Almost all new phones I've seen have this and I like it better. My old phone had a twitchy spring and liked to randomly eject the microSD card.
This is a non-story.
I didn't see that anywhere, the linked article says:
The Nokia Lumia 920 comes with 32GB of storage, but omits the memory card slot found on its cheaper sibling, the Lumia 820. When pushed on why Nokia didn't include a memory card slot, the company's executive vice president, Kevin Shields, told PC Pro it would have harmed the clean design.
I haven't found any source that says it has an internal slot.
I can't wait until their next phone that will have no speaker or microphone since that would compromise the physical form and most people don't talk on a Smartphone anyway.
And then there's the MTC in the San Francisco Bay Area (funded through sales tax and bridge tolls among other sources) that purchased an entire building in downtown San Francisco and is renovating it to become offices for $170M. It's not clear why they couldn't stay in Oakland where office space is much cheaper than downtown San Francisco. Well, it is clear -- they have unlimited funding since residents are forced to fund them, if they need more money they can just raise tolls and/or taxes.
When confronted with the fact that their purchase may not have been cost effective, the MTC rep said:
a San Mateo County supervisor who chairs the commission, insisted that the agency's goal was never to make money - or even necessarily to break even. "We're not looking at it as investment per se," Tissier said. "We look at it as moving into your own home."
That's the problem with government agencies - what incentive do they have to spend money wisely?
When I was a kid, my mom taught me that if I don't recognize the face when I look out the door peephole, don't unlock the door.
I'm pretty sure your mom didn't teach you to provide a prompt to the person at the door who could then answer yes, and you'd let them in. Sometimes it helps to actually follow the link in the article and read the claims, rather than just immediately crying "I have prior art" based on the title.
Actually, I made my claim based on the abstract:
A method of logging a first user in to an computing device includes receiving a an image of the first user via a camera operably coupled with the computing device and determining an identity of the first user based on the received image. If the determined identity matches a predetermined identity, then, based at least on the identity of the first user matching the predetermined identity, the first user is logged in to the computing device.
How is this notably different than a child determining whether or not to open the door after looking to see who it is? What is so unique about a computer that makes this worthy of a patent? Because their claims include using some (unspecified) facial recognition technique that looks at facial features? (isn't that an obvious part of facial recognition)? Because they fall back on normal password authentication if facial recognition doesn't match a face? Because they grant different access based on who it is? Kind of like telling the child: "Johnny, if the bill collector comes to the door, slide this envelope out the door, if it's Uncle Bill, let him in"
The Hawaiian island Larry bought cost $500 million. $1 million is petty cash for this guy.
I'm not sure that buying a $500M island makes $1M "petty cash". I may own a $500K house (really own it, not bank owned), but I wouldn't count $1K as "petty cash".
Of course, his $28B net worth does make $1M petty cash, that's more like $2 to someone earning $60K/year.
Not that it matters anyway, it's not like Ellison is going to write a check from his personal account to pay a debt owed by Oracle.
What truck? I drove an '81 civic. The only truck I got to drive was an old Datsun pickup when I needed to run to pick up repair parts or put a flashing yellow light on top to escort a large truck. For some reason they didn't trust the young seasonal workers with their $150,000 dump trucks.
I had no serious accidents those summers, but had a couple close calls. Once was one late night when a drunk driver crossed the center line, forcing me off the road and into some light brush. Just lost the some plastic molding under the car but the car was otherwise fine -- the other driver swerved off the road and ended up stuck in a field - one of my coworkers in a company truck came by and radioed in a call to the police and a towtruck and they nabbed him for DUI. Oh and one early morning on a rural road I narrowly avoided a deer, but he escaped unscathed and that's when I decided to put a set of driving lights on the car.
Two things: (1) this was more or less your choice, and you were rewarded for it with bonus pay to boot. Even if your employer had made it clear at certain times they needed everyone to put in some overtime, you would've had to be paid for it at least.
It was my choice in that if I didn't work there, I would have had a minimum wage job at McDonalds - with overtime hours at the construction job, I ended up getting paid over 5 times more than I would have made at McDonalds.
