You toggle back and forth between mouse mode and keyboard mode. The mouse mode isn't agile enough for easy cut and paste but it's fine for clicking wigits. It has 2 speeds and 8 directions. Better to use your touch screen
It's smart this way: some guys at IBM back in the '70s figured out the best way to poll the keys is to always report idle except when a release directly follows a press and then report the chord that existed between those 2 events. That's what your brain wants. With 8 keys there are of course 255 useful chords plus the idle chord. 127 with 7 the keys I usually implement. It's pretty much all explained in the downloadable source and instructions.
I basically quit using qwertys 17 years ago. See http://chordite.com/ I still think that's far and away the best approach. Nothing else comes close. It's really a pity I'm too lazy to promote it:-)
"The Washington Post agreed to withhold certain details about the compromised missile project at the request of the Navy, which argued that their release could harm national security."
So letting Americans know what the Chinese know is a threat. That's hard for me to understand.
Let anyone collect data as massively as they like but require that access to that be free and open to all, along with all analysis tools. Not just the government, everybody. Sort of a GNU-like approach.
I don't mind you seeing mine as long as I can see yours
Chordite.com. I don't give a damn what they say, chording will rise again:-)
It tickles me, sort of, when people say chording is too hard for people to learn and they'll prefer surgery instead. Or that folks will want to say out loud everything they might type. Or that the folks around them would tolerate them doing that.
Aside from being a bad movie cliche, what is the problem with "Show me your papers." That's pretty much what we want if the "papers" are some sort secure proof of identity.
It's a bad thing in that it's bad business --- a bad investment because no one needs to buy the product. Fine as a hobby though, or as research if you have a grant.
Coward, when you brake you convert your car's kinetic energy to heat in your brake pads or, at best, recharge a battery with efficiency way lower than 100%. When you accelerate back up to your original speed, you use fuel or battery charge (which came from fuel) to replace that kinetic energy. So you don't want to stop. By far the most efficient way to get through the light is to coast through it in neutral. Honestly, I thought everyone knew this.
I personally have thought up half a dozen cheap ways to give drivers who are approaching traffic lights enough information that they don't have to hit it red and stop --- things that work like the countdowns provided by pedestrian walk lights. And it doesn't have to be mandatory. If maybe 30% of drivers use the inforrmation to coast through, then the other 70% will have no choice. A lot of gas could probably be saved.
This sort of thing has probably been patented many times but I've never see any mention of it anywhere. Take it and run, Elon.
Yeah, I don't get it either. What is the problem. Genetic editing happens semi-randomly with every fertilization, via recombination. Chromosomes break and exchange pieces. Very often the results are not particularly good.
I am tired of reading about how the Mars rovers miraculously lived so long.
It should be obvious to even the dumbest among us that the short "expected lifespan" of the rovers was just some contractual trigger for some bonus for some contractor and was in no way a design goal.
Congress probably does understand the law of supply and demand but just doesn't have the spine to resist billionaires.
As mentioned in prior notes, H-1B is unmistakeably a tool to flood the programming market with cheap labor to keep wages down.
What surprises me most, given all the high minded rhetoric one hears about helping "the developing world," is no one ever seems to mention that US immigration policies work to strip poor countries of their intelligentsia and commercial talent.
I wonder about the legal consequences but when I'm expected to sign before I have the time (or inclination) to read the document I just scrawl someone else's name, usually Jesus H. Christ or Abraham Lincoln.
Duh, what if there were undetectable, unprovable ways to torture or coerce you into confessing? Like,say, you suspect the authorities will whisper that they'll kill your mother next year if you don't confess now. Duh, couldn't you invoke your 5th amendment right to remove their incentive?
You seem to think somebody is giving points on debate technique. No one is. And I kind of like a little fist pounding now and again.
You're just argumentative like so many others here. When you have something to add, some hair to split, some fine distinction you think cries out for elaboration, you don't have to start out with stuff like "not quite." There's also "another aspect is," "also" or even just "."
Patents are supposed to be what I said and also what you said. There's no argument. There's just you, pursuing your strange little hobby.
Well that's just crazy talk. Patents are obviously a reward for motivation and they obviously encourage innovation. You're saying a second effect (publishing) negates the first-mentioned effect (reward, incentive).
Let me see if I have this straight. Low-payed but passionate engineers invent for pleasure while living on wages from high-payed MBAs and lawyers who promptly patent any of those inventions they think might actually make money (plus a lot of others just to have ammo to fire back at infringement suits)? Sounds right to me. But that doesn't mean patents aren't meant to incentivise inventors. I think that's even written down somewhere.
BTW I don't think anyone in these 300 or so comments so far has advocated for the present system.
Also, if those engineers are so damned smart why ain't they rich.
Maybe you're the idiot, Mr. Coward. This thread and Slashdot generally has a lot of people saying that people (other than themselves) should give away inventions or just have them taken. But what if the inventor has no one else to pay his bills. What if he has babies to feed and a mortgage on his miserable little hovel. What then, eh.
I'll tell you what: he might not choose to invest the time to invent (there's a lot of trial and error). Or he might treat his invention as a trade secret. Either way you don't get full benefit. Patents are the best thing that ever happened to hypocritical little commie parasites because they get the gizmo now courtesy of the inventor's patent and they get it manufactured under license. And not more than 20 years later it's public domain.
Slashdot Mirror
This might help
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/09/cooling-paint-drops-temperature-any-surface
You toggle back and forth between mouse mode and keyboard mode. The mouse mode isn't agile enough for easy cut and paste but it's fine for clicking wigits. It has 2 speeds and 8 directions. Better to use your touch screen
It's smart this way: some guys at IBM back in the '70s figured out the best way to poll the keys is to always report idle except when a release directly follows a press and then report the chord that existed between those 2 events. That's what your brain wants. With 8 keys there are of course 255 useful chords plus the idle chord. 127 with 7 the keys I usually implement. It's pretty much all explained in the downloadable source and instructions.
