain...
I'm still mad about the (basically) neutered search capability for desktop/LAN files in Windows 7.
What used to be a consistent
"right-click, choose 'Search', enter 'filename' OR 'phrase in file', tick off search parameters, optionally expand and enter detailed parameters, hit 'Search' button->Results"
workflow has been 'simplified' to
"enter your search string in this little text window and we'll search inside every goddamn file in this directory/subdirectory (oh, and across teh internets and rifling through your emails too, if you want!) for that search term, no matter how long it takes -> wait for freaking ever -> more results than you ever needed, or no results if it's a system file, not in an indexed location or Windows simply doesn't like it for some reason. Oh, you want additional search parameters? Good luck finding any besides filesize and date modified!"
You used to be able to re-enable old-style search on Vista (somewhat), but I guess they thought it was too much of a dinosaur (or too useful, perhaps) to include in Win 7. Bah. Get off my lawn!
You're not a true Christian...
Who put you in charge to say? People have picked random mishmash from the beginning. IMHO, Christianity is like a Chili cook-off. Every one is a little different recipie, but you can look at all of 'em, and and say, yeah, that's chili.
The problems come when the habanero recipe tries to convert or destroy the jalapeno recipe. Or the kidney-bean sects declare that all those who contain brown beans are going to chili hell...that they're not really 'chili'.
I believe GP was making that statement ('You're not a true Christian') as an illustration of that fact, since some other flavour of Christianity will truly and wholeheartedly believe that statement. From what I can see, for most religions, it's an 'all or nothing' thing: those who believe the same are saved, those who believe anything else are damned, and often portrayed as less than human.
People take their chili quite seriously, but rarely are they willing to shun or even kill others for preferring a different flavour...and who, exactly, gets to decide which recipe is the 'True Chili'? Or, to refer back to GP's post, who exactly gets to decide which portions of the recipe are meant to be interpreted literally (teh Truth with a capital 'T'), and which can be substituted without harming the overall recipe (metaphors)? Sure, each can decide for themselves, but don't be surprised if someone else feels differently than you do, and rejects you and your recipe because of it.
The important part is that your chili help you feed yourself, and that your Christianity help you build a relationship with God and Christ.
That's the important part to you, and the more power to you. Others can and do place emphasis on other aspects of their religion/chili. Some simply believe it's not 'right' unless it's painful and/or has inconvenient social consequences... ;)
(love the chili analogy, btw! thanks!)
Second the vote for the Fastpack 350.
We were looking for something for travel, and this did just what we were looking for. My husband's 17" ACER laptop even fit in there, albeit it was a snug fit (i.e., we tore the flimsy zipper extender tag off while zipping it up...but it fit, and it wasn't going anywhere!). Lots of room for a couple of lenses, external flash and cables, even with the bulky battery extender/grip installed on the Canon Rebel. What I liked best is that we could stow the camera with a long-ish lens attached (our longest is 200mm and there was plenty of room to spare), and it was all well supported and cushioned. Interior partitions are adjustable to allow you to fit your gear. Quick access to both camera and laptop compartments for airport security too ;)
As for the tripod/monopod - we got an extra slim/short version and stuck it in the laptop area for day trips. It stuck out the top a bit and looked kinda goofy, and wouldn't have been good to hike with (the tripod would dig into your back if you were wearing it as a proper backpack, instead of just over one shoulder), but it was a workaround that we found useful. It would be nice if they added some tripod straps, tho...
Yeah, now that I've had a reason to give them a look, CSM does seem to be a little more levelheaded than many other sources. They don't appear to skew things based on religious views, at least in the articles I have read so far. True, that sort of thing can happen in any forum or media, so it's nice to see that the editorial staff there isn't being pressured to keep things 'christian' in nature, despite the title.
As for the American comment...no, I'm not, but neither am I one to measure my self worth by the number of newspapers I read, or how far away they are 'printed' ;) Does that mean I can't ever be European? Am I banned? :)
As I said, I have about an hour a day* (actually, no hours this weekend, since I was AFK), and in this time I choose to learn about what may directly affect my family and I before seeking information on which sheik is building the new mega mall in Dubai (or in Texas, for that matter). If I hear about some interesting national or international news, I sometimes google around for more info than the local papers have, but even that is getting more tedious as one has to wade through the ever-deepening piles of wanna-be 'journalists' who think that Wordpress, a copy/pate icon and some sarcastic comments are all it takes...
