I used to go to the gym 3-5 times a week on my way home from work until a manager complained I was only spending 8-9 hours a day working.
At which point, you inform him that he either gets you for 10 hours a day or he gets you on the pager/cell phone. Not both. Just because the manager chooses to spend 12 hours a day in the office doesn't mean everyone else has to. Grow a backbone; an unreasonable demand is an unreasonable demand.
If your company can't afford to hire enough IT staff so they make everyone else work double shifts, they're probably not doing so well anyway. There are plenty of employers these days who are willing to let you work a 40 hour week that you shouldn't put up with it unless they're paying you extraordinarily well.
Internet trolls have nothing on this guy. If you really want to fuck with people, start filing crapfloods of bogus lawsuits. You could probably even use old JT's filing as a template (trolls love templates.)
But that means it's much safer, because you're smoking 5-10% as much green leafy stuff when you want to get high.
I don't know if it extends to marijuana, but studies have shown that light smokers (1 or 2 cigarettes a day) have roughly the same rate of cancer as heavy smokers (20+ cigarettes a day.)
The general point is that smoking anything is bad for your body.
With the number of truckers who carry guns? Not likely. When you're on the road alone all the time, you carry protection, especially if you're a redneck.
This subject has already been examined plenty of times in Science Fiction.
Because Science fiction is so often right about what actually happens in the real world.
I'd argue with you more, but my flying car needs to be taken to the robo-mechanic to have the gyrostabilizers rotated and top off the dilithium crystals.
Well, my point with the "free" comment is that people really aren't used to paying a premium for cell phones. The cell phone companies are the gatekeepers of the cellular network in the USA; without their blessing, you won't get access to the cell network, period.
Most people are content with their LG or Sanyo phone. At least, they're not discontent enough to go out and drop a few bills on a new phone. They'll just get a new one for free when their contract is up. I would be very surprised if a Cingular or Verizon pays more than $20 a phone for most of the ones they give away. It's just something people have come to expect (buy the service, get the phone for free.)
The Motorola RAZR is a good phone (interface sucks, but I'm used to Moto phones so it doesn't bother me so much.) It's small, works well as a phone with an actually decent speaker phone, and the interface is usable enough for the 3 things I ever do with a cell phone (make calls, text message, alarm clock.)
Application development is not a symptom of the phone, but rather the network.
Verizon/Cingular wants to charge you $5 for Tetris, and if they allow just anyone to develop an application which can then be distributed, well, that's a problem for their business model. Most phone apps are programmed in Java anyway though, but the mobile toolkits are often quite pricey.
Cellular phones these days are awesome. It's the backwards thinking service providers who make them suck.
An iPhone makes no sense for Apple as a company. They are traditionally a high-cost, high-margin vendor who adds value to their products by marketing. There is no room for that in the cell phone market, which is oversaturated with low-margin Asian manufacturers/vendors whose phones are often given away for free.
I think Apple is content to license iTunes to phone manufacturers themselves; indeed, the only reason Apple has to enter the cell phone market is to push iTunes. Mobile phone vendors are also notorious about locking out certain functionality within their products (i.e. Verizon disables Bluetooth file transfer on all their phones so you have to pay $3.95 a pop for ringtones) and Apple has never been one to go for crap like that.
Add to this the fact that cell phone based music download services haven't exactly caught on like wildfire, and it starts to become clear why even if Apple had a prototype iPhone, they wouldn't release it. The market doesn't make sense for them; they would be better to position themselves as a phone applications developer. Passing regulatory concerns worldwide has already proven a thorn in Apple's side with iTMS, and I don't think they want to go through it again for a low-margin consumer device where they would be playing underdog to one-time best friend Motorola.
An iPhone would be a huge waste of money; there is an abundance of stylish phones and I don't think Apple would be able to charge $300 for a phone like they would probably want to.
Right, E3 was a great venue for many of the smaller sites out there, exactly because it did provide the kind of intimate, one on one interview opportunities that fansites almost never get. I have a feeling that in the purge to remove the non-media fans, a lot of smaller fan sites will get shut out as well.
