Some (Google) will say that the privacy policy explains all this. Humbug! First you have to follow a link to find the policy.
From my gmail inbox, there's a link to privacy policy at the bottom. For google, click About Google and there's a link to the privacy policy at the bottom.
But last time I checked, using Google was optional. Or does its convenience outweigh your privacy concerns?
Awesome tactic. I wonder if you could encode this information into the normal address line? Or perhaps a middle initial? I'm just thinking that using the first address line for that might cause delivery problems...
[...] leaving the mass of the universe as much as ten to 20 percent lighter[...]
I can understand the universe being lighter, but its mass being lighter?
Now, back to my new computer that has a faster speed yet runs at a colder temperature. I'm going to move its location, which will require a longer length of Ethernet cable. Hopefully this farther distance from the router won't be a problem.
You have to remember, Finder doesnt actually CHECK each file... it checks the return codes from the FILE SYSTEM (whether local or network) and then handles its next steps based off that (ie: success, disk full, write error, etc).
And anyway, when the file was originally created, the program that wrote it most likely didn't try re-reading it to be sure the data was really written. So verifying after copying is somewhat pointless. I say somewhat because it is different in that you might be copying 1000 files, and if there is some undetected problem when writing then you lose 1000 files, whereas an undetected problem normally might cause you to lose the 10 files you wrote that day during normal saving, before you noticed the problem.
See Wikipedia's entry on memory effect, also Dan's Quick Guide to Memory Effect. In short, "memory effect" is now used to refer to any reduction in a cell's capacity, for example due to aging or normal use. I doubt you can find any capacitors that don't also have reduced capacitance years later.
But be warned: don't read the technical paper itself. It could win an obfuscated contest -- if such a contest existed for scientific papers.
An obfuscated contest or a contest for obfuscation? The fomer would be difficult to figure out, while the latter would reward entries that are difficult to figure out.
On a more serious note, don't the solar panels have switches to disconnect them from each other? They are like batteries connected in series, so you just need to break a few connections to lower the voltage and make each subset electrically floating with respect to the others. It's like when you were little and connected a bunch of 9V batteries together and got a big shock.
That's my thought. Just take a look at the testing section and it's clear that A) these tests will still let problems slip through, and B) all the effort involved in an electronic version of a piece of paper and pencil is not worth it. Similar effort is put out on electronic financial systems because it's worth the benefits it gives. Electronic voting is probably the best example of technology looking for a problem to solve, and failing that, inventing a problem.
I don't have a cell phone, but every time I reach one of them and get the voicemail message and try hitting 1 to just leave a message, I always get burned by that not being a valid option or something. So I always wait through the entire thing now.
Exactly. Unlike telemarketing calls, this issue can be solved with a simple technical measure. Well, at least the problem of letting the server know of your preference to not be tracked. Enforcing it is an entirely different matter, and very difficult since you have no way of knowing that it's tracking you (it doesn't need to send your browser any cookies, for example). And this points to a fundamental difference: this kind of tracking doesn't directly impose on someone like a telemarketing call does.
"Nothing they do keeps DVD's off the streets. Every trip to the grocery store I make, I get a guy or gal coming up to me selling the latest movie for $10 on DVD (3 for $25!) or the latest yet-to-be-released CD for $5."
And these cheaper versions don't have annoying unskippable FBI warnings, disclaimers, and advertisements (er, previews) that you have to watch before you are allowed to watch the actual movie.
I'm not conversant in the terms, but a simplification of this flawed logic seems to be this: this machine made of parts A and B exhibits a new behavior that is not exhibited by part A, therefore it must be something part B exhibits on its own as well. But when building machines, the sum can be more than the parts. After all, that's the whole point of this, to find the minimal parts that implement a universal Turing machine when put together. But as I said, this isn't my field so the error may not be this fundamental.
She called L. L. Bean. They said, "Oh, that's too bad, we're sorry, we'll send another one out right away." L. L. Bean made several customers for life that day.
And that is why the business should believe the customer, lacking any specific reason not to. Most customers are honest. A business can either cater to this majority, or put policies in place that prevents a minority from scamming them, but that also turn honest customers away or make them less respectful of your business and more likely to short change you. I wouldn't be surprised if customer-trusting policies even turned away dishonest customers (to places like Best Buy that almost ask to be ripped off).
It would seem the only reasonable thing to do from this point on is to open a box and make sure your item is in there before leaving the store.
That is similar to what my father does: he has them open the package if it's one of those that requires a utility knife and some heavy cutting. He also leaves the packaging at the store, so they can deal with it. It sends the message: less packaging, easier to open. It'd also guard against this problem.
Or they could use the 7% "extra" space for error correction and bad block remapping, giving 38 GB of it for this hypothetical 512 GB flash drive (where 1GB = 1 billion bytes).
[...] news of research that seems to confirm and support current theories of how cosmic rays are created. [...] The results lend support to the possibility of protons and nucleii being accelerated in supernova remnants to energies of 1 PeV (10^15 eV) and beyond. Here is the abstract from Nature.
So this research confirms... supports...well lends support to the possibility. Care to soften it further?
