Your other apps aren't quickly available in the background; you have to reboot to get to them. You don't have access to the dashboard. Windows still doesn't handle multiple displays properly while gaming. (Can't have work/e-mail/IM/ventrilo visible and *clickable* on the second monitor)
Wine works almost as well on MacOS too though. So there's more available than you'd think.
I'm very familiar with melanoma, as I've had multiple family members die from it, as well as having had multiple family members survive it. In general, if you get satge 1 or two Melanoma, you're likelihood of recurrence is higher than average, but you're just as likely to survive later occurances if it is detected early. It is *very* likely that you survive early detection of phase 1 or 2 melanoma, and it's impossible for me to believe that a US president would be allowed to let a reoccurance go un-noticed.
If you have phase 3 melanoma, your likelihood of reoccurance is elevated just like with phase 1 & 2, but it's also fairly likely it will show up in your brain.... You either survive as with phase 1 & phase 2, or you die within three or four years.
If you have phase 4 melanoma, you die. Fast. 3-6 months tops.
Since McCain had his cancer in 2000 and he's still alive, it's almost certain he's completely cancer free. He's pretty much just as likely to die from melanoma as anybody else who has a family history of it. Probably less, since he will be having very frequent checks by the best doctors.
BTW, age has nothing to do with the survival rate. It's not like they dose you with drugs or anything. They just cut the cancerous bits off and put a band-aid on it.
Shame the outlook for mccain making it 4 years is not that good. I dont mean this just because hes old but his past medical problems means there is a good chance it will be president Palin running for re-election
Yeah. And Cheney was going to keel over too, right?
Sorry, but I don't buy that McCain is 4 years from death, yet is able to keep up the campaign schedule that he's running. He seems healthy enough to live out his term to me. I also don't think he's irresponsible enough to attempt to get elected if he knew his health indicated he wasn't likely to live out his term.
That argument is nothing more than a shameful scare tactic.
You missed my point. McCain and Palin clearly have different opinions. He's more of a centrist, and she's clearly an extremist. He chose her to give those positions representation in his administration, which was necessary to get the base of his party involved in the election. That doesn't mean those positions will be policy in a McCain administration. In fact, it seems unlikely.
In contrast, the other ticket is led by somebody who is as far to the left as you get in US national politics, pretending that he's more towards the center than he is.
Most Americans views on the issues are right down the middle, or slightly to the right of the middle. That's why extreme candidates have to pander to the center. Unfortunately, most Americans don't vote. Only those with extreme positions do. Which is why a truely centrist candidate has to pick an extreme running mate.
US oil refineries are tuned to produce more gasoline than diesel. Thus the price of diesel is significantly higher than the price of gasoline here. Our refineries are all old, and not re-tunable to change the percentages. This is in contrast to Europe where the refineries were designed with higher diesel output in mind.
There are only a few states that restrict diesel beyond normal market forces. In fact, in many places the emissions regulations for diesel powered vehicles are more lenient due to the political clout of the trucking industry and unions.
Biodiesel doesn't solve the problem, because even with the current limited use, its production drives the price of corn up beyond sustainability. We need it for food. We don't yet have the infrastructure to farm for our energy.
You better go back and check that record, since he voted with his party more than any other Senator during his term.
He's exactly like Bush in that sense. He's going to come into office with all these good intentions to bring the parties together, but he's completely naive about the fact that the way he's going about it guarantees failure.
I made my only point. He's better because he would prove the viability of a centrist candidate. Which is hard enough to do... You mentioned yourself how much he had to pander to the extremists to get the nomination. I also am displeased with Obama's tax and healthcare policies, the latter of which will be the bleeding wound that gradually and finally kills off this country, but the fact that we need the most moderate candidate possible is enough of a factor to make the other issues a mere bonus.
The message of unity is a big fat lie. If you don't think so you're in for a huge disappointment. He won't even manage unity within his party.
If you think this election is significantly more important than the last 12 presidential elections you must have only recently started paying attention.
