Turning off all power saving features is not a good idea; rather, turn off all power saving features that make work harder.
I have no problem with that my laptop pulls the CPU speed down when I'm moving my mouse between the color palette and the image, and there's a surprising amoung of time the computer spends waiting for the user. Forcing high power consumption while the computer is doing nothing is hardly helpful.
A much better measure is how long they last and how hot they get while performing useful work - with settings that are optimal. This also encourages development of more efficient power saving methods that do not impact actual usability.
Hint: look up the broken window fallacy. It doesn't actually related to Windows, but to broken glass.
In short, spending money to fix problems isn't nearly as good for the economy as if that money can be spent developing better and more useful systems.
All the resources wasted on fixing Windows issues keep people employed doing drudge work - if those resources were freed up, the IT department wouldn't be cut down; it would be used to further improve efficiency of the company. Which is, after all, the entire point of having an IT department...
I got my phone for free with my $10 a year prepaid plan. It has better sound than any phone I had in the US. Ironically, it's a Motorola.
The parent brought up costs, so I countered.
I have no landline, and I don't know what they cost these days. I agree flat rate is nice, and if it was available here, I'd probably get a landline. As it is, I obviously don't need it.
I pay $10 a year for my GSM cellphone service. For this I get $10 worth of outgoing calls and SMS, and free incoming calls. Yes. $10 per year.
If I use a calling card (which I do), outgoing calls are on that instead of on the $10 I deposit per year to keep my service. The phone card price beats any deal I've seen from a cell service, and since it's an 800 number it doesn't count against available time on the phone.
When my friends from the US visit and borrow my GSM phone, they always marvel at the quality of the sound. I had several CDMA phones when I lived in the states, and none of them was even nearly as good quality as any of the GSM phones I've had in Scandinavia. I don't care what the specs and marketing says, GSM has much better clarity than CDMA.
The US has primitive wireless. They're catching up, but until 800 numbers and incoming calls don't use up minutes they will remain second rate.
And you forget one thing. When the device was sold to the buyer, it belongs to the buyer. The buyer can smash it with a hammer, play the disks he bought, or play his own content.
Noone has any right to tell him what he can and cannot do with the device once it is purchased.
It doesn't matter what the manufacturer or seller wishes; if I buy something, it is mine. If I want to make it jump through hoops, and then tell the rest of the world how I did it, that is my perogative. You have no say in the matter. Nor does Hasbro.
Because Windows patches commonly turn services on even if they were explicityly off (or in some cases deleted), or add completely new functionality without documenting that they do.
Plus, even with sshd access, you have a hard time monitoring it remotely, much less patching it without rebooting it.
I was infuriated because who would buy our CD?s if they could get them online for free?
I'm hoping this part was a joke; when you're a small band trying to get exposure, making money from CD sales is not a priority. If you feel it is, you're in the wrong business.
The point of performing arts of all kinds is to get to perform, to have people enjoy ones work and to get it out to as many people as possible. Napster is an excellent method for this; selling CD's isn't. Not even when you're a big, well known band will CD sales take off particularly much (unless you have a juggernaut marketing machine behind you).
I'd be positively thrilled if half a dozen people would download one of my songs from Napster. If enough people do, I can start playing the local scene for more money; I will be better known. And the real fans will still buy a CD; they're even more likely to do so if they have heard the songs already.
Unless you don't believe in your product (bad music, lousy recording, no good production), freely available tracks are pure goood marketing, leading to exposure, more plays and more sales.
The problem with PDF is exactly what you explain as an advantage - it looks and acts like a real book, not like an ebook. It is the single worst ebook format in existence.
An ebook has to adapt to various screen sizes, page layouyts, fonts and other demands. PDF does this to some extent, but in doing so has to abandon its one advantage - that it looks exactly like the printed copy. For anything without illustrations, pure ASCII is better. For illustrated works, HTML beats it. The ideal ebook format lets text flow as it has to across the reading device's display surface, and carries no information what so ever about layout. PDF is the total opposite of this.
Making an ebook is not about reproducing the printed copy on screen. In fact, that is the LAST thing you want to do. It's a lot simpler than making a physical book - simply dump the text as marked up ASCII (or XML), and translate to, for example, HTML. From there it can easily become any good ebook format, although HTML is already as good as it gets. Indexes, tables of contents etc. are redundant when the text is electronically searchable. Just dump down the raw text, the ebook software will handle the rest.
Stay away from PDF. Reading PDF on a decent ebook reader (such as a palm pilot) is a royal PITA. Ebooks are NOT physical books that happen to display on a screen.
