Actually I used to time them and the previews usually lasted 11 to 19 minutes, with the majority being 15. I wish I had my excel spreadsheet to show you but to be honest, I haven't tracked the time one since about '08, but I have taken notice that the minutes have been pretty much the same.
I once times a 21 minute long preview session - the longest. So while he exaggerated at 30 minutes, you maybe be understating the amount by saying only 7 minutes.
However, this actually varies by franchise and by location because some theaters have local ads, some don't, etc...So it is quite possible neither of you are innacurate for your area.
Also, I love the Megaplex Theatres in Utah because I can reserve my seats. I can arrive 10 minutes after the listed start time and still be "on time" before the actual move starts. And I can take outside food in.
Wow. Your magizine is pirated and posted around the world for you? I hope you have good ads and links in your articles so you can take advantage of all that free advertising.
It is pretty easy to screen share with many tools, such as LANDesk's Management Gateway Remote Control or LogMeIn's http://join.me/ website.
The only problem with screen sharing is that after you hang up, if you get interrupted and don't get back to the issue, you are relying on memory. Try to video capture the remote control session.
Everyone always wants step by step or screen shots. Why not use a tool that give you all of that. Camtasia Studio or similar software that captures a video of the screen.
Train the users to capture a video of reproducing the bug. Then have them post the video in the bug report. Other than needing plenty of storage to handle a lot of videos, this is actually quite a good solution. Any bug that is submitted without a video is returned to the submitter requesting they duplicate it.
Along with fixing the bug, you are going to watch what the users click and what they do and you might actually realize that as a developer you never really understood the user before.
First, you are taking the wrong approach when you "assert that there is no god" because science has not proven such. You believe there is not God and your belief lacks scientific proof every bit as much those who believe in God lack scientific proof. In a universe without a beginning and without an end, the scientific possibly of a superior being exists from a scientific point of view. So until it is discounted, it is probably not a good idea.
Also, there are many witnesses from Moses to Jesus to Mohammad of a superior being visiting them. Even after Christ, there are claimed witnesses. The most recent witness I know of was Joseph Smith.
Whether you like it or not, the belief that there is not God is just a belief. You have an unrational beleif equal to that of your family.
If you want to teach them from a scientific point of view, then don't "assert that there is no god" just assert that science is working on proving and disproving theories and we should know that there is always more to learn.
Also, what does science know about post death? Has science proven or disproved a spirit? Not yet. Maybe a superior being did come here who knows some things about post death and shared that with us. Since there is infinitely more time after death, and assuming you exist after death, wouldn't doing something to improve your existence after death make sense?
Religion is quite delusional in many ways. I agree. However, guess what. So is science. Both science and religion have limited information.
The science delusion is often that we actually have something 100% figured out already. Guess what, we are not even close. We have evidence of evolution. I completely agree. However, the same evidence also supports another theory. Code re-use. Only DNA code, not software code. Is similar gene sequences in species an example of Evolution or a was it just a superior being showing excellent DNA code re-use? Unfortunately, DNA evidence doesn't discount either. So does evolution mean there is not God. Not at all. In fact, if we can manipulate DNA with our limited knowledge, how much more could a superior being with far more scientific knowledge than we have do the same and more.
Even if we do firm up the theory of evolution as a natural process, then that still doesn't mean that a being, such as God, couldn't have used evolution to create man and life on the earth. Heck, He probably could use both evolution and DNA manipulation.
Let's face as much as science has advanced, it has a long way to go. One thing religion has right is the superior being idea. No matter how much scientific knowledge we acquire, there is more to be found.
By the way, when does life begin? Scientists used to believe in spontaneous generation, remember? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation. What is laughable is that some people, even scientists, have duped themselves into believing it again. If we make spontaneous generation small enough, down to the level of atoms, then spontaneous generation of life is believable again. There is more to it than mixing elements. We are still finding smaller and smaller parts of atoms.
Spontaneous generation does NOT occur, no matter how small we make it. The creation of life is something we still don't understand. I recently read this article where scientists are saying that we can almost create life in a lab. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/05/ribonucleotides.
As we try to prove that we as human's can create life (and if you read the article, we didn't even come close yet) the idea of a God being able to create life becomes more possible, not less. If we figured something out, and we can manipulate some part of life scientifically, how much more so could a being that is billions of years more advanced than we are do the same.
We can manipulate DNA. Why would science discount the idea that in the vast expanse of the universe a superior race exists that has been manipulating life and DNA forever. A real scientist would not discount the idea because science is out to prove and disprove theories, not make rash statements. A real scientist would not discount the theory of a superior being until it is proven that a superior being doesn't exist. Showing that our limited human race can almost create life is evidence that life can be created in a way other than a natural process, which is more evidence of the possibility of a God.