I think the effects of cancelling E3 (and that's what this is; E3 as the game-buying-public knows it has been cancelled) will be profoundly damaging from a symbolic standpoint. There are already signs of a market slowdown (sluggish X360 sales, hesitation over the price point on PS3, the overall low number of games for any platform not called 'Wii') and this could push public perception into the "is this industry dying?" realm. If the American economy goes into recession in the next 5 years we could easily see the console gaming market crash again like in the early 80s.
E3 was largely symbolic of the entire console gaming movement. Taking this event away is not a small move, nor is it good for the industry. I know EA, Sony and Microsoft were the ones pushing this move (probably because they each already run their own events,) but in the end it's only going to hurt them and the industry as a whole.
Ehh undergrad papers are largely a joke anyway. The only person reading them is the person grading them, so the only person they're hurting is themselves.
Wikipedia is a bad resource for a number of reasons, the least of which being its somewhat dubious provenance: it is never a primary source, at best a secondary source, and most often a tertiary source, neither of which are incredibly accurate or paint a very good picture of ths subject.
Wikipedia can be a good resource for beginning your research, however. If the article is any good, it will document its sources, which you can then look up and use yourself. The source material usually has more information than is posted on Wikipedia, which might also be useful to your topic.
All they're gonna do is make it a "closed door" meeting by charging $3k for a press pass. The entry fee will keep most of the autograph-seeking kiddies away while allowing all the media coverage of the old show and making a tidy profit to boot.
E3 has not always been open to the public, either. Only in the past couple years have they started selling general admission tickets, though it was never hard to get a press pass if you had even a moderately popular web site.
I bet the ESA looked at the industry and realized that because of consolidation and an off-year for consoles there are only a few big players left who can afford to support E3, and they're already throwing their own events.
It has less to do with the interface and everything to do with the drive mechanisms. SCSI drives are more expensive not because they use SCSI, but because the customers who use SCSI would rather pay a little more and have a drive that is more reliable.
Even the enterprise and datacenter are starting to use SATA for the vastly superior price per GB over high speed SCSI or FC drives in tiered storage systems. Store the bulk of your data on cheap SATA drives in a RAID5, then when you use it, move it to a 15k RPM SCSI drive.
Drive failure is really not much of an issue; you'll likely be using RAID5 or 5/0 with a hot spare with any SATA configuration and the odds of 3 drives failing at once are astronomical. Not to mention that a 500 GB SATA drive costs less than an 80GB 15k RPM FC drive, so if it fails, just buy another.
I only ever bought gold to spend on repairs and stuff like epic mounts. I almost never bought anything off the AH, and if I did it was a less expensive item or two that I needed to craft something. Besides, Blizzard built a game that renedered the economy almost irrelevant once you hit endgame. Endgame raiders can more or less remove themselves from the economy and surface once in a while to sell things for gold to spend on repairs. Most of the high level items are bound to your character.
Actually, the article I read about the subject said they were doing away with the paper money completely for the "regular" version of the game. I imagine the "special edition" versions might still use paper money though.
The idea of true federalism went away with the civil war. That's basically what it was about; the South said "You can't tell us what to do in our state!" and the north said "Yes we can." That said, many of the things states do yield better results than they would if done on a national level. The mobility of our society today and the real national nature of our economy in the corporate era means that people identify less with the states and more as "Americans."
It was created specifically because the founding fathers of this country believed the mass populous was too stupid and easily influenced to elect good leaders. The electoral college was a safeguard against a popularist movement starting and electing someone wholly unfit for the office.
All it does now is reduce voter turnout (as a liberal in Texas, my vote really doesn't count,) make stealing a close election easier (you only have to tamper with ~5000 votes in a swing state as opposed to ~100,000 on a national level) and cause politicians to make false promises on issues that are important in the swing states. You don't even have to steal the election, it's more like shoplifting an election. A popular count for the presidential election makes fraud a lot harder. Instead of targeting a specific district in one incident, the fraud has to be widespread, which increases the chances of getting caught.