So, I had a choice, but the other choice was less desirable. Sort of a like a chinese factory worker deciding between a hard life on the farm or a hard life (but more comfortable) in the factory.
(2) you were in high school. You can do a lot of really over the top physical feats while in high school, and it's easy. It's a very different thing to being a whole career, and different again to the sort of advancement opportunities you had.
I was 18 - 20 when I worked that job - not much different in age than the 19 and 23 year olds quoted in the summary.
If someone chooses building camera lenses on an assembly line as a career, there's more than Samsung to blame.
I'm not saying that working conditions in China are cushy, but saying that 12 hours/day and 25 hours of overtime/week is worker abuse ignores the fact that there are a lot of people in "developed" countries that work those same hours. If they are not getting compensated for that work, have unsafe conditions, don't have adequate breaks, etc, then that's different, but long hours don't automatically equate to worker abuse.
I worked construction for a few summers after high school -- 12 hour shifts weren't uncommon (on my feet the whole time)
Come again, buddy??
I worked in construction sites every summer during my college years, for I desperately needed money to pay for books and food and shelter
From scaffolding to steel framing high rises, never did I have to be on my feet for the entire 12 hour shift
Which job were you in, buddy?
I worked for a heavy construction company, primarily doing road construction - doing things like shoveling asphalt that fell out of the paver, raking down stone to level it, pressure washing mud off the heavy equipment before loading it for transport to another job site, directing trucks to dump their load where it was needed, subbing in for flagman when needed, etc. About the only time I got to sit down was when I had to drive to pick up parts or, when I was lucky, get a cushy job escorting heavy/wide loads.
even in my company 12 hour shifts are common, in the hearland of the USA... boo who for the Asians?
I worked construction for a few summers after high school -- 12 hour shifts weren't uncommon (on my feet the whole time), and I took all the overtime I could get, sometimes putting in 80 hours or more of overtime a month (six 10 hour days/week), If I didn't have to drive up to 90 minutes each way to the job site on the other side of the state, I probably would have put in more overtime. When I was lucky, I'd get to drive an escort vehicle for a wide-load truck on my way to or from the job site so I'd rack up a couple hours of work while driving to work).
It was hard work, but I still found time to party with friends on the weekends, and the work paid most of my first two years of college.
Plus, California uses electronic toll transponders to track cars on the freeways to determine traffic flows.
I thought they used to be more up front about this use, but the only reference I could find on the Bay Area Fastrak site is buried in the terms of use:
You agree that the Toll Tag may be read to provide anonymous traffic flow data to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's '511' project, a real time traffic information service. No information identifying a FasTrak account, person or vehicle using the Toll Tag will be collected by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission or '511'. If you do not want your Toll Tag's presence to be noted by '511', remove the Toll Tag from your windshield and place it in the special bag you received with the Toll Tag. Be sure to replace the Toll Tag on your windshield before you enter a FasTrak lane in order to avoid toll violation charges. If you would like additional information about '511', please visit www.511.org.
The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
I think it's easy to argue that providing mental health services to those that need it (thus keeping crazy people off the streets) benefits the general welfare of the United States.
"Reagan turned mental patients into homeless people"
Nice strawman. Please now indicate which section of the constitution authorizes the federal government to provide mental health care for the citizens of this country. Please be specific and clear.
There are state laws that allow the government to involuntarily institutionalize someone for mental health care if they are shown to be a danger to themselves or others - these laws are (now) compliant with federal laws. View the references at the end of the Wikipedia article for details about specific laws:
But mental healthcare services by the government doesn't have to mean involuntary confinement, there are plenty of voluntary mental healthcare options with inpatient and outpatient programs. And I don't think they need constitutional authorization for voluntary services since the government provides many services that are not explicitly named in the constitution.
I beg to differ. The basic design requirement of a wheel is that it's round and rolls, and I'll certainly grant you that this aspect of wheels hasn't changed. However, a rough-hewn wooden round, such as used in the simplest of carts, bears very little other resemblance to the three-spoked carbon-fiber performance bicycle wheels I see with some frequency on my morning bicycle commute. Sure, both are round and roll, but otherwise, there's thousands of years of difference between them.