There is no such thing as a generic "intellectual property". Trademarks need to be defended vigorously or they are lost. Trade secrets are undefendable if revealed, although damages can be sought. Copyright can be lost, although it takes ignoring severe violations. Patents cannot be lost from lack of defense, period. Since none of these forms of "intellectual property" have the same defendability, the term "intellectual property" is useless in this context.
The wording in this comment is a perfect example of why the use of the term "intellectual property" is not only incorrect, but will lead to the spread of misinformation and help companies like SCO muddle the waters and create FUD.
You're correct, and this is a typical example of how referring to copyrights, trade secrets, trademarks and patents under the umbrella name of "intellectual property" works in favour of a company performing sleazy action. All these kinds of "IP" have radically different legal protection.
Trademarks will lose their power if violations are not pursued. Trade secrets become public domain when revealed, there is no way to unring a bell. SCO are clearly hoping that the "IP" term confusion will work to their advantage, and that readers (especially decision makers) will be unaware of that patents and trademarks have very different legal protection and that their statement about previous non-enforcement is vacuous.
This is the danger of lumping largely unrelated concepts (from a legal standpoint) under a common name and treat them as a whole instead of as the very distinct beasts they are.
Balance of Power apparently sold some 250,000 copies. Back in those days that wasn't too shabby, even if it wasn't record numbers.
This is his company site. Several of the games he has written are available for download for free, and he has essays and information about the ones that aren't there.
The site also has lots of information about his latest work, which seems very interesting but so far hasn't really taken off. Not because of lack of promise, but because it's simply breaking too new ground.
As for why we should believe he knows what he's talking about, he manages to make a decent living out of writing games, and some of his strategy games are really good and were groundbreaking when they came out. And you could always read the published excerpt and see if you agree with what he says.
My experience was rather the opposite. I got Balance of Power 1990 edition when it came out for the Amiga, and in the beginning I got beat up pretty bad. Then I started thinking deeper, looking at motivations and reading more into numbers, and I quickly improved. Soon I was routinely beating the game in multipolar with 1000+ points.
The game builds on very simple and fundamental aspects of international diplomacy and influence, and does a very good job of it. The main reason I don't play it now is that the interface which back then felt smooth is by todays standard very clunky. The actual game engine and mechanics are still quite challenging and educational.
Slashdot Mirror
Turning off all power saving features is not a good idea; rather, turn off all power saving features that make work harder.
I have no problem with that my laptop pulls the CPU speed down when I'm moving my mouse between the color palette and the image, and there's a surprising amoung of time the computer spends waiting for the user. Forcing high power consumption while the computer is doing nothing is hardly helpful.
A much better measure is how long they last and how hot they get while performing useful work - with settings that are optimal. This also encourages development of more efficient power saving methods that do not impact actual usability.
Hint: look up the broken window fallacy. It doesn't actually related to Windows, but to broken glass.
...
In short, spending money to fix problems isn't nearly as good for the economy as if that money can be spent developing better and more useful systems.
All the resources wasted on fixing Windows issues keep people employed doing drudge work - if those resources were freed up, the IT department wouldn't be cut down; it would be used to further improve efficiency of the company. Which is, after all, the entire point of having an IT department
The menus in GIMP tear off and will remain exactly where you place them, if that is what you like.
A quick look on the GIMP homepage will confirm that yes, the cursors can in fact be brush shaped now (in 1.3).
I got my phone for free with my $10 a year prepaid plan. It has better sound than any phone I had in the US. Ironically, it's a Motorola.
The parent brought up costs, so I countered.
I have no landline, and I don't know what they cost these days. I agree flat rate is nice, and if it was available here, I'd probably get a landline. As it is, I obviously don't need it.
I pay $10 a year for my GSM cellphone service. For this I get $10 worth of outgoing calls and SMS, and free incoming calls. Yes. $10 per year.
If I use a calling card (which I do), outgoing calls are on that instead of on the $10 I deposit per year to keep my service. The phone card price beats any deal I've seen from a cell service, and since it's an 800 number it doesn't count against available time on the phone.
When my friends from the US visit and borrow my GSM phone, they always marvel at the quality of the sound. I had several CDMA phones when I lived in the states, and none of them was even nearly as good quality as any of the GSM phones I've had in Scandinavia. I don't care what the specs and marketing says, GSM has much better clarity than CDMA.
The US has primitive wireless. They're catching up, but until 800 numbers and incoming calls don't use up minutes they will remain second rate.
And you forget one thing. When the device was sold to the buyer, it belongs to the buyer. The buyer can smash it with a hammer, play the disks he bought, or play his own content.
Noone has any right to tell him what he can and cannot do with the device once it is purchased.
It doesn't matter what the manufacturer or seller wishes; if I buy something, it is mine. If I want to make it jump through hoops, and then tell the rest of the world how I did it, that is my perogative. You have no say in the matter. Nor does Hasbro.
