When they changed the way Start works since Vista, it sucks bigtime. Having lot's of programs installed makes that list too long and the hassle of finding your program becomes too great to bother with it. The way XP works was better to me: Expand it all over your desktop. Nice a grid of all your installed apps in one sight. Switching to classic isn't an option, it removes the shortcuts aswell. It really goes into primitive mode, 98 style.
Now I use 3rd party tools to get my OS to do what I want with it. How absurd is that?
Microsoft! Stop telling me on how to use my pc please! And bring some legacy options back that WILL enhance usability.
In looking for possible explanations, isn't it possible that this could be a nice twist towards String Theory? If we assume extra dimensions curled up inside the 3 spatial dimensions of our own + time, isn't it then possible for a neutrino to pass trough a curled up dimension and 'tunnel' it's way to the end point e.g. kind of wormhole?
Also, what was the mass of the neutrino when it went past light speed? Should have been infinitely big.
Why are they always to simple to figure out? A tiny bit of social engineering cracks that system. Solution would be if you could make up your own questions in some way. But still a court rules that such a system works?
From a professional tester point of view, let someone else do it. It's wise to do a developer test but actual functional testing is best done if someone else does it (a dedicated functional tester for instance). Firstly, that other person has a different perspective of the piece of software because it reads the requirements and hasn't seen the development process you as a developer did (the functional tester will press buttons differently).;)
Secondly, you don't have to spend lots of time figuring out how and what to test. Which is more efficient as you can spend that time on developing other software.:)
Software quality becomes more important everyday and only just recently more companies are hiring dedicated functional testers to test that, which you find a tedious task.:)
Pfff... I never like recovery discs. Every grain of personalisation is gone since the company you bought the computer from placed their wallpapers and custom themes all over the place. Even worse, the harddrive is littered with trials of virusscanners or other advertisement software. Always had that personal drive for your music? It's gone! The last recovery disc I used also 'restored' they drive mapping replacing all partitions to make it factory default again. And there is nothing you can do about it. No settings, no parameters you can set. C drive was wiped like it should, but forget about other partitions and everything on it aswell.
I HATE recovery discs. Just do it yourself by loading a boot diskette/USB/other external device and install a clean copy of your favorite OS which mostly can be ripped from the recovery disc themselves.
It could be that it existed in one timeframe and modify things in that frame, while on the next timeframe it doesn't exist due to modifications made in previous timeframe. What happens in later timeframes is not relevant anymore. See ASCII schematic below:
We assume linear time.
Legend: | = normal timeframe - = spacer (to make the scheme more readable, in actuallity, timeframes are imidiately after eachother) A = Anne (person 'a') B = Bernard (person 'b') / = modified timeframe ()= original time indicator
So what happens in this schematic? Bernard is there from timeframe 1 to timeframe 5. Suddenly Anne pops-up from her timemachine in timeframe 4 and kills Bernard who happend to be her grandfather. Noone knows where Anne came from. From that point on, neither do exist due to the killing of Bernard. So the question arrises: "Who killed Bernard?". The answer is still that Anne did it. The timespace between the '(' and the ')' shows that they first were both present in those (then yet unmodified) timeframes. But at timeframe 12 Anne gets to her timemachine to kill Bernard which happens at timeframe 13 AND 5. But when Anne got back in time, timeframe 13 and up is not relevant anymore because it never existed. It did exist in reality but the future existed in the (what is now) past. There is no paradox because the past and future are in equilibrium. There are no seperate timelines because that would suggest traveling to the future which isn't theoretically possible at this time. Pun not intended.
My guess is that it's one of those 'If you hadn't downloaded it, you would have bought it' kind of study. I have spend so much energy in this subject that all that I have left to say about this matter is: 'This study is silly'.
Slashdot Mirror
Well people, the age of your relative freedom is definitely over when this is ratified.
Welcome to the neo dark age. This time not ruled by the church but by Megacorp & co that is called the western world.
I prefer a car analogy actually.
When they changed the way Start works since Vista, it sucks bigtime. Having lot's of programs installed makes that list too long and the hassle of finding your program becomes too great to bother with it. The way XP works was better to me: Expand it all over your desktop. Nice a grid of all your installed apps in one sight.
Switching to classic isn't an option, it removes the shortcuts aswell. It really goes into primitive mode, 98 style.
Now I use 3rd party tools to get my OS to do what I want with it. How absurd is that?
Microsoft! Stop telling me on how to use my pc please! And bring some legacy options back that WILL enhance usability.