Right, that's so unlike the mouse where the first mouse:
How unenlightened, I've always wanted to put a d-pad on the thumb side of the mouse for easy weapon switching instead of reaching keys in odd spaces. Even with keyboard customization distributing the load to a hand that is more idle (the aiming hand) that merely only moves the mouse increases efficiency.
So why don't you already have such a mouse? It's not like multi-button gaming mice don't exist.
If there's something magic about a pure D-pad on a mouse, then design it, find a chinese manufacturer to make it and you'll be rich. But probably not or Logitech would have already released it if there was demand. Just because you thought of it doesn't mean that it's a revolutionary idea that will change the nature of gaming mice.
My 5 year old mouse has 5 buttons beyond the normal 3 buttons + wheel. (and I never use the extra buttons).
You're already a webdev...be your own boss and don't mess with anyone else.
I think the OP mentioned that:
I tried self-employment, but motivation and discipline are a bit hard to come by, and it's not something that will work for me long-term. In theory it's perfect, in practice not so much.
That's going to be a problem when he seeks a salaried job -- few employers want an unmotivated, undisciplined employee. If I wanted to hover over the employee and make sure he's doing the work he's supposed to be doing, I'd hire my son.
They are part of the natural environment. Human efforts to eradicate species in places doesn't determine whether they're natural. Neither does the length of time they've been part of an environment.
Note that I am not loading "natural" with any kind of value judgement.
You talk a lot about "natural" without saying what you mean -- many people don't count a species that's been transplanted 5000 miles from its normal habitat by humans to be "natural" -- especially when it is killing native species that haven't adapted to its presence, and has few native predators here.
They are all now part of the natural environment. Bringing manufactured chemicals and inserting them around a vehicle is obviously less natural than an invasive species.
Since billions of dollars are spent annually trying to eradicate them and pay for the damage they cause, I'm not sure that that you can say that they are a part of the natural environment.
In any case, would you feel better if the campers spread chemicals that are not manufactured? Like natural occurring Borax?
Most good RV's have showers. heck mine has a full bathroom and a queen sized real bed in a bedroom.
I wonder, just for the heck of it, how does the carbon footprint of an RV "liver of life on the road" stack up against your average city dweller.
Probably much higher than an average city dweller that lives in a small condo or apartment, but maybe not much worse than a suburban dweller that lives in a 2000 sq foot house on an acre of land.
Living my life in short periods at campgrounds punctuated by endless periods driving 60' of steel on tollways does not really appeal to me, but I can see how it might appeal to some. I prefer a home, a spot on the map that is me.
Most full-time RVers I know have the opposite lifestyle - long stretches in a campground with relatively short stints of being on the road - with no particular destination or timeline (except migrating south to avoid harsh winter weather), there's no need to drive endless miles on the highway.
Oh, and there's not much steel in an RV, I saw the aftermath of a rollover accident and there was a hundred feet of aluminum siding, wood and personal effects, but about the only thing left intact was the steel framed floor. It was a windy day, the driver overcorrected after the RV swayed off the road, and it ended up tipping over and down a hill. Not sure how he escaped having his towing vehicle dragged along with it, something must have snapped.
A backyard and a front porch from which to watch the universe revolve around me.
With an RV you can have a nice porch that looks out onto a variety of different scenery (or the RV next door depending on how cramped the campground is)
>>>place a small inflatable pool on the ground where the wheels will go.
I'd rather live in a hotel. Oh wait. I already do that. You can find hotels that have Cable, internet, and of course hot showers, for the same price as renting an apartment would be. (In contrast an RV is expensive to buy and the camping rent is not exactly cheap.)
Some people want to stay where there are no hotels. You can get a RV site with full hookups (water, sewer + power, sometimes cable TV and internet too) for around $20 - $50/day. Can you get a hotel room with full cooking facilities, separate sleeping and living areas, your own clothes hanging in the closet, etc for under $50/day? And if you want seclusion, you can find isolated camping areas where there are no neighbors within sight or earshot and you can live quite comfortably for a week or so using the water tanks and generator built-in to your RV.