Because Windows patches commonly turn services on even if they were explicityly off (or in some cases deleted), or add completely new functionality without documenting that they do.
Plus, even with sshd access, you have a hard time monitoring it remotely, much less patching it without rebooting it.
I'm hoping this part was a joke; when you're a small band trying to get exposure, making money from CD sales is not a priority. If you feel it is, you're in the wrong business.
The point of performing arts of all kinds is to get to perform, to have people enjoy ones work and to get it out to as many people as possible. Napster is an excellent method for this; selling CD's isn't. Not even when you're a big, well known band will CD sales take off particularly much (unless you have a juggernaut marketing machine behind you).
I'd be positively thrilled if half a dozen people would download one of my songs from Napster. If enough people do, I can start playing the local scene for more money; I will be better known. And the real fans will still buy a CD; they're even more likely to do so if they have heard the songs already.
Unless you don't believe in your product (bad music, lousy recording, no good production), freely available tracks are pure goood marketing, leading to exposure, more plays and more sales.
The problem with PDF is exactly what you explain as an advantage - it looks and acts like a real book, not like an ebook. It is the single worst ebook format in existence.
An ebook has to adapt to various screen sizes, page layouyts, fonts and other demands. PDF does this to some extent, but in doing so has to abandon its one advantage - that it looks exactly like the printed copy. For anything without illustrations, pure ASCII is better. For illustrated works, HTML beats it. The ideal ebook format lets text flow as it has to across the reading device's display surface, and carries no information what so ever about layout. PDF is the total opposite of this.
Making an ebook is not about reproducing the printed copy on screen. In fact, that is the LAST thing you want to do. It's a lot simpler than making a physical book - simply dump the text as marked up ASCII (or XML), and translate to, for example, HTML. From there it can easily become any good ebook format, although HTML is already as good as it gets. Indexes, tables of contents etc. are redundant when the text is electronically searchable. Just dump down the raw text, the ebook software will handle the rest.
Stay away from PDF. Reading PDF on a decent ebook reader (such as a palm pilot) is a royal PITA. Ebooks are NOT physical books that happen to display on a screen.
There is no such thing as a generic "intellectual property". Trademarks need to be defended vigorously or they are lost. Trade secrets are undefendable if revealed, although damages can be sought. Copyright can be lost, although it takes ignoring severe violations. Patents cannot be lost from lack of defense, period. Since none of these forms of "intellectual property" have the same defendability, the term "intellectual property" is useless in this context.
The wording in this comment is a perfect example of why the use of the term "intellectual property" is not only incorrect, but will lead to the spread of misinformation and help companies like SCO muddle the waters and create FUD.
You're correct, and this is a typical example of how referring to copyrights, trade secrets, trademarks and patents under the umbrella name of "intellectual property" works in favour of a company performing sleazy action. All these kinds of "IP" have radically different legal protection.
Trademarks will lose their power if violations are not pursued. Trade secrets become public domain when revealed, there is no way to unring a bell. SCO are clearly hoping that the "IP" term confusion will work to their advantage, and that readers (especially decision makers) will be unaware of that patents and trademarks have very different legal protection and that their statement about previous non-enforcement is vacuous.
This is the danger of lumping largely unrelated concepts (from a legal standpoint) under a common name and treat them as a whole instead of as the very distinct beasts they are.
the RSI, frazzled nerves and raised blood pressure of a good net match are hardly worth it.
Sounds like excellent training to deal with cubicle work under tight deadlines and frustrating meetings with PHB's.
Balance of Power apparently sold some 250,000 copies. Back in those days that wasn't too shabby, even if it wasn't record numbers.
This is his company site. Several of the games he has written are available for download for free, and he has essays and information about the ones that aren't there.
The site also has lots of information about his latest work, which seems very interesting but so far hasn't really taken off. Not because of lack of promise, but because it's simply breaking too new ground.
As for why we should believe he knows what he's talking about, he manages to make a decent living out of writing games, and some of his strategy games are really good and were groundbreaking when they came out. And you could always read the published excerpt and see if you agree with what he says.
Balance of power is all about conflict - on the biggest scale humanity has experienced to date.
...
And last time I watched it, War Games would also have been "essentially over" if a nuclear war had actually started
My experience was rather the opposite. I got Balance of Power 1990 edition when it came out for the Amiga, and in the beginning I got beat up pretty bad. Then I started thinking deeper, looking at motivations and reading more into numbers, and I quickly improved. Soon I was routinely beating the game in multipolar with 1000+ points.
The game builds on very simple and fundamental aspects of international diplomacy and influence, and does a very good job of it. The main reason I don't play it now is that the interface which back then felt smooth is by todays standard very clunky. The actual game engine and mechanics are still quite challenging and educational.