In looking for possible explanations, isn't it possible that this could be a nice twist towards String Theory? If we assume extra dimensions curled up inside the 3 spatial dimensions of our own + time, isn't it then possible for a neutrino to pass trough a curled up dimension and 'tunnel' it's way to the end point e.g. kind of wormhole?
Also, what was the mass of the neutrino when it went past light speed? Should have been infinitely big.
Note to self: Less copy/pasting of articles. :D
Companies could misuse this loophole by letting people only to use filtered Internet. At least thats how I understand it.
In Dutch:
http://nu.pvda.nl/berichten/2011/06/Voorstellen-martijn-van-dam-wijziging-telecommunicatiewet-open-vrij-internet.html
I think Obama is referring to TeamFortress 2.
Why are they always to simple to figure out? A tiny bit of social engineering cracks that system. Solution would be if you could make up your own questions in some way.
But still a court rules that such a system works?
Odd world.
That last thing happens from time to time. Some loony kills a guy in defence of it being an message from the future.
Does that mean that it works?
The title of this news item contains a typo.
Doom doesn't need a special age for celebration. It's just too awesome for that.
- Blood 2 (Cabalco deathrays in HD!);
- Redneck Rampage.
The obligatory XKCD comic.
That term is so 90's. Why are we still calling it that? Shouldn't it be 'nanochip' or something like that?
From a professional tester point of view, let someone else do it. It's wise to do a developer test but actual functional testing is best done if someone else does it (a dedicated functional tester for instance). Firstly, that other person has a different perspective of the piece of software because it reads the requirements and hasn't seen the development process you as a developer did (the functional tester will press buttons differently). ;)
Secondly, you don't have to spend lots of time figuring out how and what to test. Which is more efficient as you can spend that time on developing other software. :)
More about structured testing here:
http://www.ie.sogeti.com/Resources--Downloads/Methodologies/TMap-Test-Management-Approach/
Software quality becomes more important everyday and only just recently more companies are hiring dedicated functional testers to test that, which you find a tedious task. :)
I love the work in this field but Modular Prosthetic Limb or 'MPL' doesn't really fit the usage. Functional Arm Prosthetic or 'FAP' might be better.
Pfff... I never like recovery discs. Every grain of personalisation is gone since the company you bought the computer from placed their wallpapers and custom themes all over the place. Even worse, the harddrive is littered with trials of virusscanners or other advertisement software. Always had that personal drive for your music? It's gone! The last recovery disc I used also 'restored' they drive mapping replacing all partitions to make it factory default again. And there is nothing you can do about it. No settings, no parameters you can set. C drive was wiped like it should, but forget about other partitions and everything on it aswell.
I HATE recovery discs. Just do it yourself by loading a boot diskette/USB/other external device and install a clean copy of your favorite OS which mostly can be ripped from the recovery disc themselves.
It could be that it existed in one timeframe and modify things in that frame, while on the next timeframe it doesn't exist due to modifications made in previous timeframe. What happens in later timeframes is not relevant anymore. See ASCII schematic below:
We assume linear time.
Legend:
| = normal timeframe
- = spacer (to make the scheme more readable, in actuallity, timeframes are imidiately after eachother)
A = Anne (person 'a')
B = Bernard (person 'b')
/ = modified timeframe
()= original time indicator
Awesome ASCII Schematic:
B|-B|-B|-B|-AB/--/--/--/--/-(AB|AB|AB|-B/)--/--/--/--/--
So what happens in this schematic?
Bernard is there from timeframe 1 to timeframe 5. Suddenly Anne pops-up from her timemachine in timeframe 4 and kills Bernard who happend to be her grandfather. Noone knows where Anne came from.
From that point on, neither do exist due to the killing of Bernard. So the question arrises: "Who killed Bernard?". The answer is still that Anne did it. The timespace between the '(' and the ')' shows that they first were both present in those (then yet unmodified) timeframes. But at timeframe 12 Anne gets to her timemachine to kill Bernard which happens at timeframe 13 AND 5. But when Anne got back in time, timeframe 13 and up is not relevant anymore because it never existed. It did exist in reality but the future existed in the (what is now) past. There is no paradox because the past and future are in equilibrium. There are no seperate timelines because that would suggest traveling to the future which isn't theoretically possible at this time. Pun not intended.
Slashdot answer in 3..2..1..
Everyone knows that we don't need more then 640k.
I think they should give it to the 'dear leader' first. We won't want him to die nou won't we?
My guess is that it's one of those 'If you hadn't downloaded it, you would have bought it' kind of study.
I have spend so much energy in this subject that all that I have left to say about this matter is: 'This study is silly'.
Something in me screams 'The Matrix' actually.
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these! \o/
There is a reason Bill Gates is 'Locutus of Borg' here on /.