Depending on how much time you spend on the road versus parked (fuel is expensive), if you already own the RV, it can be more cost effective, more convenient and more comfortable than a hotel room.
It's definitely a different lifestyle and it's not for everyone, much live live-aboard sailing.
The fireants are part of the environment. The campers and their borax far less so.
The most troublesome species of fire ant in the USA (the Red Imported Fire Ant) is an invasive species that costs $5B a year in medical treatment, agriculture losses, and eradication efforts. It's no more a part of the natural environment than the campers.
Are you seriously saying that you've never tested a network device in your test lab that was supposed to be a drop-in replacement for older technology already installed in the office (which is a unique environment that's not repeated anywhere else in your organization), then had the new device fail to work when it was plugged in without having someone tweak the configuration?
For mission-critical networks, we have a lab setup which precisely emulate the production network: same ports, same software, same physical connections. The only difference is physical. In those cases, reconfiguration means someone messed up a test.
Well that's kind of the problem -- the physical environment. Equipment that works fine in test may not work in the real environment. For example, when you replace that old access switch that has a 100mbit trunk back to the core, you mean find out that the new switch that works great at 1gbit in your test lab works sporadically in the field because the building wiring is substandard can't support gig, if you pin the connection to 100mbit it works fine. (or replace the wiring if that's an option)
Or, in the case of the ISS, it means that the the test environment couldn't replicate the conditions in space (which, literally exist nowhere else on earth), which led to a damaged bolt when removing the part, and then the current difficulties with installing the new one.
you're obviously not an engineer. the big things are made up out of tiny things. its always* a tiny things that gets you
Not a mechanical engineer, no. I'm a network engineer. And when I build a network, I make sure to catch the "low hanging fruit" when I test things.
And when it comes to testing bolts, even with my non-mechanical engineering background, I can see that this is low hanging fruit. Will this bolt be able to turn 15 times in this configuration? I'm sure NASA would have been able to test that in their fish tank, and they probably did; with a different bolt...
Are you seriously saying that you've never tested a network device in your test lab that was supposed to be a drop-in replacement for older technology already installed in the office (which is a unique environment that's not repeated anywhere else in your organization), then had the new device fail to work when it was plugged in without having someone tweak the configuration?
And it's often the "low hanging fruit" that causes the problem when it's something out of the ordinary...like that someone had to force the port from autonegotiate to 100mbit because there's a flaky connection somewhere between the device and the core network so the autonegotiated 1000mbit connection wouldn't stay up, and building management refuses to replace the network cable.
In this case, they discovered metal filings when they unbolted the old unit, and though they sprayed them out with compressed nitrogen, there was apparently significant enough thread damage that the new bolt wouldn't go in.
A test lab tries to approximate reality, but it's hard to do a complete simulation of a component exposed to the vacuum of space with repeated and severe heat/cool cycles as it's exposed to and shaded from the sun.
I don't doubt that they tested everything right down to the exact same bolts (probably machined by the same vendor, and possibly even made from the same ingot of raw metal), but no test lab is a perfect representation of the real-world. Most spacewalk maintenance is rehearsed dozens or hundreds of times on earth before attempted in space.
Just need to back out the bolt, run a thread chaser through to clean up the threads and try again.
And if NASA has an Amazon Prime membership, Amazon will have it delivered to the space station by Wednesday (if they pay the $3.99 overnight delivery fee). There may also be a small surcharge for orbital delivery.
Man, you're really pretty stupid aren't you? Do you realize OS X is BSD UNIX? No, I guess you don't realize that because you're a fucking noob who doesn't know dick. Get a clue retard.
Do you realize that BSD Unix is not the same as Linux?
Slashdot Mirror
Did you see that it still has an internal slot?
Almost all new phones I've seen have this and I like it better. My old phone had a twitchy spring and liked to randomly eject the microSD card.
This is a non-story.
I didn't see that anywhere, the linked article says:
The Nokia Lumia 920 comes with 32GB of storage, but omits the memory card slot found on its cheaper sibling, the Lumia 820.
When pushed on why Nokia didn't include a memory card slot, the company's executive vice president, Kevin Shields, told PC Pro it would have harmed the clean design.