Fraud is the pink elephant nobody wants to talk about. The press is scared to even bring it up because if the average American knew how easy it was to do, it would totally undermine popular faith in our democratic system. There is a very real chance that without some shadyness that nobody can prove (thanks to the lack of a paper trail from Diebold e-voting machines, whose executives are fervent Bush supporters) Bush would not have won Ohio and John Kerry would be our president now. The situation was similar in Florida in 2000.
The college is useless. It was put into place when the vision for this country was a more regional, loosely federated alliance of individual autonomous states. That vision disappeared pretty much the day George Washington left office.
Right now, all it does is allow the political parties to focus their advertising dollars (and fraud) on states whose outcome was not decided a year before the election. The best part is that it makes a little bit of fraud able to decide an entire election. All you really need to do is 'lose' a few ballots from the right neighborhoods in a large swing state and it can change the outcome of an entire national election.
I'm not saying that actually happens, but the potential and ease with which it can be done is so scary that the press doesn't even want to discuss it.
They have WiFi and mesh capabilities, so you only need one net connection in a village and all laptops in the area will be able to access the one connection. I'm not saying it's going to work well, but they did at least think of this problem.:)
How many MMOs can the market support? MMOs are absolutely dependent on achieving critical mass to be successful, and with so many out there and how many are so time consuming you can only play one at a time, it seems that more of them should be failing. Are they just being propped up by VC or are these companies genuinely turning a profit?
Well, the biggest problem with the virtual boy was the headache you got even after short periods of play. That's going to be a symptom of any oscillating mirror technology. I do have to say, it was a fully immersive experience which hasn't been duplicated again though. The other big problem was it was marketed as a portable system, and the games were essentially portable games, but it was a decidedly non-portable system.
Slashdot Mirror
SBS 2003 Premium edition does in fact include SQL server.
I used to go to the gym 3-5 times a week on my way home from work until a manager complained I was only spending 8-9 hours a day working.
At which point, you inform him that he either gets you for 10 hours a day or he gets you on the pager/cell phone. Not both. Just because the manager chooses to spend 12 hours a day in the office doesn't mean everyone else has to. Grow a backbone; an unreasonable demand is an unreasonable demand.
If your company can't afford to hire enough IT staff so they make everyone else work double shifts, they're probably not doing so well anyway. There are plenty of employers these days who are willing to let you work a 40 hour week that you shouldn't put up with it unless they're paying you extraordinarily well.
Internet trolls have nothing on this guy. If you really want to fuck with people, start filing crapfloods of bogus lawsuits. You could probably even use old JT's filing as a template (trolls love templates.)
But that means it's much safer, because you're smoking 5-10% as much green leafy stuff when you want to get high.
I don't know if it extends to marijuana, but studies have shown that light smokers (1 or 2 cigarettes a day) have roughly the same rate of cancer as heavy smokers (20+ cigarettes a day.)
The general point is that smoking anything is bad for your body.
With the number of truckers who carry guns? Not likely. When you're on the road alone all the time, you carry protection, especially if you're a redneck.
This subject has already been examined plenty of times in Science Fiction.
Because Science fiction is so often right about what actually happens in the real world.
I'd argue with you more, but my flying car needs to be taken to the robo-mechanic to have the gyrostabilizers rotated and top off the dilithium crystals.
Well, my point with the "free" comment is that people really aren't used to paying a premium for cell phones. The cell phone companies are the gatekeepers of the cellular network in the USA; without their blessing, you won't get access to the cell network, period.
Most people are content with their LG or Sanyo phone. At least, they're not discontent enough to go out and drop a few bills on a new phone. They'll just get a new one for free when their contract is up. I would be very surprised if a Cingular or Verizon pays more than $20 a phone for most of the ones they give away. It's just something people have come to expect (buy the service, get the phone for free.)