Obama is easily the most Bush-like candidate in this election.
He's highly partisan yet claims he'll change that about Washington (shall we say that he's a "uniter, not a divider?), he refuses to denounce Bush's signing statement practices, an he's lacking in experience. Additionally, with the exception of the wedge issues (abortion, flag burning, gun-control, gay marriage) Bush's social policies are more closely aligned with Obama than McCain.
Why do we continue to elect the most extreme candidates presented to us? When was the last time we had a candidate as centrist as McCain running? When he loses, it'll be a very long time before a major party nominates another centrist candidate.
There's a term for managers who don't have a basic grasp of what their employees do, and instead rely on the expertise of those under him to do the work that the manager him/herself should be doing (planning, estimating, scheduling; the final decision making is 1/100th of the job).
Profit sucking overhead.
If you're getting by as a manager by passing on the estimates given by your employees, or (god help you) by a statistical analysis of past similar (how do you know they're similar again?) projects, don't fool yourself into thinking you're a good manager. You're not. You're a glorified, overpaid secretary.
...that you haven't circumvented any access controls if you don't violate the copyright of the work in question... If you break the DRM on a DVD for somebody for their own personal use, and that person doesn't redistribute the work in any way, theoretically you may be OK. Of course, you'd be trusting your customer not to post the files you rip for them on the internet, and let's be honest... A few customers in, at least one is going to do exactly that.
I wouldn't want to be the test case for that argument, but it seems like there's a non-zero chance for success.
There's also that pesky term 'effectively' in there. In the case of DVDs, there's a lot of wiggle room with that term, since the copy protection on DVDs doesn't protect against exact copies of the disc in any way whatsoever, much less an effective way. Sure, most people don't have the equipment to make an exact copy, but that's beside the point...
It's not safer. It's equally as safe. I assume they're planning on ignoring the people who have the typical response, and instead trust that they've properly engineered their containment devices to properly withstand the launch vehicle blowing up.
Think of the data. Thinking of the children makes people irrational.
The same thing that happens to everything else we brought to the moon that we didn't also use to get people/objects back. It's going to sit there. It's not like it'll be hurting anybody/anything either.
It doesn't matter if the WoW PvP system is broken or not. Most casual players don't want to PvP. Which is why there are 50% more players on PvE realms than on PvP realms in Warcraft. In other words: There are more players on non-PvP WoW servers than there are in all other MMOs combined.
Incidentally, PvE servers have majority Alliance populations, and PvP servers have majority Horde populations.
My prediction for WAR? "Armies vs. Armies" is going to be hard to balance, because the "hardcore players" are going to pick the evil faction.
Sorry. He loses. If you pick up a game "for the good of the market" you send the message that people should invest in games like that. If WAR fails, it sends the message that they got it wrong, not that Blizzard is unstoppable.
Let me translate what Mark Jacobs was saying: "This was harder than we thought. We don't think we can be as successful as we'd like to be, or as successful as we thought we could be when we started. But we really want to save face."
Ok, so they got a focus group together, and looked on the internet, and people said "More, better PvP!"...
Too bad the niche hardcore players are the only people who speak up in those forums. Here's a big hint to everybody making this type of game: All those casual players that make Warcraft and Diablo crazy, stupid successful.... They play for the co-op and social aspects. They don't PvP. People who post on internet forums and create feature wishlists for these types of games (probably 90+% of the people who read this) aren't representative of the bulk of players no matter how vocal they are, or how important they think they are. If you cater to those players, and "being the next WoW" (in terms of paying playerbase) is your goal, you will fail.
I had one from PNY. I called to have them make good on the lifetime warranty, and was told that "lifetime" meant the lifetime of that product line, and since they no longer make that card, it's no longer covered. I went back and read the fine print, and sure enough, that's exactly what the warranty said.
I hope they enjoy whatever profits they made off of me on the sale of that one card, because I am now an ex-PNY-customer. I now typically buy EVGA.