I haven't found any source that says it has an internal slot.
I can't wait until their next phone that will have no speaker or microphone since that would compromise the physical form and most people don't talk on a Smartphone anyway.
And then there's the MTC in the San Francisco Bay Area (funded through sales tax and bridge tolls among other sources) that purchased an entire building in downtown San Francisco and is renovating it to become offices for $170M. It's not clear why they couldn't stay in Oakland where office space is much cheaper than downtown San Francisco. Well, it is clear -- they have unlimited funding since residents are forced to fund them, if they need more money they can just raise tolls and/or taxes.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_21418357/mtcs-san-francisco-office-building-purchase-bridge-tolls
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/MTC-project-may-cost-Bay-Area-drivers-more-3822760.php
When confronted with the fact that their purchase may not have been cost effective, the MTC rep said:
a San Mateo County supervisor who chairs the commission, insisted that the agency's goal was never to make money - or even necessarily to break even.
"We're not looking at it as investment per se," Tissier said. "We look at it as moving into your own home."
That's the problem with government agencies - what incentive do they have to spend money wisely?
I have prior art that dates back nearly 40 years.
When I was a kid, my mom taught me that if I don't recognize the face when I look out the door peephole, don't unlock the door.
I'm pretty sure your mom didn't teach you to provide a prompt to the person at the door who could then answer yes, and you'd let them in. Sometimes it helps to actually follow the link in the article and read the claims, rather than just immediately crying "I have prior art" based on the title.
Actually, I made my claim based on the abstract:
A method of logging a first user in to an computing device includes receiving a an image of the first user via a camera operably coupled with the computing device and determining an identity of the first user based on the received image. If the determined identity matches a predetermined identity, then, based at least on the identity of the first user matching the predetermined identity, the first user is logged in to the computing device.
How is this notably different than a child determining whether or not to open the door after looking to see who it is? What is so unique about a computer that makes this worthy of a patent? Because their claims include using some (unspecified) facial recognition technique that looks at facial features? (isn't that an obvious part of facial recognition)? Because they fall back on normal password authentication if facial recognition doesn't match a face? Because they grant different access based on who it is? Kind of like telling the child: "Johnny, if the bill collector comes to the door, slide this envelope out the door, if it's Uncle Bill, let him in"
I have prior art that dates back nearly 40 years.
When I was a kid, my mom taught me that if I don't recognize the face when I look out the door peephole, don't unlock the door.
Why is anything that has an obvious physical analog even patentable just because it's implemented on a computer?
The Hawaiian island Larry bought cost $500 million. $1 million is petty cash for this guy.
I'm not sure that buying a $500M island makes $1M "petty cash". I may own a $500K house (really own it, not bank owned), but I wouldn't count $1K as "petty cash".
Of course, his $28B net worth does make $1M petty cash, that's more like $2 to someone earning $60K/year.
Not that it matters anyway, it's not like Ellison is going to write a check from his personal account to pay a debt owed by Oracle.
What truck? I drove an '81 civic. The only truck I got to drive was an old Datsun pickup when I needed to run to pick up repair parts or put a flashing yellow light on top to escort a large truck. For some reason they didn't trust the young seasonal workers with their $150,000 dump trucks.
I had no serious accidents those summers, but had a couple close calls. Once was one late night when a drunk driver crossed the center line, forcing me off the road and into some light brush. Just lost the some plastic molding under the car but the car was otherwise fine -- the other driver swerved off the road and ended up stuck in a field - one of my coworkers in a company truck came by and radioed in a call to the police and a towtruck and they nabbed him for DUI. Oh and one early morning on a rural road I narrowly avoided a deer, but he escaped unscathed and that's when I decided to put a set of driving lights on the car.
Two things: (1) this was more or less your choice, and you were rewarded for it with bonus pay to boot. Even if your employer had made it clear at certain times they needed everyone to put in some overtime, you would've had to be paid for it at least.
It was my choice in that if I didn't work there, I would have had a minimum wage job at McDonalds - with overtime hours at the construction job, I ended up getting paid over 5 times more than I would have made at McDonalds.
