I'm not sure if "time to find the IP address" is all that critical a metric. I don't disagree. But it is a valid example of something that Vista is worse at than XP.
1. On the Start Menu, right-click on Network and click Properties (2 clicks) That's three - click to get the start menu, right-click on Network, click on Properties.
I wouldn't say that 1 extra click is "much less efficient". 67% more clicks (5 v 3). If my car used 67% more fuel than it does now I'm pretty sure I'd describe it as "much less efficient".
Once again, the point is that it is harder to find out the IP address with Vista's GUI than it is with XP's. Do you dispute this point?
Your argument is only valid if the notification icon is not intended to be used for finding out the IP address. It doesn't matter whether or not displaying the IP address is the primary purpose, it only matters whether or not that is how Microsoft intend for users to find the IP address. And I certainly don't believe they intend for people to write VB scripts that run ipconfig.
I had a similar setup for a while but then I found out it was costing me ~$35/mo in electricity just to keep my PC running all the time. That's for a 400Watt system at $.12/KWh. Did it really draw 400W all the time? If you're setting up a dedicated file/email server you don't need top of the line processors or graphics cards. You should be able to get the average power use down to 50W or less.
Secondly, I get the distinct impression that the original audience doesn't take these games nearly as seriously as US players. Settlers says on the packaging that its running time is about 1-2 hours (If I recall correctly, my original packaging has been lost to the sands of time), yet my games regularly run 3 or more hours, as trades and debates and discussions of beat-the-current-leader happens. This ratio of about twice-as-long seems to be consistent with most of the German Board Games my group plays/played. It's just your style of play. The group of people I regularly play with are much quicker. We haven't played Catan in a long time (we generally prefer games with less luck), but when we do games do not often exceed an hour with 3-4 people and I've never had one go over 2 hours. Most other games we play in a much shorter time than packages states. It's just a matter of knowing the rules well, focusing on quick play, and not getting distracted.
You can't open a command window and type 'ipconfig' ? Of course, but that's not the point. The point is that the GUI method of getting that functionality is much less efficient in Vista than it was in XP.
The problem with the X-prize was that all the money was in first place. When Space Ship One won it, there was no financial incentive for the others to keep going. All of the serious teams where already developing vehicles for a variety of reasons. The X-Prize may have altered their plans but that is all. None of those teams stopped working after Rutan won it. For those that are doing this stuff with a financial incentive in mind the incentive is still there: the likely emergence of a significant market for joyrides.
I'm just pointing out that the two examples don't really relate - as although both are technically illegal, TurnItIn goes one step further by not offering a way to stop the offending behaviour either before or after the fact. Legally I doubt that would make any difference. Either both services breach copyright or neither does. Google may be able to make the argument that at least their service drives business for the publishers, but again I doubt that would legally change their use of the works from infringing to non-infringing.
But I completely agree that TurnItIn are on much shakier moral ground.
Yes VMware ESX Server runs a modified version of Red Hat Linux.
"VMware ESX Server uses a stripped-down proprietary kernel (derived from work done on Stanford University's SimOS) that replaces the Linux kernel after hardware initialization"
That's not really "running Linux" is it? It boots Linux and then switches to a different kernel.
But Google Book Search allows publishers to contact them to opt out. This service does not. Irrelevant. Saying "you could have told us not to" or "you could have asked us to cease and desist" is not a defense against copyright infringement. Otherwise I could copy DVDs to my hearts content and defend myself from prosecution by simply giving the publishers a chance to opt out. That is not going to hold up in court.
Actually, just a minor correction - you have the concept right, but you misstated it. So you're above statement would be:
Further, even if turning in his own work was technically plagiarism, it would not be copyright infringement No, it was right as originally written. The university claimed to own the copyright to the work, but they did not author it. Thus, the original author may have been infringing the copyright by resubmitting it, but he could not have been guilty of plagiarism as it is impossible to plagiarise your own work by definition.
While at a glance, it may seem like this is simply "the latest thing google did," and... let's be honest, given the editor in question... this was most likely the reason it made the front page. I can't speak for the editor in question, but I suspect it made the front page because it's likely to be interesting to a lot of people. We all have hard drives and most of them are ATA drives. None of us want to lose our data.