I do appreciate the link someone provided to Al-Jazeera, though, I hadn't come across it before. It looks to be (maybe) a bit less sensationalistic and biased than some other world news sources (read: BBC), and their english language site is quite accessible. I'll give it a try now and then, so I can discuss Dubai mega-mall politics with my friends ;)
*Oops, that was a comment I made on another thread in this discussion. Sorry!
Water is wet!
Film at 11.
Extrapolation of results: If you're not on FB at all, you either have immense self esteem or you crave rejection? Or, you know, you have RL friends to interact with, ones who already know the important things about you, and you them...
As an exercise, why don't you choose some news topic, and go read about that topic on various sites around the world.
That's what I have informative and helpful posters at /. for! ;)
Seriously, I actually have very little time in the day available for 'entertainment' reading. Sometimes I'll cast my net around for something new and (hopefully!) interesting, but overall I spend *maybe?* an hour a day reading news and articles. This is actually a lot of why I like /. so much, even if the editorial and summary quality stinks sometimes, because it does pull some 'other' news sources to my attention, which I then add to my 'for later' list of reading (like CSM!). (News aggregators are both wonderful and evil, evil little things, btw)
When you went to the store did you skip over anything sold by 3M because you weren't in the mining industry?
Do you skip BBC because you don't care about British news?
Do you skip Al Jazeera because you don't care about Arabic news?
Umm...yes? At least to 2 and 3? (FYI. 3M is in much, much more than just mining, but I probably wouldn't go browse the industrial/mining supply section of their website. Their electrical and electronics supply section is a different matter entirely!)
I don't get your point: if you're at the magazine rack, do you compulsively pick up and read (or even skim through) every single magazine on the shelf, in alphabetical order, or do you prioritize on magazines that relate to your interests / environment? Would you tend to skip over the 'Kids' section, or the 'Knitting and Crafts' section, for that matter? (not to imply that you don't knit or do crafts ;)
Same thing for me whenever I see the words 'Christian' or 'Religious', even if it's conjoined with topics that do interest me, such as 'Science'. Religious discussions are not a topic I am generally interested in, so I don't tend to seek out sources offering them. If I come across a well-written article that comes from such a source, I don't hesitate to share it with friends, I am just less likely to actively seek them out for news without other endorsements.
CSM has amazing articles and unlike most of the drivel coming out of places these days is actually well written and researched. The "Christian" part throws a lot of people but it shouldn't.
Indeed, why not? If I see a publication titled "Kids Science" (or "Seniors Science", or "Science in Mining", etc.), why would I assume it's not tailored for the identified audience? Sure there may be some interesting nuggets to be found, but I would expect the majority of articles to be shaped to appeal to children (or seniors, or miners, etc.). Since I am not a member of the target group, without further information why would I assume there is anything in there to appeal to me?
That being said, now I will check out an issue or two of CSM, based on the comments here. If they can truly keep religion out of the science reporting, then I welcome an addition to my reading list!
Whoosh much?
Here's a refreshing WHOOSH for you!
Don't feel bad, judging by the modding so far, you're not the only one...
For the record, that's a rating of medical safety. So having something that does nothing is medically safe. IN the US, probably in the EU as well.
Great! So I can get my silverware certified and brag that I'm using 'certified medical devices' to eat my dinner? Maybe they'll make me healthier...or maybe I can convince others that they are, generating a market for my new medi-ware. Cool!
If the minimum bar for rating is that the device doesn't actually harm the person using it, then that's what the rating should be called, i.e., 'certified as medically safe', not 'certified as a medical device'. The latter implies that the device actually does something medical, and strikes me as intentionally misleading. But whatever, anything to keep the certification fees flowing in, I guess...
2) Pay attention to her every nuance, her reactions to what you say and do, her favorite ice-cream or wine, where she likes to be touched, anything. Everything she does is data to be stored in your internal database. Pay attention to detail like you do with code, it's an underrated talent that programmers have but don't apply to anything else IRL.
Also useful advice for the aspiring stalker-on-the-go! Seriously, sometimes having someone scrutinize your every move and memorize your every preference can be pretty off-putting. Some women like this, some don't, just like guys. YMMV.