So, I had a choice, but the other choice was less desirable. Sort of a like a chinese factory worker deciding between a hard life on the farm or a hard life (but more comfortable) in the factory.
(2) you were in high school. You can do a lot of really over the top physical feats while in high school, and it's easy. It's a very different thing to being a whole career, and different again to the sort of advancement opportunities you had.
I was 18 - 20 when I worked that job - not much different in age than the 19 and 23 year olds quoted in the summary.
If someone chooses building camera lenses on an assembly line as a career, there's more than Samsung to blame.
I'm not saying that working conditions in China are cushy, but saying that 12 hours/day and 25 hours of overtime/week is worker abuse ignores the fact that there are a lot of people in "developed" countries that work those same hours. If they are not getting compensated for that work, have unsafe conditions, don't have adequate breaks, etc, then that's different, but long hours don't automatically equate to worker abuse.
I worked construction for a few summers after high school -- 12 hour shifts weren't uncommon (on my feet the whole time)
Come again, buddy??
I worked in construction sites every summer during my college years, for I desperately needed money to pay for books and food and shelter
From scaffolding to steel framing high rises, never did I have to be on my feet for the entire 12 hour shift
Which job were you in, buddy?
I worked for a heavy construction company, primarily doing road construction - doing things like shoveling asphalt that fell out of the paver, raking down stone to level it, pressure washing mud off the heavy equipment before loading it for transport to another job site, directing trucks to dump their load where it was needed, subbing in for flagman when needed, etc. About the only time I got to sit down was when I had to drive to pick up parts or, when I was lucky, get a cushy job escorting heavy/wide loads.
even in my company 12 hour shifts are common, in the hearland of the USA ... boo who for the Asians?
I worked construction for a few summers after high school -- 12 hour shifts weren't uncommon (on my feet the whole time), and I took all the overtime I could get, sometimes putting in 80 hours or more of overtime a month (six 10 hour days/week), If I didn't have to drive up to 90 minutes each way to the job site on the other side of the state, I probably would have put in more overtime. When I was lucky, I'd get to drive an escort vehicle for a wide-load truck on my way to or from the job site so I'd rack up a couple hours of work while driving to work).
It was hard work, but I still found time to party with friends on the weekends, and the work paid most of my first two years of college.
Every driver already has a tracking device...
Plus, California uses electronic toll transponders to track cars on the freeways to determine traffic flows.
I thought they used to be more up front about this use, but the only reference I could find on the Bay Area Fastrak site is buried in the terms of use:
http://www.bayareafastrak.com/dynamic/signup/terms.html
You agree that the Toll Tag may be read to provide anonymous traffic flow data to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's '511' project, a real time traffic information service. No information identifying a FasTrak account, person or vehicle using the Toll Tag will be collected by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission or '511'. If you do not want your Toll Tag's presence to be noted by '511', remove the Toll Tag from your windshield and place it in the special bag you received with the Toll Tag. Be sure to replace the Toll Tag on your windshield before you enter a FasTrak lane in order to avoid toll violation charges. If you would like additional information about '511', please visit www.511.org.
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1:
The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
I think it's easy to argue that providing mental health services to those that need it (thus keeping crazy people off the streets) benefits the general welfare of the United States.
"Reagan turned mental patients into homeless people"
Nice strawman. Please now indicate which section of the constitution authorizes the federal government to provide mental health care for the citizens of this country. Please be specific and clear.
There are state laws that allow the government to involuntarily institutionalize someone for mental health care if they are shown to be a danger to themselves or others - these laws are (now) compliant with federal laws. View the references at the end of the Wikipedia article for details about specific laws:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_commitment#United_States
But mental healthcare services by the government doesn't have to mean involuntary confinement, there are plenty of voluntary mental healthcare options with inpatient and outpatient programs. And I don't think they need constitutional authorization for voluntary services since the government provides many services that are not explicitly named in the constitution.
I beg to differ. The basic design requirement of a wheel is that it's round and rolls, and I'll certainly grant you that this aspect of wheels hasn't changed. However, a rough-hewn wooden round, such as used in the simplest of carts, bears very little other resemblance to the three-spoked carbon-fiber performance bicycle wheels I see with some frequency on my morning bicycle commute. Sure, both are round and roll, but otherwise, there's thousands of years of difference between them.
