IT will be staffed by pimply faced youths who are susceptible to power trips and a mean streak.
That's more or less how it is known today. And I think that's exactly how it will change in ten years: not at all. It will be the same thing, only with more professionals (and "professionals") and flying computers, which will probably be very annoying to operate and repair.
Anedoctal too, but I had a Thunderbird 1.3GHz and when its fan died, the computer just froze and shut down, waiting patiently for a replacement cooler. As it was Sunday, I refused to wait for stores to open and just pointed a big, humen-cooling fan at the exposed enthrails of my box and it worked just fine. The same 1.3GHz later received a copper heatsink with two fans and it took about a year for them to get deformed and misaligned due to heat. Funny thing is me and my friends remember it being ludicrously hot, but its TDP was only about 70W, quite a bit lower than my current Athlon II.
So true. I had to work on a notebook with Vista, once. The damned thing took about ten minutes to boot and the system tray looked like Tokyo, all colorful and overcrowded. It belonged in the Louvre, but I'm afraid it wouldn't fit. And before Premiere would open, yes, Java update, Avast scheduled scan (it was scheduled for "whenever it aggravates the user the most", apparently), Adobe update and an MSN window that would pop up as soon as I thought everything was over. It was atrocious.
I'd guess the shorter release cycle is organizing their ambitions. Instead of implementing twenty new features and then refining them for months, now they add one or two features and immediately hone them for release. So less things are broken and remain so for a shorter period of time.
I have a Samsung 80Gb IDE drive and it takes about 40s to boot to a working desktop, so that's not it. I'd consider any machine* taking longer than 2 minutes to boot to be in dire need of maintenance.
Of course a digital camera is a multifunction device. It can capture snapshots, record videos, view slideshows, play movies, display interactive, text-based menus and prevent papers from flying when hit by a gust of wind.
... the guy only looks for the negative. There is plenty of positive information on the web.
If you only look at child porn, violence, death and whatever you consider negative, then yes it is a source of negative information. But the negative influence is YOURSELF. You are the one explicitly looking that negative information. The internet will not display anything you don't ASK for.
A subtle insertion of goatse would be deliciously ironic (though, out of the irony department, still as undelicious as anything can be).
In the US of A where they were born and raised Corporations pleased customers on most of their days Chilling out, maxing, relaxing all cool While employing people fresh out of the school When a couple of hackers, they were up to no good Started making trouble in their neighborhood They got in one little fight and the prez got scared He said "we're going to war, it's not like anyone cared"
There was a/. post a few weeks back of some innovative poster who managed to compute the total of deaths per terawatt caused by energy sources. Believe it or not, nuclear was dead last in confirmed kills, and coal was pretty high on the list.
Probably at the top of the list, with almost 13,000 dead annually. Or maybe not. http://www.coalcares.org/cleanenergy.html teaches us that wind power kills a lot more.
Ugh, I have butchered some of my sentences with careless editing. Here's how that part should read:
think most people there are either overreacting or their cars are being fed something other than 10%e-90%g. Maybe more than a few unscrupulous gas station owners are mixing more alcohol or a different kind of solvent, thinking they can get away with it now because everyone will just assume it's the ethanol.
Though the excerpt you have chosen may work better as it is.
Of course, if X occurs everywhere and to everyone except to you, you may either be on to an interesting discovery or you have fucked up your experiment. Given that ethanol powers about 5 million vehicles in my town alone and the consensus is that consumption increases by a third (it's even reflected in the price at the pump - ethanol tends to be at least 30% cheaper because if it isn't, people buy gasoline instead and vice versa), I think it's more likely that you screwed up somewhere. Plus I'm willing to bet that you're not measuring the consumption of your car with scientific rigor. And I have only cited the numbers because they support what is a very known occurrence. But if you choose to ignore all that, label me a liar, lunatic, lobbyst or stupid and believe whatever, it's ok. Oh, and about nature "not giving a flying fuck to what I think should happen", once I thought that birds should mate in flight. And guess what nature gave me when I looked out the window.
Such different mileage numbers cannot be attributed to ethanol. A certain volume X of it has about 70% of the energy present in its equivalent in gasoline. Which means if you average 20MPG with gasoline, your car will do about 14MPG on pure ethanol. In a 10%e-90%g blend, you'll be looking at a reduction from 20MPG to 19.4MPG.