I basically quit using qwertys 17 years ago. See http://chordite.com/ I still think that's far and away the best approach. Nothing else comes close. It's really a pity I'm too lazy to promote it :-)
"The Washington Post agreed to withhold certain details about the compromised missile project at the request of the Navy, which argued that their release could harm national security."
So letting Americans know what the Chinese know is a threat. That's hard for me to understand.
We could protect freedom by sacrificing privacy.
Let anyone collect data as massively as they like but require that access to that be free and open to all, along with all analysis tools. Not just the government, everybody. Sort of a GNU-like approach.
I don't mind you seeing mine as long as I can see yours
It's about mobility, amigo. The competition isn't a 101 qwerty on a desk, it's you moving your thumbs as fast as you can on your little telephone.
Anyway, I've been at over 40 wpm for years. Way faster than I ever was on a qwerty. Who knows what one of you supersonic thumbers could achieve.
As for you, card puncher: details matter.
Chordite.com. I don't give a damn what they say, chording will rise again :-)
It tickles me, sort of, when people say chording is too hard for people to learn and they'll prefer surgery instead. Or that folks will want to say out loud everything they might type. Or that the folks around them would tolerate them doing that.
Aside from being a bad movie cliche, what is the problem with "Show me your papers." That's pretty much what we want if the "papers" are some sort secure proof of identity.
It's a bad thing in that it's bad business --- a bad investment because no one needs to buy the product. Fine as a hobby though, or as research if you have a grant.
"we need more smart people thinking about applications" = we have a solution looking for a problem
Coward, when you brake you convert your car's kinetic energy to heat in your brake pads or, at best, recharge a battery with efficiency way lower than 100%. When you accelerate back up to your original speed, you use fuel or battery charge (which came from fuel) to replace that kinetic energy. So you don't want to stop. By far the most efficient way to get through the light is to coast through it in neutral. Honestly, I thought everyone knew this.
I personally have thought up half a dozen cheap ways to give drivers who are approaching traffic lights enough information that they don't have to hit it red and stop --- things that work like the countdowns provided by pedestrian walk lights. And it doesn't have to be mandatory. If maybe 30% of drivers use the inforrmation to coast through, then the other 70% will have no choice. A lot of gas could probably be saved.
This sort of thing has probably been patented many times but I've never see any mention of it anywhere. Take it and run, Elon.
New Coke
Yeah, I don't get it either. What is the problem. Genetic editing happens semi-randomly with every fertilization, via recombination. Chromosomes break and exchange pieces. Very often the results are not particularly good.
He told you: square block, rounded corners
And geez, Samsung, you could be doing so much better: chordite.com
I am tired of reading about how the Mars rovers miraculously lived so long.
It should be obvious to even the dumbest among us that the short "expected lifespan" of the rovers was just some contractual trigger for some bonus for some contractor and was in no way a design goal.
Congress probably does understand the law of supply and demand but just doesn't have the spine to resist billionaires.
As mentioned in prior notes, H-1B is unmistakeably a tool to flood the programming market with cheap labor to keep wages down.
What surprises me most, given all the high minded rhetoric one hears about helping "the developing world," is no one ever seems to mention that US immigration policies work to strip poor countries of their intelligentsia and commercial talent.
I wonder about the legal consequences but when I'm expected to sign before I have the time (or inclination) to read the document I just scrawl someone else's name, usually Jesus H. Christ or Abraham Lincoln.
Duh, what if there were undetectable, unprovable ways to torture or coerce you into confessing? Like,say, you suspect the authorities will whisper that they'll kill your mother next year if you don't confess now. Duh, couldn't you invoke your 5th amendment right to remove their incentive?
Well said.
Roughly, if A and B are correlated then either A causes B or B causes A or both A and B are caused by some C.
So causation is implied in every case! :-)
You seem to think somebody is giving points on debate technique. No one is. And I kind of like a little fist pounding now and again.
You're just argumentative like so many others here. When you have something to add, some hair to split, some fine distinction you think cries out for elaboration, you don't have to start out with stuff like "not quite." There's also "another aspect is," "also" or even just " ."
Patents are supposed to be what I said and also what you said. There's no argument. There's just you, pursuing your strange little hobby.
Well that's just crazy talk. Patents are obviously a reward for motivation and they obviously encourage innovation. You're saying a second effect (publishing) negates the first-mentioned effect (reward, incentive).
Let me see if I have this straight. Low-payed but passionate engineers invent for pleasure while living on wages from high-payed MBAs and lawyers who promptly patent any of those inventions they think might actually make money (plus a lot of others just to have ammo to fire back at infringement suits)? Sounds right to me. But that doesn't mean patents aren't meant to incentivise inventors. I think that's even written down somewhere.
BTW I don't think anyone in these 300 or so comments so far has advocated for the present system.
Also, if those engineers are so damned smart why ain't they rich.
Maybe you're the idiot, Mr. Coward. This thread and Slashdot generally has a lot of people saying that people (other than themselves) should give away inventions or just have them taken. But what if the inventor has no one else to pay his bills. What if he has babies to feed and a mortgage on his miserable little hovel. What then, eh.
I'll tell you what: he might not choose to invest the time to invent (there's a lot of trial and error). Or he might treat his invention as a trade secret. Either way you don't get full benefit. Patents are the best thing that ever happened to hypocritical little commie parasites because they get the gizmo now courtesy of the inventor's patent and they get it manufactured under license. And not more than 20 years later it's public domain.