Right, that's so unlike the mouse where the first mouse:
http://www.techdigest.tv/The%20First%20Mouse.jpg
Looks exactly like a modern gaming mouse:
http://tbreak.com/tech/2010/08/madcatz-shows-off-cyborg-r-a-t-9-gaming-mouse-at-gamescom/
How unenlightened, I've always wanted to put a d-pad on the thumb side of the mouse for easy weapon switching instead of reaching keys in odd spaces. Even with keyboard customization distributing the load to a hand that is more idle (the aiming hand) that merely only moves the mouse increases efficiency.
So why don't you already have such a mouse? It's not like multi-button gaming mice don't exist.
Here's a 17 button model:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16826153064
(not exactly a thumbable d-pad but you could use those 12 thumb buttons as a d-pad if you wanted to)
And here's a more modest 13 button mouse:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16826104377&Tpk=g700
If there's something magic about a pure D-pad on a mouse, then design it, find a chinese manufacturer to make it and you'll be rich. But probably not or Logitech would have already released it if there was demand. Just because you thought of it doesn't mean that it's a revolutionary idea that will change the nature of gaming mice.
My 5 year old mouse has 5 buttons beyond the normal 3 buttons + wheel. (and I never use the extra buttons).
Anonymous Coward wrote:
You're already a webdev...be your own boss and don't mess with anyone else.
I think the OP mentioned that:
That's going to be a problem when he seeks a salaried job -- few employers want an unmotivated, undisciplined employee. If I wanted to hover over the employee and make sure he's doing the work he's supposed to be doing, I'd hire my son.
They are part of the natural environment. Human efforts to eradicate species in places doesn't determine whether they're natural. Neither does the length of time they've been part of an environment.
Note that I am not loading "natural" with any kind of value judgement.
You talk a lot about "natural" without saying what you mean -- many people don't count a species that's been transplanted 5000 miles from its normal habitat by humans to be "natural" -- especially when it is killing native species that haven't adapted to its presence, and has few native predators here.
They are all now part of the natural environment. Bringing manufactured chemicals and inserting them around a vehicle is obviously less natural than an invasive species.
Since billions of dollars are spent annually trying to eradicate them and pay for the damage they cause, I'm not sure that that you can say that they are a part of the natural environment.
In any case, would you feel better if the campers spread chemicals that are not manufactured? Like natural occurring Borax?
Most good RV's have showers. heck mine has a full bathroom and a queen sized real bed in a bedroom.
I wonder, just for the heck of it, how does the carbon footprint of an RV "liver of life on the road" stack up against your average city dweller.
Probably much higher than an average city dweller that lives in a small condo or apartment, but maybe not much worse than a suburban dweller that lives in a 2000 sq foot house on an acre of land.
Living my life in short periods at campgrounds punctuated by endless periods driving 60' of steel on tollways does not really appeal to me,
but I can see how it might appeal to some. I prefer a home, a spot on the map that is me.
Most full-time RVers I know have the opposite lifestyle - long stretches in a campground with relatively short stints of being on the road - with no particular destination or timeline (except migrating south to avoid harsh winter weather), there's no need to drive endless miles on the highway.
Oh, and there's not much steel in an RV, I saw the aftermath of a rollover accident and there was a hundred feet of aluminum siding, wood and personal effects, but about the only thing left intact was the steel framed floor. It was a windy day, the driver overcorrected after the RV swayed off the road, and it ended up tipping over and down a hill. Not sure how he escaped having his towing vehicle dragged along with it, something must have snapped.
A backyard and a front porch from which to watch the universe revolve around me.
With an RV you can have a nice porch that looks out onto a variety of different scenery (or the RV next door depending on how cramped the campground is)
>>>place a small inflatable pool on the ground where the wheels will go.
I'd rather live in a hotel.
Oh wait. I already do that. You can find hotels that have Cable, internet, and of course hot showers, for the same price as renting an apartment would be. (In contrast an RV is expensive to buy and the camping rent is not exactly cheap.)