I am a software developer and very logical. I believe in God because I feel there is something more out there and logically, a superior being makes sense, especially since time is forever, without a beginning and without an end. I believe in continued scientific learning because I feel there is something more out there and logically we have infinitely more to learn. I have yet to see the two beliefs conflict.
Look, right outside your front door is good for many reasons:
1. You can have more time with your family.
- Spend lunch hours with them
2. You can work an extra 30 minutes each day to get ahead and still be home more than you were when commuting.
3. You pay less in gas, so the £7k raise may actually be a £9k raise when you factor in travel costs you won't be paying.
Do what is right for you and your family...think long term too.
I just went with T-Mobile because they were the only ones that could give me a phone with data for and text for $69 a month.
I am now contracted to T-Mobile for 2 years.
T-Mobile seems to be cheaper and pretty much just as good for me and there is still potential for them to rise up and continue to succeed.
Jared
http://www.rhyous.com/
You missed the point.
The company will fold, its assets will be sold off at 5% of its value, and a new company will emerge that doesn't have hardly any debt and suddenly it is way cheaper for the company to run.
See it cost 500 million per year to run company X that is in debt. It only makes 100 million a year.
Company Y buys Company X for 10% of its value.
Now it costs Company X 10% to run or 50 million. Now there is a 50% profit.
Nobody realizes the first company was intended to suck a bunch of money to get the product going, then fold, then restart without having to answer to all the investors.
Jared
http://www.rhyous.com/
Taking away freedoms should never be done with so frivolously!
I am embarrassed for our nation that we even have a governor that would entertain the idea of taking away a freedom without bringing the idea to the entire population.
In fact, we should have a new amendment to the constitution that states that any law that restricts freedom can only occur by a vote of the population.
I have actually had this same idea...only I believe I thought it through a little more.
Painting your roof white is great...in the summer. Maybe they should do this in the south only.
Because when it is cold in the winter, you need the roof's heat to help lower your costs of your heating bill. So for people in the north who experience cold winters, how does a white roof help?
Since the current planes were mostly built in the 70's, 40 years ago, and these new ones NASA makes won't be out until 2030, which is another generation, and generations are usually 20 years, wouldn't any new jet be considered 3 generations ahead.
I want a jet released this year that is a generation or two ahead of now!
Slashdot Mirror
Actually I used to time them and the previews usually lasted 11 to 19 minutes, with the majority being 15. I wish I had my excel spreadsheet to show you but to be honest, I haven't tracked the time one since about '08, but I have taken notice that the minutes have been pretty much the same. I once times a 21 minute long preview session - the longest. So while he exaggerated at 30 minutes, you maybe be understating the amount by saying only 7 minutes. However, this actually varies by franchise and by location because some theaters have local ads, some don't, etc...So it is quite possible neither of you are innacurate for your area. Also, I love the Megaplex Theatres in Utah because I can reserve my seats. I can arrive 10 minutes after the listed start time and still be "on time" before the actual move starts. And I can take outside food in.
Wow. Your magizine is pirated and posted around the world for you? I hope you have good ads and links in your articles so you can take advantage of all that free advertising.
It is pretty easy to screen share with many tools, such as LANDesk's Management Gateway Remote Control or LogMeIn's http://join.me/ website. The only problem with screen sharing is that after you hang up, if you get interrupted and don't get back to the issue, you are relying on memory. Try to video capture the remote control session.
Everyone always wants step by step or screen shots. Why not use a tool that give you all of that. Camtasia Studio or similar software that captures a video of the screen. Train the users to capture a video of reproducing the bug. Then have them post the video in the bug report. Other than needing plenty of storage to handle a lot of videos, this is actually quite a good solution. Any bug that is submitted without a video is returned to the submitter requesting they duplicate it. Along with fixing the bug, you are going to watch what the users click and what they do and you might actually realize that as a developer you never really understood the user before.
First, you are taking the wrong approach when you "assert that there is no god" because science has not proven such. You believe there is not God and your belief lacks scientific proof every bit as much those who believe in God lack scientific proof. In a universe without a beginning and without an end, the scientific possibly of a superior being exists from a scientific point of view. So until it is discounted, it is probably not a good idea. Also, there are many witnesses from Moses to Jesus to Mohammad of a superior being visiting them. Even after Christ, there are claimed witnesses. The most recent witness I know of was Joseph Smith. Whether you like it or not, the belief that there is not God is just a belief. You have an unrational beleif equal to that of your family. If you want to teach them from a scientific point of view, then don't "assert that there is no god" just assert that science is working on proving and disproving theories and we should know that there is always more to learn. Also, what does science know about post death? Has science proven or disproved a spirit? Not yet. Maybe a superior being did come here who knows some things about post death and shared that with us. Since there is infinitely more time after death, and assuming you exist after death, wouldn't doing something to improve your existence after death make sense?