Also, the only "gasonline" available around here is 25% ethanol and a lot of imports (mostly BMW and Audi) run just fine. Rubber does degrade significantly with ethanol, but not that much when it's blended with gas. I think most people there are either overreacting or being fed something other than 10%e-90%g. Maybe more alcohol or a different kind of solvent, thinking they can get away with it now because everyone will just assume it's the ethanol. I had a moped that would always complain whenever fed substandard or adulterated fuel, so I'd test each gas station with it before greenlighting it for my family. Most cars run just fine on a lot of crap until they are corroded and start running crappily even on good stuff, but the combination of a small chamber and a carburetor was quick to point out any dishonest oil merchants.
Yes, 3.5.19 to be exact. It does ship Chromium 6, which is better, but if there's one area in which Debian's slight lag really bugs me is web browsing. Back when I was using Debian 64-bit, I got stuck with Firefox 3.0 for quite a long time. Mozilla doesn't provide a 64-bit binary. Neither does Opera. I did compile 3.5 eventually, but it took about an hour and I had to go through the whole process once a week, when a new bugfix would come out. It sucked.
Yes, it is. Try pasting anything in a terminal with Ctrl+V. Won't work. Right-clicking -> paste does. Try copying from the URL bar, closing Firefox/Chrome/whatever and then pasting the previously copied address somewhere. It's gone. At least in Gnome 2.30. Dunno if using KDE makes any difference.
I think the reason they are extending the lives of consoles is exactly because the PS2 wouldn't die. It proved itself to be quite a competitor to the PS3, costing a small fraction of its bigger brother and, therefore, much more appealing to emerging markets. The PS3 came out in 2006 and up to 2009 you still had big titles coming to the PS2. (Force Unleashed, Persona etc.) What happens, I think, is that with the PS2, games got to the point where they are actually good-looking. The PS1 could do 3D, but it was a mess of ugly polygons. In the PS2, racing cars look great. Humans look like humans, though not quite on uncanny valley levels. Speech is plentliful. So, while the jump to PS3 does allow for much more polygons, AA and whatnot, I don't think people care much for that outside of a niche. I mean, I've played Aliens vs Predator on the PS3 and it was fantastic. Visually incredible. But, for me, not enough of an improvement over the PS2 to justify forking what's quite a hefty amout of money over a new console. The original Xbox, BTW, could already use the Source engine, still quite current.
I disagree with the "you get what you pay for" mentality. See Linux/Android or, on the other side, the infamous $7250 Pear Anjou audio cables. Plus the selection books go through, now, is meant to determine what sells, not what's good. And look at what such selection has given us:
Counterpoint: blogs x magazines, online news x newspapers or youtube x TV. There's always crap and good stuff on both sides, I find it much easier to find something I like on Youtube than on TV. It's a lot cheaper/less time consuming, too.
I'm a 37-year-old employed heterosexual virgin with more money than sense who only cares about gaaaaamez and ranting on Slashdot. I use all three OSes, and more besides! You can't pin us all down with your fancy categorizations.
P.S. I know you weren't trolling
P.P.S. I never lived in the basement.
Fixed that for you, otherwise I'd have to confiscate your Apple gear.
You'd be surprised. I think you may be perceiving more anti-Apple rants because you're a OSX/iOS user. Granted Linux is somewhat less vilified here on/., but Windows suffers the same kind of prejudice. Actually Apple is for the technologically illiterate gay yuppie with more money than sense. Windows is for the 14-year-old irresponsible brat who only cares about gaaaaamez or using facebook to publish his or her egoshots, his or her grandparents and for subordinates of the many shady executives that Microsoft has bribed. Linux is for the 30-year-old unemployed virgin who live in their mom's basement, uses an obsolete machine and rants on Slashdot and/or 4chan between prolongued sessions of angry masturbation. So we all have to deal with trolling. What I'm saying is that not only it's easier to just ignore the obviously stupid comments, but it also makes for a less cluttered/.. And if a critique is obviously stupid, a) no reasonably intelligent person will take it seriously and b) no matter what you say, you will not change your interlocutor's opinion about Apple, Google, Mozilla, FSF or whatever subject is heatedly being discussed, so you may as well just let it be. It's also less stressful.
Slashdot Mirror
IT will be staffed by pimply faced youths who are susceptible to power trips and a mean streak.
That's more or less how it is known today. And I think that's exactly how it will change in ten years: not at all. It will be the same thing, only with more professionals (and "professionals") and flying computers, which will probably be very annoying to operate and repair.