Some people want to stay where there are no hotels. You can get a RV site with full hookups (water, sewer + power, sometimes cable TV and internet too) for around $20 - $50/day. Can you get a hotel room with full cooking facilities, separate sleeping and living areas, your own clothes hanging in the closet, etc for under $50/day? And if you want seclusion, you can find isolated camping areas where there are no neighbors within sight or earshot and you can live quite comfortably for a week or so using the water tanks and generator built-in to your RV.
Depending on how much time you spend on the road versus parked (fuel is expensive), if you already own the RV, it can be more cost effective, more convenient and more comfortable than a hotel room.
It's definitely a different lifestyle and it's not for everyone, much live live-aboard sailing.
The fireants are part of the environment. The campers and their borax far less so.
The most troublesome species of fire ant in the USA (the Red Imported Fire Ant) is an invasive species that costs $5B a year in medical treatment, agriculture losses, and eradication efforts. It's no more a part of the natural environment than the campers.
Are you seriously saying that you've never tested a network device in your test lab that was supposed to be a drop-in replacement for older technology already installed in the office (which is a unique environment that's not repeated anywhere else in your organization), then had the new device fail to work when it was plugged in without having someone tweak the configuration?
For mission-critical networks, we have a lab setup which precisely emulate the production network: same ports, same software, same physical connections. The only difference is physical. In those cases, reconfiguration means someone messed up a test.
Well that's kind of the problem -- the physical environment. Equipment that works fine in test may not work in the real environment. For example, when you replace that old access switch that has a 100mbit trunk back to the core, you mean find out that the new switch that works great at 1gbit in your test lab works sporadically in the field because the building wiring is substandard can't support gig, if you pin the connection to 100mbit it works fine. (or replace the wiring if that's an option)
Or, in the case of the ISS, it means that the the test environment couldn't replicate the conditions in space (which, literally exist nowhere else on earth), which led to a damaged bolt when removing the part, and then the current difficulties with installing the new one.
you're obviously not an engineer. the big things are made up out of tiny things. its always* a tiny things that gets you
Not a mechanical engineer, no. I'm a network engineer. And when I build a network, I make sure to catch the "low hanging fruit" when I test things.
And when it comes to testing bolts, even with my non-mechanical engineering background, I can see that this is low hanging fruit. Will this bolt be able to turn 15 times in this configuration? I'm sure NASA would have been able to test that in their fish tank, and they probably did; with a different bolt...
Are you seriously saying that you've never tested a network device in your test lab that was supposed to be a drop-in replacement for older technology already installed in the office (which is a unique environment that's not repeated anywhere else in your organization), then had the new device fail to work when it was plugged in without having someone tweak the configuration?
And it's often the "low hanging fruit" that causes the problem when it's something out of the ordinary...like that someone had to force the port from autonegotiate to 100mbit because there's a flaky connection somewhere between the device and the core network so the autonegotiated 1000mbit connection wouldn't stay up, and building management refuses to replace the network cable.
In this case, they discovered metal filings when they unbolted the old unit, and though they sprayed them out with compressed nitrogen, there was apparently significant enough thread damage that the new bolt wouldn't go in.
A test lab tries to approximate reality, but it's hard to do a complete simulation of a component exposed to the vacuum of space with repeated and severe heat/cool cycles as it's exposed to and shaded from the sun.
I don't doubt that they tested everything right down to the exact same bolts (probably machined by the same vendor, and possibly even made from the same ingot of raw metal), but no test lab is a perfect representation of the real-world. Most spacewalk maintenance is rehearsed dozens or hundreds of times on earth before attempted in space.
Sounds like they got the bolt cross threaded.
Just need to back out the bolt, run a thread chaser through to clean up the threads and try again.
And if NASA has an Amazon Prime membership, Amazon will have it delivered to the space station by Wednesday (if they pay the $3.99 overnight delivery fee). There may also be a small surcharge for orbital delivery.
Man, you're really pretty stupid aren't you? Do you realize OS X is BSD UNIX? No, I guess you don't realize that because you're a fucking noob who doesn't know dick. Get a clue retard.
Do you realize that BSD Unix is not the same as Linux?