Religion is quite delusional in many ways. I agree. However, guess what. So is science. Both science and religion have limited information. The science delusion is often that we actually have something 100% figured out already. Guess what, we are not even close. We have evidence of evolution. I completely agree. However, the same evidence also supports another theory. Code re-use. Only DNA code, not software code. Is similar gene sequences in species an example of Evolution or a was it just a superior being showing excellent DNA code re-use? Unfortunately, DNA evidence doesn't discount either. So does evolution mean there is not God. Not at all. In fact, if we can manipulate DNA with our limited knowledge, how much more could a superior being with far more scientific knowledge than we have do the same and more. Even if we do firm up the theory of evolution as a natural process, then that still doesn't mean that a being, such as God, couldn't have used evolution to create man and life on the earth. Heck, He probably could use both evolution and DNA manipulation. Let's face as much as science has advanced, it has a long way to go. One thing religion has right is the superior being idea. No matter how much scientific knowledge we acquire, there is more to be found. By the way, when does life begin? Scientists used to believe in spontaneous generation, remember? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation. What is laughable is that some people, even scientists, have duped themselves into believing it again. If we make spontaneous generation small enough, down to the level of atoms, then spontaneous generation of life is believable again. There is more to it than mixing elements. We are still finding smaller and smaller parts of atoms. Spontaneous generation does NOT occur, no matter how small we make it. The creation of life is something we still don't understand. I recently read this article where scientists are saying that we can almost create life in a lab. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/05/ribonucleotides. As we try to prove that we as human's can create life (and if you read the article, we didn't even come close yet) the idea of a God being able to create life becomes more possible, not less. If we figured something out, and we can manipulate some part of life scientifically, how much more so could a being that is billions of years more advanced than we are do the same. We can manipulate DNA. Why would science discount the idea that in the vast expanse of the universe a superior race exists that has been manipulating life and DNA forever. A real scientist would not discount the idea because science is out to prove and disprove theories, not make rash statements. A real scientist would not discount the theory of a superior being until it is proven that a superior being doesn't exist. Showing that our limited human race can almost create life is evidence that life can be created in a way other than a natural process, which is more evidence of the possibility of a God. I am a software developer and very logical. I believe in God because I feel there is something more out there and logically, a superior being makes sense, especially since time is forever, without a beginning and without an end. I believe in continued scientific learning because I feel there is something more out there and logically we have infinitely more to learn. I have yet to see the two beliefs conflict.
Look, right outside your front door is good for many reasons: 1. You can have more time with your family. - Spend lunch hours with them 2. You can work an extra 30 minutes each day to get ahead and still be home more than you were when commuting. 3. You pay less in gas, so the £7k raise may actually be a £9k raise when you factor in travel costs you won't be paying. Do what is right for you and your family...think long term too.
I just went with T-Mobile because they were the only ones that could give me a phone with data for and text for $69 a month. I am now contracted to T-Mobile for 2 years. T-Mobile seems to be cheaper and pretty much just as good for me and there is still potential for them to rise up and continue to succeed. Jared http://www.rhyous.com/
You missed the point. The company will fold, its assets will be sold off at 5% of its value, and a new company will emerge that doesn't have hardly any debt and suddenly it is way cheaper for the company to run. See it cost 500 million per year to run company X that is in debt. It only makes 100 million a year. Company Y buys Company X for 10% of its value. Now it costs Company X 10% to run or 50 million. Now there is a 50% profit. Nobody realizes the first company was intended to suck a bunch of money to get the product going, then fold, then restart without having to answer to all the investors. Jared http://www.rhyous.com/
Taking away freedoms should never be done with so frivolously! I am embarrassed for our nation that we even have a governor that would entertain the idea of taking away a freedom without bringing the idea to the entire population. In fact, we should have a new amendment to the constitution that states that any law that restricts freedom can only occur by a vote of the population.
I have actually had this same idea...only I believe I thought it through a little more. Painting your roof white is great...in the summer. Maybe they should do this in the south only. Because when it is cold in the winter, you need the roof's heat to help lower your costs of your heating bill. So for people in the north who experience cold winters, how does a white roof help?
Since the current planes were mostly built in the 70's, 40 years ago, and these new ones NASA makes won't be out until 2030, which is another generation, and generations are usually 20 years, wouldn't any new jet be considered 3 generations ahead. I want a jet released this year that is a generation or two ahead of now!
I think that you should give PC-BSD (http://www.pcbsd.org) a try. It is working really well for me.