The Motorola RAZR is a good phone (interface sucks, but I'm used to Moto phones so it doesn't bother me so much.) It's small, works well as a phone with an actually decent speaker phone, and the interface is usable enough for the 3 things I ever do with a cell phone (make calls, text message, alarm clock.)
Application development is not a symptom of the phone, but rather the network.
Verizon/Cingular wants to charge you $5 for Tetris, and if they allow just anyone to develop an application which can then be distributed, well, that's a problem for their business model. Most phone apps are programmed in Java anyway though, but the mobile toolkits are often quite pricey.
Cellular phones these days are awesome. It's the backwards thinking service providers who make them suck.
An iPhone makes no sense for Apple as a company. They are traditionally a high-cost, high-margin vendor who adds value to their products by marketing. There is no room for that in the cell phone market, which is oversaturated with low-margin Asian manufacturers/vendors whose phones are often given away for free.
I think Apple is content to license iTunes to phone manufacturers themselves; indeed, the only reason Apple has to enter the cell phone market is to push iTunes. Mobile phone vendors are also notorious about locking out certain functionality within their products (i.e. Verizon disables Bluetooth file transfer on all their phones so you have to pay $3.95 a pop for ringtones) and Apple has never been one to go for crap like that.
Add to this the fact that cell phone based music download services haven't exactly caught on like wildfire, and it starts to become clear why even if Apple had a prototype iPhone, they wouldn't release it. The market doesn't make sense for them; they would be better to position themselves as a phone applications developer. Passing regulatory concerns worldwide has already proven a thorn in Apple's side with iTMS, and I don't think they want to go through it again for a low-margin consumer device where they would be playing underdog to one-time best friend Motorola.
An iPhone would be a huge waste of money; there is an abundance of stylish phones and I don't think Apple would be able to charge $300 for a phone like they would probably want to.
(I know, let the flames commence!
Right, E3 was a great venue for many of the smaller sites out there, exactly because it did provide the kind of intimate, one on one interview opportunities that fansites almost never get. I have a feeling that in the purge to remove the non-media fans, a lot of smaller fan sites will get shut out as well.
I think the effects of cancelling E3 (and that's what this is; E3 as the game-buying-public knows it has been cancelled) will be profoundly damaging from a symbolic standpoint. There are already signs of a market slowdown (sluggish X360 sales, hesitation over the price point on PS3, the overall low number of games for any platform not called 'Wii') and this could push public perception into the "is this industry dying?" realm. If the American economy goes into recession in the next 5 years we could easily see the console gaming market crash again like in the early 80s.
E3 was largely symbolic of the entire console gaming movement. Taking this event away is not a small move, nor is it good for the industry. I know EA, Sony and Microsoft were the ones pushing this move (probably because they each already run their own events,) but in the end it's only going to hurt them and the industry as a whole.
Ehh undergrad papers are largely a joke anyway. The only person reading them is the person grading them, so the only person they're hurting is themselves.
Wikipedia is a bad resource for a number of reasons, the least of which being its somewhat dubious provenance: it is never a primary source, at best a secondary source, and most often a tertiary source, neither of which are incredibly accurate or paint a very good picture of ths subject.
Wikipedia can be a good resource for beginning your research, however. If the article is any good, it will document its sources, which you can then look up and use yourself. The source material usually has more information than is posted on Wikipedia, which might also be useful to your topic.
All they're gonna do is make it a "closed door" meeting by charging $3k for a press pass. The entry fee will keep most of the autograph-seeking kiddies away while allowing all the media coverage of the old show and making a tidy profit to boot.
E3 has not always been open to the public, either. Only in the past couple years have they started selling general admission tickets, though it was never hard to get a press pass if you had even a moderately popular web site.
I bet the ESA looked at the industry and realized that because of consolidation and an off-year for consoles there are only a few big players left who can afford to support E3, and they're already throwing their own events.
It has less to do with the interface and everything to do with the drive mechanisms. SCSI drives are more expensive not because they use SCSI, but because the customers who use SCSI would rather pay a little more and have a drive that is more reliable.