Maybe he's right, and BluRay will be gone in 5 years, but he's clearly smoking something.
The article says that BluRay is going to be huge for a while, but in the long term Samsung is backing OLED displays.
WTF?
Re:Of Buggy Whips and Webmasters
on
Should IT Unionize?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Most of what you said is spot on, but something about your comment is bugging me.
You're one of those managers that looks for a CS degree when you're hiring admin and support staff, aren't you? I don't know why, but many managers can't seem to figure out what the differences between an IT worker, a programmer, and a Computer Scientist are. And they are three *very* distinct things.
When all those people were getting CS degrees, they didn't learn how to fix your computer. They didn't learn how to set up your servers. They didn't learn how to manage your datacenter. They may have picked up a little of that along the way, because they need to use servers, computers, and datacenters as tools. But what they learned was math, and probably a little programming. If you need to scope a project, or design an application, a Computer Scientist is for you. If you want to build a website, you probably want IT workers and programmers. Not Computer Scientists.
If you refuse to hire people for IT type positions unless they have a CS degree (which is a ridiculously common practice these days), you're limiting yourself to a very small pool of people who learned the math, but also have IT skills, and are willing to use them professionally. You also bumped your costs way up, because you're hiring overqualified people in to a commodity position. Meanwhile there are plenty of people out there in the labor pool who are as good or better at the tasks you need done, have been trained speciffically for those tasks, and they won't cost you as much because you're not paying for their degree.
Slashdot Mirror
It only needs one thing wrong with it to be worthless.
It crashes on large mailboxes. That's a game-loser right there.
It's a general-purpose computer that's been DRM-infected to hell.
It's what Trusted Computing would actually be like: capricious, arbitrary and overpriced.
...and completely hacked.
You forgot one.
Playing games under bootcamp is not the same.
Your other apps aren't quickly available in the background; you have to reboot to get to them. You don't have access to the dashboard. Windows still doesn't handle multiple displays properly while gaming. (Can't have work/e-mail/IM/ventrilo visible and *clickable* on the second monitor)
Wine works almost as well on MacOS too though. So there's more available than you'd think.
I'm very familiar with melanoma, as I've had multiple family members die from it, as well as having had multiple family members survive it. In general, if you get satge 1 or two Melanoma, you're likelihood of recurrence is higher than average, but you're just as likely to survive later occurances if it is detected early. It is *very* likely that you survive early detection of phase 1 or 2 melanoma, and it's impossible for me to believe that a US president would be allowed to let a reoccurance go un-noticed.
If you have phase 3 melanoma, your likelihood of reoccurance is elevated just like with phase 1 & 2, but it's also fairly likely it will show up in your brain.... You either survive as with phase 1 & phase 2, or you die within three or four years.
If you have phase 4 melanoma, you die. Fast. 3-6 months tops.
Since McCain had his cancer in 2000 and he's still alive, it's almost certain he's completely cancer free. He's pretty much just as likely to die from melanoma as anybody else who has a family history of it. Probably less, since he will be having very frequent checks by the best doctors.
BTW, age has nothing to do with the survival rate. It's not like they dose you with drugs or anything. They just cut the cancerous bits off and put a band-aid on it.
Shame the outlook for mccain making it 4 years is not that good. I dont mean this just because hes old but his past medical problems means there is a good chance it will be president Palin running for re-election
Yeah. And Cheney was going to keel over too, right?
Sorry, but I don't buy that McCain is 4 years from death, yet is able to keep up the campaign schedule that he's running. He seems healthy enough to live out his term to me. I also don't think he's irresponsible enough to attempt to get elected if he knew his health indicated he wasn't likely to live out his term.
That argument is nothing more than a shameful scare tactic.
You missed my point. McCain and Palin clearly have different opinions. He's more of a centrist, and she's clearly an extremist. He chose her to give those positions representation in his administration, which was necessary to get the base of his party involved in the election. That doesn't mean those positions will be policy in a McCain administration. In fact, it seems unlikely.