Of course, a truly insightful story would have taken this opportunity to compare Google's findings with the others and report on that. The Google paper does that itself.
To me it's useful - if I get a SMART warning, then I'm definitely backing up my drive and will replace it before it croaks....
What information these give are as such. If a test is positive (i.e. the drive temperature is >80 C), then it accurately will predict that the drive will fail. If the test is negative (drive temp 40 C then it accurately predicts that the drive is ok. But according to the paper none of the SMART parameters was very useful in this regard. Over 50% of drive failures were not predicted by SMART errors, so the "negative test" can't give much confidence that the drive is ok. Conversely while some types of SMART error (e.g. scan errors) indicated a much higher probabily of impending failure, they still weren't all that indicative. 70% of drives that reported a scan error were still functioning normally after 8 months. So the "positive test" isn't all that convincing either. This is why the paper came to the conclusion that SMART was not useful in building a predictive model for drive failure.
I'm leery of censorship and nanny-state style regulation of media, but the current system doesn't make a lot of sense. Sex and profanity are tightly controlled while violence isn't, yet violence is probably the most potentially damaging to viewers of the three. I think it would make a lot of sense if a single body had the task of rating tv, film, and video games and did so with a consistent set of guidelines as to what is appropriate.
Hardware is just software? Where did I say that?
Don't fall into the trap that just because it all involves computers, it's all equally easy. I never said it was equally easy. I said it was possible. Try reading more carefully next time.
The PS3 is the obvious target. It's quite likely that someone with access to a dev kit would be able find the PS3's key. And I really doubt Sony would revoke the PS3's key.
I saw your journal entry on the sea level rise resulting from the melting of the Greenland ice sheet. You've used the diameter of the earth instead of the radius when figuring the volume.
Using your figures for the diameter of the earth, the coverage of the oceans, and the area of greenland, and an increase of exactly 7m (since 23ft is obviously a conversion from 7m):
initial radius: 6367.9375
radius with 7m increase: 6367.9445
volume of initial sphere: 1081645595127.8
volume of final sphere: 1081649162151.3
difference: 3567023.5
70% (for coverage of sphere that is water): 2496916.4
required ice thickness over greenland to generate increase: 1.15km
Ummm, how about no more new keys for software players. As long as there are software players it seems obvious that it will be possible to reverse engineer what they are doing to shake out the keys. But if the industry decides that SW players are too weak, they simply revoke keys for them and don't issue new ones. The end of software players and the end of the risk. Hardware players are basically just computers too. Especially devices like the PS3. It's entirely possible someone will be able to hack those as well.
Firewire is rarely found on garden variety intel hardware. This is changing though. A lot of mid to high end systems from have Firewire these days, check out (e.g.) Dell. It's also pretty common on motherboards from the likes of Gigabyte. And you can buy PCI controllers very cheaply.
Firstly, you don't need to have a search bar if the URL bar can do the job. Having a longer URL bar can be useful, for example when you need to tinker with a long URL and the part you want to change is not at the beginning. Fair enough.
Secondly, the search bar is not always set to the site you want to search in. I find it less distracting to type a few letters than to press Alt+Down, examine the popup menu and then select the site I want.
You can use ctrl-up and ctrl-down to change search engines without popping up the whole list. I find it easier to press ctrl-k, ctrl-up, ctrl-up, than to use a bookmark link, however I only use three search engines: Google, Wikipedia, and IMDB. I can imagine it'd be more difficult with 10.
Thirdly, keyworded bookmarks can be generated easily. Installing a new site in the search bar takes a bit more work. This a good point, but I'm not sure it matters unless (for some reason) you are often adding sites. I guess the flipside is that should a site's search URL change you're going to have to find and fix it, whereas the search bar should be fixed in the next patch (or even flagged as an update).
I don't know whether the Wikipedia search bar entry generates direct entry URLs or uses Wikipedia's search function. It goes directly to the pages for search terms that exist. That probably means it generates direct entry URLs.