On the other hand, you just can't have Davide Dominici. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWjFLt-7T4w (bonus laughter if you're familiar with Italian)
Anedoctal too, but I had a Thunderbird 1.3GHz and when its fan died, the computer just froze and shut down, waiting patiently for a replacement cooler. As it was Sunday, I refused to wait for stores to open and just pointed a big, humen-cooling fan at the exposed enthrails of my box and it worked just fine. The same 1.3GHz later received a copper heatsink with two fans and it took about a year for them to get deformed and misaligned due to heat. Funny thing is me and my friends remember it being ludicrously hot, but its TDP was only about 70W, quite a bit lower than my current Athlon II.
So true. I had to work on a notebook with Vista, once. The damned thing took about ten minutes to boot and the system tray looked like Tokyo, all colorful and overcrowded. It belonged in the Louvre, but I'm afraid it wouldn't fit. And before Premiere would open, yes, Java update, Avast scheduled scan (it was scheduled for "whenever it aggravates the user the most", apparently), Adobe update and an MSN window that would pop up as soon as I thought everything was over. It was atrocious.
I'd guess the shorter release cycle is organizing their ambitions. Instead of implementing twenty new features and then refining them for months, now they add one or two features and immediately hone them for release. So less things are broken and remain so for a shorter period of time.
I have a Samsung 80Gb IDE drive and it takes about 40s to boot to a working desktop, so that's not it. I'd consider any machine* taking longer than 2 minutes to boot to be in dire need of maintenance.
*from about 2003 onwards
Computers weren't designed for security. They still aren't. We shouldn't feel bad though, 'god' didn't do much better.
A lot of Apple fans will disagree with that last part.
Great! So all you have to do to make a Hummer comply with the new standards is add an anvil do the trunk.
Of course a digital camera is a multifunction device. It can capture snapshots, record videos, view slideshows, play movies, display interactive, text-based menus and prevent papers from flying when hit by a gust of wind.
... the guy only looks for the negative. There is plenty of positive information on the web.
If you only look at child porn, violence, death and whatever you consider negative, then yes it is a source of negative information. But the negative influence is YOURSELF. You are the one explicitly looking that negative information. The internet will not display anything you don't ASK for.
A subtle insertion of goatse would be deliciously ironic (though, out of the irony department, still as undelicious as anything can be).
Being a soldier for health care seems deliciously ironic.
In the US of A where they were born and raised
Corporations pleased customers on most of their days
Chilling out, maxing, relaxing all cool
While employing people fresh out of the school
When a couple of hackers, they were up to no good
Started making trouble in their neighborhood
They got in one little fight and the prez got scared
He said "we're going to war, it's not like anyone cared"
There was a /. post a few weeks back of some innovative poster who managed to compute the total of deaths per terawatt caused by energy sources. Believe it or not, nuclear was dead last in confirmed kills, and coal was pretty high on the list.
Probably at the top of the list, with almost 13,000 dead annually. Or maybe not. http://www.coalcares.org/cleanenergy.html teaches us that wind power kills a lot more.
think most people there are either overreacting or their cars are being fed something other than 10%e-90%g. Maybe more than a few unscrupulous gas station owners are mixing more alcohol or a different kind of solvent, thinking they can get away with it now because everyone will just assume it's the ethanol.
Though the excerpt you have chosen may work better as it is.
Of course, if X occurs everywhere and to everyone except to you, you may either be on to an interesting discovery or you have fucked up your experiment. Given that ethanol powers about 5 million vehicles in my town alone and the consensus is that consumption increases by a third (it's even reflected in the price at the pump - ethanol tends to be at least 30% cheaper because if it isn't, people buy gasoline instead and vice versa), I think it's more likely that you screwed up somewhere. Plus I'm willing to bet that you're not measuring the consumption of your car with scientific rigor. And I have only cited the numbers because they support what is a very known occurrence. But if you choose to ignore all that, label me a liar, lunatic, lobbyst or stupid and believe whatever, it's ok. Oh, and about nature "not giving a flying fuck to what I think should happen", once I thought that birds should mate in flight. And guess what nature gave me when I looked out the window.
Such different mileage numbers cannot be attributed to ethanol. A certain volume X of it has about 70% of the energy present in its equivalent in gasoline. Which means if you average 20MPG with gasoline, your car will do about 14MPG on pure ethanol. In a 10%e-90%g blend, you'll be looking at a reduction from 20MPG to 19.4MPG.
Also, the only "gasonline" available around here is 25% ethanol and a lot of imports (mostly BMW and Audi) run just fine. Rubber does degrade significantly with ethanol, but not that much when it's blended with gas. I think most people there are either overreacting or being fed something other than 10%e-90%g. Maybe more alcohol or a different kind of solvent, thinking they can get away with it now because everyone will just assume it's the ethanol. I had a moped that would always complain whenever fed substandard or adulterated fuel, so I'd test each gas station with it before greenlighting it for my family. Most cars run just fine on a lot of crap until they are corroded and start running crappily even on good stuff, but the combination of a small chamber and a carburetor was quick to point out any dishonest oil merchants.
hey, that's the world we live in. Suck it up.