In contrast, the other ticket is led by somebody who is as far to the left as you get in US national politics, pretending that he's more towards the center than he is.
Most Americans views on the issues are right down the middle, or slightly to the right of the middle. That's why extreme candidates have to pander to the center. Unfortunately, most Americans don't vote. Only those with extreme positions do. Which is why a truely centrist candidate has to pick an extreme running mate.
US oil refineries are tuned to produce more gasoline than diesel. Thus the price of diesel is significantly higher than the price of gasoline here. Our refineries are all old, and not re-tunable to change the percentages. This is in contrast to Europe where the refineries were designed with higher diesel output in mind.
There are only a few states that restrict diesel beyond normal market forces. In fact, in many places the emissions regulations for diesel powered vehicles are more lenient due to the political clout of the trucking industry and unions.
Biodiesel doesn't solve the problem, because even with the current limited use, its production drives the price of corn up beyond sustainability. We need it for food. We don't yet have the infrastructure to farm for our energy.
In America, people are individuals with their own ideas and opinions. How does it work where you live?
You better go back and check that record, since he voted with his party more than any other Senator during his term.
He's exactly like Bush in that sense. He's going to come into office with all these good intentions to bring the parties together, but he's completely naive about the fact that the way he's going about it guarantees failure.
I made my only point. He's better because he would prove the viability of a centrist candidate. Which is hard enough to do... You mentioned yourself how much he had to pander to the extremists to get the nomination. I also am displeased with Obama's tax and healthcare policies, the latter of which will be the bleeding wound that gradually and finally kills off this country, but the fact that we need the most moderate candidate possible is enough of a factor to make the other issues a mere bonus.
The message of unity is a big fat lie. If you don't think so you're in for a huge disappointment. He won't even manage unity within his party.
If you think this election is significantly more important than the last 12 presidential elections you must have only recently started paying attention.
Vista gaming is now on par with XP.
Good. Still no need to "upgrade" then...
Obama is easily the most Bush-like candidate in this election.
He's highly partisan yet claims he'll change that about Washington (shall we say that he's a "uniter, not a divider?), he refuses to denounce Bush's signing statement practices, an he's lacking in experience. Additionally, with the exception of the wedge issues (abortion, flag burning, gun-control, gay marriage) Bush's social policies are more closely aligned with Obama than McCain.
Why do we continue to elect the most extreme candidates presented to us? When was the last time we had a candidate as centrist as McCain running? When he loses, it'll be a very long time before a major party nominates another centrist candidate.
There's a term for managers who don't have a basic grasp of what their employees do, and instead rely on the expertise of those under him to do the work that the manager him/herself should be doing (planning, estimating, scheduling; the final decision making is 1/100th of the job).
Profit sucking overhead.
If you're getting by as a manager by passing on the estimates given by your employees, or (god help you) by a statistical analysis of past similar (how do you know they're similar again?) projects, don't fool yourself into thinking you're a good manager. You're not. You're a glorified, overpaid secretary.
...that you haven't circumvented any access controls if you don't violate the copyright of the work in question... If you break the DRM on a DVD for somebody for their own personal use, and that person doesn't redistribute the work in any way, theoretically you may be OK. Of course, you'd be trusting your customer not to post the files you rip for them on the internet, and let's be honest... A few customers in, at least one is going to do exactly that.
I wouldn't want to be the test case for that argument, but it seems like there's a non-zero chance for success.
There's also that pesky term 'effectively' in there. In the case of DVDs, there's a lot of wiggle room with that term, since the copy protection on DVDs doesn't protect against exact copies of the disc in any way whatsoever, much less an effective way. Sure, most people don't have the equipment to make an exact copy, but that's beside the point...
It's not safer. It's equally as safe. I assume they're planning on ignoring the people who have the typical response, and instead trust that they've properly engineered their containment devices to properly withstand the launch vehicle blowing up.