Let me get this straight. You (rightly) say that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Then you complain that their claims are not extraordinary enough. What's your point?
every 2 or 3 in 10,000 outcomes can be changed, I'm not impressed. Those are pretty basically standard statistical anomalies, and to say that they are definate proof of ESP is a very far stretch. Depends on the methodology. If repeated anomalies are correlated to the instructed direction of influence, then it might be pretty strong evidence of a very weak influence. E.g. the subject is instructed to influence the device to produce high numbers. Over 10,000 trials the device shows a prefence for producing high numbers. That is one result, but it may be just a "standard statistical anomaly". But if you repeat that whole test say 1000 times (switching the desired direction of influence to avoid any bias in the RNG) you may be able to show a real correlation between the direction of evidence requested and the results of the RNG.
the posts for the majority point towards methods *removing* CO2 from the air, because that is what the question is literally. The fundamental question is however: make the total amount of CO2 less than it is now, by a billion tons a year. If you can make a device that *allows* people to burn less fosil fuels, and install it so it will be efficient up to 1 billion tons a year: you've won. The prize is quite clear: you must remove a billion tons of CO2 from the atmosphere. You will not win by reducing emissions.
So you are right. The GP is not redundant. It is, however, off topic.
ok, mental slip. Least dense. No, you were right the first time - water is most dense at 4 degrees. You just got the consequences the wrong way round - the volume of the oceans will be minimized, not maximized.
I really think you should hand that degree back...
But in a post-9/11 U.S.A., the authorities have to assume things like this could be terrorist in nature and respond as if they were. You think the authorities should assume every little item that Joe Public doesn't recognise is a bomb? That is ridiculous.
The authorities should exercise some common sense and stop assuming that the terrorists are complete morons. Bombs in movies may have flashing lights, bombs in reality do not. No terrorist is going to put up a bomb with flashing lights in plain view.
Slashdot Mirror
Your argument is only valid if the notification icon is not intended to be used for finding out the IP address. It doesn't matter whether or not displaying the IP address is the primary purpose, it only matters whether or not that is how Microsoft intend for users to find the IP address. And I certainly don't believe they intend for people to write VB scripts that run ipconfig.
But I completely agree that TurnItIn are on much shakier moral ground.
"VMware ESX Server uses a stripped-down proprietary kernel (derived from work done on Stanford University's SimOS) that replaces the Linux kernel after hardware initialization"
That's not really "running Linux" is it? It boots Linux and then switches to a different kernel.Right, misspoke there.
I'm leery of censorship and nanny-state style regulation of media, but the current system doesn't make a lot of sense. Sex and profanity are tightly controlled while violence isn't, yet violence is probably the most potentially damaging to viewers of the three. I think it would make a lot of sense if a single body had the task of rating tv, film, and video games and did so with a consistent set of guidelines as to what is appropriate.
The PS3 is the obvious target. It's quite likely that someone with access to a dev kit would be able find the PS3's key. And I really doubt Sony would revoke the PS3's key.
Using your figures for the diameter of the earth, the coverage of the oceans, and the area of greenland, and an increase of exactly 7m (since 23ft is obviously a conversion from 7m):
initial radius: 6367.9375
radius with 7m increase: 6367.9445
volume of initial sphere: 1081645595127.8
volume of final sphere: 1081649162151.3
difference: 3567023.5
70% (for coverage of sphere that is water): 2496916.4
required ice thickness over greenland to generate increase: 1.15km
According to http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2000/EmmanuelleStJe an.shtml, the Greenland ice shelf is at least 1.5km thick.
It sounds like saying the Greenland icecap melting would raise the water by 23 feet is complete nonsense. Only if you screw up the math.How is typing ctrl-l "wp " better than typing ctrl-k ""?
So you are right. The GP is not redundant. It is, however, off topic.
I really think you should hand that degree back...
The authorities should exercise some common sense and stop assuming that the terrorists are complete morons. Bombs in movies may have flashing lights, bombs in reality do not. No terrorist is going to put up a bomb with flashing lights in plain view.