We can do better.
But we don't.
Yes, 3.5.19 to be exact. It does ship Chromium 6, which is better, but if there's one area in which Debian's slight lag really bugs me is web browsing. Back when I was using Debian 64-bit, I got stuck with Firefox 3.0 for quite a long time. Mozilla doesn't provide a 64-bit binary. Neither does Opera. I did compile 3.5 eventually, but it took about an hour and I had to go through the whole process once a week, when a new bugfix would come out. It sucked.
Yes, it is. Try pasting anything in a terminal with Ctrl+V. Won't work. Right-clicking -> paste does. Try copying from the URL bar, closing Firefox/Chrome/whatever and then pasting the previously copied address somewhere. It's gone. At least in Gnome 2.30. Dunno if using KDE makes any difference.
That'd actually be very interesting. Sort of a return to cartdriges.
I think the reason they are extending the lives of consoles is exactly because the PS2 wouldn't die. It proved itself to be quite a competitor to the PS3, costing a small fraction of its bigger brother and, therefore, much more appealing to emerging markets. The PS3 came out in 2006 and up to 2009 you still had big titles coming to the PS2. (Force Unleashed, Persona etc.) What happens, I think, is that with the PS2, games got to the point where they are actually good-looking. The PS1 could do 3D, but it was a mess of ugly polygons. In the PS2, racing cars look great. Humans look like humans, though not quite on uncanny valley levels. Speech is plentliful. So, while the jump to PS3 does allow for much more polygons, AA and whatnot, I don't think people care much for that outside of a niche. I mean, I've played Aliens vs Predator on the PS3 and it was fantastic. Visually incredible. But, for me, not enough of an improvement over the PS2 to justify forking what's quite a hefty amout of money over a new console. The original Xbox, BTW, could already use the Source engine, still quite current.
I disagree with the "you get what you pay for" mentality. See Linux/Android or, on the other side, the infamous $7250 Pear Anjou audio cables. Plus the selection books go through, now, is meant to determine what sells, not what's good. And look at what such selection has given us:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref=sr_tc_2_0?rh=i%3Astripbooks%2Ck%3AGlenn+Beck&keywords=Glenn+Beck&ie=UTF8&qid=1305950033&sr=8-2-ent&field-contributor_id=B001IQUMVM
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=fart&x=0&y=0
http://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref=sr_tc_2_0?rh=i%3Astripbooks%2Ck%3AL.+Ron+Hubbard&keywords=L.+Ron+Hubbard&ie=UTF8&qid=1305950113&sr=8-2-ent&field-contributor_id=B000AP9H6S
My point being it wouldn't get any worse.
Counterpoint: blogs x magazines, online news x newspapers or youtube x TV. There's always crap and good stuff on both sides, I find it much easier to find something I like on Youtube than on TV. It's a lot cheaper/less time consuming, too.
I'm a 37-year-old employed heterosexual virgin with more money than sense who only cares about gaaaaamez and ranting on Slashdot. I use all three OSes, and more besides! You can't pin us all down with your fancy categorizations. P.S. I know you weren't trolling P.P.S. I never lived in the basement.
Fixed that for you, otherwise I'd have to confiscate your Apple gear.
You'd be surprised. I think you may be perceiving more anti-Apple rants because you're a OSX/iOS user. Granted Linux is somewhat less vilified here on /., but Windows suffers the same kind of prejudice. Actually Apple is for the technologically illiterate gay yuppie with more money than sense. Windows is for the 14-year-old irresponsible brat who only cares about gaaaaamez or using facebook to publish his or her egoshots, his or her grandparents and for subordinates of the many shady executives that Microsoft has bribed. Linux is for the 30-year-old unemployed virgin who live in their mom's basement, uses an obsolete machine and rants on Slashdot and/or 4chan between prolongued sessions of angry masturbation. So we all have to deal with trolling. What I'm saying is that not only it's easier to just ignore the obviously stupid comments, but it also makes for a less cluttered /.. And if a critique is obviously stupid, a) no reasonably intelligent person will take it seriously and b) no matter what you say, you will not change your interlocutor's opinion about Apple, Google, Mozilla, FSF or whatever subject is heatedly being discussed, so you may as well just let it be. It's also less stressful.
TL;DR version: don't feed the trolls.