Whoa! So now Mac users are advocating the command-line as an 'ease-of-use' feature?? Now I've seen it all!:)
No, I was advocating it as a possibly simpler way to direct another user to change a particular preference; a GUI is the best interface for a single user to explore the preferences. I still stand by my claim that having to relay a GUI script that the user must manually execute is kind of silly, though others have shown that giving the equivalent command-line is probably only simpler for users experienced with the terminal.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, if another country housed an evil person who violated a US copyright, he should be turned over to the US immediately.
Also, kind of funny that he used the term "pygmy". Kind of like calling someone a nigger or jew.
Awesome tactic. I wonder if you could encode this information into the normal address line? Or perhaps a middle initial? I'm just thinking that using the first address line for that might cause delivery problems...
I can understand the universe being lighter, but its mass being lighter?
Now, back to my new computer that has a faster speed yet runs at a colder temperature. I'm going to move its location, which will require a longer length of Ethernet cable. Hopefully this farther distance from the router won't be a problem.
And anyway, when the file was originally created, the program that wrote it most likely didn't try re-reading it to be sure the data was really written. So verifying after copying is somewhat pointless. I say somewhat because it is different in that you might be copying 1000 files, and if there is some undetected problem when writing then you lose 1000 files, whereas an undetected problem normally might cause you to lose the 10 files you wrote that day during normal saving, before you noticed the problem.
And it's LEGO, not Lego.
See Wikipedia's entry on memory effect, also Dan's Quick Guide to Memory Effect. In short, "memory effect" is now used to refer to any reduction in a cell's capacity, for example due to aging or normal use. I doubt you can find any capacitors that don't also have reduced capacitance years later.
An obfuscated contest or a contest for obfuscation? The fomer would be difficult to figure out, while the latter would reward entries that are difficult to figure out.
CD-R that is. Well, at least I heard from a friend.
On a more serious note, don't the solar panels have switches to disconnect them from each other? They are like batteries connected in series, so you just need to break a few connections to lower the voltage and make each subset electrically floating with respect to the others. It's like when you were little and connected a bunch of 9V batteries together and got a big shock.
Hope it's not made by Sony, otherwise it doubles as a suicide bomber vest.
That's my thought. Just take a look at the testing section and it's clear that A) these tests will still let problems slip through, and B) all the effort involved in an electronic version of a piece of paper and pencil is not worth it. Similar effort is put out on electronic financial systems because it's worth the benefits it gives. Electronic voting is probably the best example of technology looking for a problem to solve, and failing that, inventing a problem.
I don't have a cell phone, but every time I reach one of them and get the voicemail message and try hitting 1 to just leave a message, I always get burned by that not being a valid option or something. So I always wait through the entire thing now.
Exactly. Unlike telemarketing calls, this issue can be solved with a simple technical measure. Well, at least the problem of letting the server know of your preference to not be tracked. Enforcing it is an entirely different matter, and very difficult since you have no way of knowing that it's tracking you (it doesn't need to send your browser any cookies, for example). And this points to a fundamental difference: this kind of tracking doesn't directly impose on someone like a telemarketing call does.
"Nothing they do keeps DVD's off the streets. Every trip to the grocery store I make, I get a guy or gal coming up to me selling the latest movie for $10 on DVD (3 for $25!) or the latest yet-to-be-released CD for $5."
And these cheaper versions don't have annoying unskippable FBI warnings, disclaimers, and advertisements (er, previews) that you have to watch before you are allowed to watch the actual movie.
I'm not conversant in the terms, but a simplification of this flawed logic seems to be this: this machine made of parts A and B exhibits a new behavior that is not exhibited by part A, therefore it must be something part B exhibits on its own as well. But when building machines, the sum can be more than the parts. After all, that's the whole point of this, to find the minimal parts that implement a universal Turing machine when put together. But as I said, this isn't my field so the error may not be this fundamental.
Exactly. Laserdiscs used analog encoding (for video at least), and they are much more similar to compact discs!
Why anyone with low income would waste it on cable (not to mention the time wasted watching it) is beyond me.
And that is why the business should believe the customer, lacking any specific reason not to. Most customers are honest. A business can either cater to this majority, or put policies in place that prevents a minority from scamming them, but that also turn honest customers away or make them less respectful of your business and more likely to short change you. I wouldn't be surprised if customer-trusting policies even turned away dishonest customers (to places like Best Buy that almost ask to be ripped off).
That is similar to what my father does: he has them open the package if it's one of those that requires a utility knife and some heavy cutting. He also leaves the packaging at the store, so they can deal with it. It sends the message: less packaging, easier to open. It'd also guard against this problem.
OK, I'm busted. Apologies.
Or they could use the 7% "extra" space for error correction and bad block remapping, giving 38 GB of it for this hypothetical 512 GB flash drive (where 1GB = 1 billion bytes).
So this research confirms... supports...well lends support to the possibility. Care to soften it further?
How about Concast? I do like your initiative in coining a more descriptive name for them.
No, I was advocating it as a possibly simpler way to direct another user to change a particular preference; a GUI is the best interface for a single user to explore the preferences. I still stand by my claim that having to relay a GUI script that the user must manually execute is kind of silly, though others have shown that giving the equivalent command-line is probably only simpler for users experienced with the terminal.