Even the enterprise and datacenter are starting to use SATA for the vastly superior price per GB over high speed SCSI or FC drives in tiered storage systems. Store the bulk of your data on cheap SATA drives in a RAID5, then when you use it, move it to a 15k RPM SCSI drive.
Drive failure is really not much of an issue; you'll likely be using RAID5 or 5/0 with a hot spare with any SATA configuration and the odds of 3 drives failing at once are astronomical. Not to mention that a 500 GB SATA drive costs less than an 80GB 15k RPM FC drive, so if it fails, just buy another.
I think you have to be human to be elected president. Dick Cheney is an evil cyborg, so we don't have to worry about that.
I only ever bought gold to spend on repairs and stuff like epic mounts. I almost never bought anything off the AH, and if I did it was a less expensive item or two that I needed to craft something. Besides, Blizzard built a game that renedered the economy almost irrelevant once you hit endgame. Endgame raiders can more or less remove themselves from the economy and surface once in a while to sell things for gold to spend on repairs. Most of the high level items are bound to your character.
Actually, the article I read about the subject said they were doing away with the paper money completely for the "regular" version of the game. I imagine the "special edition" versions might still use paper money though.
The idea of true federalism went away with the civil war. That's basically what it was about; the South said "You can't tell us what to do in our state!" and the north said "Yes we can." That said, many of the things states do yield better results than they would if done on a national level. The mobility of our society today and the real national nature of our economy in the corporate era means that people identify less with the states and more as "Americans."
It was created specifically because the founding fathers of this country believed the mass populous was too stupid and easily influenced to elect good leaders. The electoral college was a safeguard against a popularist movement starting and electing someone wholly unfit for the office.
All it does now is reduce voter turnout (as a liberal in Texas, my vote really doesn't count,) make stealing a close election easier (you only have to tamper with ~5000 votes in a swing state as opposed to ~100,000 on a national level) and cause politicians to make false promises on issues that are important in the swing states. You don't even have to steal the election, it's more like shoplifting an election. A popular count for the presidential election makes fraud a lot harder. Instead of targeting a specific district in one incident, the fraud has to be widespread, which increases the chances of getting caught.
Fraud is the pink elephant nobody wants to talk about. The press is scared to even bring it up because if the average American knew how easy it was to do, it would totally undermine popular faith in our democratic system. There is a very real chance that without some shadyness that nobody can prove (thanks to the lack of a paper trail from Diebold e-voting machines, whose executives are fervent Bush supporters) Bush would not have won Ohio and John Kerry would be our president now. The situation was similar in Florida in 2000.
The college is useless. It was put into place when the vision for this country was a more regional, loosely federated alliance of individual autonomous states. That vision disappeared pretty much the day George Washington left office.
Right now, all it does is allow the political parties to focus their advertising dollars (and fraud) on states whose outcome was not decided a year before the election. The best part is that it makes a little bit of fraud able to decide an entire election. All you really need to do is 'lose' a few ballots from the right neighborhoods in a large swing state and it can change the outcome of an entire national election.
I'm not saying that actually happens, but the potential and ease with which it can be done is so scary that the press doesn't even want to discuss it.
And that's worse than the current system how?
They have WiFi and mesh capabilities, so you only need one net connection in a village and all laptops in the area will be able to access the one connection. I'm not saying it's going to work well, but they did at least think of this problem. :)
How many MMOs can the market support? MMOs are absolutely dependent on achieving critical mass to be successful, and with so many out there and how many are so time consuming you can only play one at a time, it seems that more of them should be failing. Are they just being propped up by VC or are these companies genuinely turning a profit?
I prefer games that don't require me to plan out my month down to the hour for 3 or 4 pieces of video game loot.
Well, the biggest problem with the virtual boy was the headache you got even after short periods of play. That's going to be a symptom of any oscillating mirror technology. I do have to say, it was a fully immersive experience which hasn't been duplicated again though. The other big problem was it was marketed as a portable system, and the games were essentially portable games, but it was a decidedly non-portable system.
At least you still get mod points...