Think of the data. Thinking of the children makes people irrational.
The same thing that happens to everything else we brought to the moon that we didn't also use to get people/objects back. It's going to sit there. It's not like it'll be hurting anybody/anything either.
It doesn't matter if the WoW PvP system is broken or not. Most casual players don't want to PvP. Which is why there are 50% more players on PvE realms than on PvP realms in Warcraft. In other words: There are more players on non-PvP WoW servers than there are in all other MMOs combined.
Incidentally, PvE servers have majority Alliance populations, and PvP servers have majority Horde populations.
My prediction for WAR? "Armies vs. Armies" is going to be hard to balance, because the "hardcore players" are going to pick the evil faction.
So... Play WAR, or future games will suffer?
Sorry. He loses. If you pick up a game "for the good of the market" you send the message that people should invest in games like that. If WAR fails, it sends the message that they got it wrong, not that Blizzard is unstoppable.
Let me translate what Mark Jacobs was saying: "This was harder than we thought. We don't think we can be as successful as we'd like to be, or as successful as we thought we could be when we started. But we really want to save face."
"PvP is a much more important part of..."
Ok, so they got a focus group together, and looked on the internet, and people said "More, better PvP!"...
Too bad the niche hardcore players are the only people who speak up in those forums. Here's a big hint to everybody making this type of game: All those casual players that make Warcraft and Diablo crazy, stupid successful.... They play for the co-op and social aspects. They don't PvP. People who post on internet forums and create feature wishlists for these types of games (probably 90+% of the people who read this) aren't representative of the bulk of players no matter how vocal they are, or how important they think they are. If you cater to those players, and "being the next WoW" (in terms of paying playerbase) is your goal, you will fail.
I had one from PNY. I called to have them make good on the lifetime warranty, and was told that "lifetime" meant the lifetime of that product line, and since they no longer make that card, it's no longer covered. I went back and read the fine print, and sure enough, that's exactly what the warranty said.
I hope they enjoy whatever profits they made off of me on the sale of that one card, because I am now an ex-PNY-customer. I now typically buy EVGA.
DVD players have been under $30 for almost 5 years, and you just got one "now"?
Wow. I thought I was cynical.
Maybe he's right, and BluRay will be gone in 5 years, but he's clearly smoking something.
The article says that BluRay is going to be huge for a while, but in the long term Samsung is backing OLED displays.
WTF?
Most of what you said is spot on, but something about your comment is bugging me.
You're one of those managers that looks for a CS degree when you're hiring admin and support staff, aren't you? I don't know why, but many managers can't seem to figure out what the differences between an IT worker, a programmer, and a Computer Scientist are. And they are three *very* distinct things.
When all those people were getting CS degrees, they didn't learn how to fix your computer. They didn't learn how to set up your servers. They didn't learn how to manage your datacenter. They may have picked up a little of that along the way, because they need to use servers, computers, and datacenters as tools. But what they learned was math, and probably a little programming. If you need to scope a project, or design an application, a Computer Scientist is for you. If you want to build a website, you probably want IT workers and programmers. Not Computer Scientists.
If you refuse to hire people for IT type positions unless they have a CS degree (which is a ridiculously common practice these days), you're limiting yourself to a very small pool of people who learned the math, but also have IT skills, and are willing to use them professionally. You also bumped your costs way up, because you're hiring overqualified people in to a commodity position. Meanwhile there are plenty of people out there in the labor pool who are as good or better at the tasks you need done, have been trained speciffically for those tasks, and they won't cost you as much because you're not paying for their degree.
Unions mean that lazy senior waste of payroll is never going to get fired.
Unions mean that there's one more reason to outsource your technical staff.
"IT" workers are already paid higher than average, and enjoy many peculiarities of their industry that are missing from unionized jobs.
Sure, some members of an IT union would benefit from it. Many of the wouldn't.
PC gaming is dying out because people like to play games rather than wasting time figuring out why the DRM won't let their game run.
Fixed that for you.