7) Layman's terms, layman's terms, layman's terms, I can't stress this enough. You can't connect with a girl if you can't relate to her. Even with layman's terms, most of our professions are still to complicated to understand. They are just fine with hearing that you really love your job and consider it like an art form and how your work helps people (depending on the profession, that is).
Or, you know, look for a woman who's into the same things you are...not all women get bored discussing code optimization ;)
1) Hold yourself to a high standard (hygiene, fashion, confidence [the real kind, not the knock-all-others-down-a-peg kind], health, well-roundedness [have lots of other things to do than obsess over girls and sex])
Yes! The more interests you have (not 'pretend to have', but actually, truly enjoy), the more likely you'll have something in common. My husband and I enjoy picking apart the latest Star Trek movie for flaws as much as we like traveling, diving, or seeking out the perfect cup of coffee. Sure, I prefer console over MMORPG, but it would be boring if we were only interested in the exact same things! ;) Try many things, and if you enjoy it, keep doing it!
6) Don't be negative and don't rant about shit she obviously isn't interested in. Some girls DO think nerds are cute, even hot ones, but don't want to hear a long-winded passage about the Prime Directive (whatever that is, I'm a Star Wars fan :p)
You get a gold star for this one. Seldom have I seen truer words on /. Negativity is/should be a big warning bell for you, as well as for her. Who wants to be with someone who just bitches and moans all day, or who can't stop telling stories about how they 'really showed that guy!'? Trust me, it's as tedious in jocks as it is in geeks.
Overall, pretty good summary! ;)
FTS:
These devices, much like earphones or should we say 'earlumes,' are registered medical devices.
WTF? Where, in Singapore?
Oh, I see, it has CE certification as a 'medical device' for sale in Europe. Well, nice to see the US isn't the only country lowering the bar for snake oil salesmen everywhere...(yes, those magnetic bracelet-thingies are registered under MHRA as 'medical devices')
frig.
...I find the idea of charging more for access at 3:00AM a little backwards; I'd expect to pay more for a gig of traffic transferred during peak hours than for a gig of traffic at 3AM. Sure, the 3AM traffic is delivered faster, making it "better service", but I think it makes more sense to incentivize people to make their big transfers at a time of day which is less disruptive to other users.
Of course, there's a whole 'nother /. article on the front page right now about dynamic time-of-day based pricing in the electrical power industry.
That's a good point. Varying the charge/GB throughout the day, then tracking and charging on actual throughput during those times would perhaps make more sense...very much like the power utility is proposing ;) That way customers who schedule their heavy traffic during the wee hours still get a price break, but ISPs still have some incentive to boost their overall bandwidth to allow more customers to stream large files during peak hours at a reasonable speed...if they're willing to pay for it, that is.
Not sure if this would be practical, though since not only does it increase logging burdens on ISPs to track realtime usage, they would also have to make that info available to their customers. But I suppose phone companies do this already...hmmm, 'daytime MB' plans? 'Free evening and weekend MB' plans? That could open up a nasty can of worms for the customers...
Who says it actually resembled a wrench?
GGP did. Maybe you should try reading the thread before replying. Oh wait this is slashdot.
Yes, GGP knew it was supposed to be wrench...perhaps because he had already seen that particular indicator? Just because it looks like a wrench to one person doesn't mean it looks like a wrench to others. I work with Lotus Notes, unfortunately, and I still don't know what the icon for 'Document IDs" is supposed to be. To me it looks like a beanie hat with a propeller on top...WTF??
Can you tell us the name of your company?
I want to make sure I never buy any of your products.
Munitions R' Us. We're having a blow out sale, do drop by!
Or perhaps you should get a job at a company that doesn't manufacture tampons or kitchen products?
I bet with that many women working in close proximity to one another, there's a week or so each month where you DREAD going to work, isn't there?
...whispers the anonymous coward in a crowded forum...'nuff said.
You had a chance to feel useful as a husband; instead you made your wife feel useless.
Feel useful when you realize your wife has never seen a wrench in her life?
Who says it actually resembled a wrench? I know I've seen indicators flash up, especially on older cars, that took some creative squinting and lots of thumbing through the manual to figure out what they were supposed to represent...
captcha : improve
captcha : login
captcha : itsafreecountry-livewithit