The moderation does go away, but I'm pretty certain I still just got your moderation to meta-moderate. Ahh, the wonders of Slashcode.
Neither + nor - (I guess that means no impact on your karma either way, if you care about such things), in case you were wondering.
$3000 workstations and touch-screen, all-in-one machines are mainstream? Uh, yeah, perhaps on your planet. I didn't say nobody else sold similar machines, but those you listed aren't mainstream, they're all niche, which is exactly my point. Mainstream PCs are mid-range towers which cost $500-$2000, which is exactly why Apple don't sell a mid-range tower.
I'm not sure why Apple has gone so long without selling a middle-of-the-road headless tower in the $1k-$2k range. I think it would help them get more enterprise penetration.
It's not coincidence that Apple don't sell a machine which is directly comparable to mainstream Windows PCs. Every one of their desktop machines is "different" to the mainstream. The extremely-high-end Pro; the tiny Mini; the sleek, integrated iMac. Not being directly comparable makes it easier to sell at a higher price than machines with similar headline specs. If you're trying to sell a premium product in a commodity market you have stand out.
I don't think we'll see a standard mid-range tower, they just can't make that obviously different enough to justify a premium price. I'm hoping for something just a bit bigger than a Mini. Still small and quiet and pretty enough to be different, but at least with a couple of 3.5" drive bays and expansion slots.
The spectrum belongs to the people and thus *all* of the money gained from any sale goes back to us.
You live in a functional (if not perfect) democracy, thus the government getting the money is the people getting the money. You get your share in the form of services and/or lower taxes.
All Saints sold 10 million records. It maybe crap, but it's the kind of crap the market seems to want. A lot of people just want something that sounds nice and don't care if it sounds nice because of great musicians, great singers or great technology in the hands of a great producer.
You have absolutely no conception just how big a number 2^128 is, do you? Every human who has ever lived could have a billion devices, each with a billion sub-components with their own public IP address. Doing that would use less than one billionth of the address space.
There are a lot more reserved addresses than just those reserved for private networks. There are 30 or so/8s reserved for multicast and future use, for example.
If China moved to IPv6 they'd still need a bunch of hefty gateways to connect to the rest of the world, which is still using IPv4. An IPv6 - IPv4 gateway is doing pretty similar work to a NAT gateway, so I doubt they would really be that much cheaper than NAT boxes.
If 25 companies (are there even that many with/8s?) gave back their entire allocation, that would still only add 10% to the pool. That might buy a little time (a year, if we're at 80% and have two years left), but it's hardly going to solve the problem.
Example, if you see a warning "You are about to delete the entire payroll data for September !!! Are You Sure ???"
What DO you expect to happen by clicking on the X button ?
In that case it's pretty obvious it should abort the operation. The only options are to do the deletion or to not do the deletion. Doing it without consent would be insanity, so your only option is to not do it. If you hate your users you can give them another popup explaining that you aborted. If you're a proper sadist you could even re-ask them the very same question they just declined to answer.
It rais...oh, fuck it. They haven't just been sitting on it, they've already bought back $40bn worth of their own stock this decade. Then there's the billions they've invested in XBox and Zune, plus they were trying to use a lot of money earlier this year to buy Yahoo!. You can't just buy $40bn worth of a stock overnight because the price would go through the roof. This new buyback is scheduled to take 5 years.
If Microsoft had any implementable ideas, it would be using that $40 billion to make more money, [...]
I think it's much more likely that Microsoft has implementable ideas, they just don't need all of that $40bn to implement them. They're absolutely rolling in cash. They can easily implement all the good ideas they have, many of the bad ideas and many of the pie-in-the-sky ideas and still have $40bn spare. I imagine it must actually be pretty hard to spend $40bn and make a profit with the resulting business. No tech industry in the history of the world cost anything like that much to set up. They'd have to burn money at XBox rates on half a dozen projects and I just don't think there are that many markets big enough to justify that kind of investment.
And more interestingly, the study says that most users are in fact *not* idiots, but that a distressingly high percentage (almost half) are.
The attitude that users who do something wrong are idiots is a large part of why computers, operating systems and applications are generally pretty shit. They're made by and for geeks, not normal people. If 1% of your users do the wrong thing they may well be idiots. If 50% of your users are doing the wrong thing, you are the idiot for designing your software so badly half the population can't use it.
(I mean "you" in the general sense, not the parent specifically)
Things in geo-stationary orbit don't fall back down, they have exactly the orbital velocity required to maintain altitude, by definition. Well, there's a smidgen of drag so things will eventually fall back down, but not for a very long time. You would need to go further than geostationary orbit to give probes leaving the Earth's gravitational well an extra push, but I think satellite launching is the main market and satellites don't escape from the earth.
They are typically the same, but I suppose if you had significant variations in the gravitational field across and object the centre of mass and centre of gravity may not coincide.
The fact that obscene levels of military spending sometimes produces results for the population as a whole doesn't make it good value. For example, how would the results of military spending compare to spending 80% of the military budget on higher education and academic research?
Opera uses an online server to cache the images before sending them to you to save you money. Firefox is going to need similar innovation to make a dent
I virtually always get over 0.5Mbps from my HSDPA connection, and frequently saturate the 2.1Mbps Bluetooth 2.0 link to my phone, which is more than adequate for browsing without compression. 3G/3.5G networks are rapidly expanding around the world. Proxies were a great idea back in the days of GPRS, but I just don't think it's worth pissing about with them any more. Just wait till everyone in the world has a phone ten times as fast as their old one, which should only take a couple of years.
On occasion I find myself in foreign country, unable to understand the local the language. Usually I find myself wondering what the locals are saying to one another. But sometimes, I don't.
Slashdot Mirror
The moderation does go away, but I'm pretty certain I still just got your moderation to meta-moderate. Ahh, the wonders of Slashcode. Neither + nor - (I guess that means no impact on your karma either way, if you care about such things), in case you were wondering.
Oh, before you wilfully misinterpret what I've written again, the HP is the touchscreen machine I was referring to.
$3000 workstations and touch-screen, all-in-one machines are mainstream? Uh, yeah, perhaps on your planet. I didn't say nobody else sold similar machines, but those you listed aren't mainstream, they're all niche, which is exactly my point. Mainstream PCs are mid-range towers which cost $500-$2000, which is exactly why Apple don't sell a mid-range tower.
It's not coincidence that Apple don't sell a machine which is directly comparable to mainstream Windows PCs. Every one of their desktop machines is "different" to the mainstream. The extremely-high-end Pro; the tiny Mini; the sleek, integrated iMac. Not being directly comparable makes it easier to sell at a higher price than machines with similar headline specs. If you're trying to sell a premium product in a commodity market you have stand out.
I don't think we'll see a standard mid-range tower, they just can't make that obviously different enough to justify a premium price. I'm hoping for something just a bit bigger than a Mini. Still small and quiet and pretty enough to be different, but at least with a couple of 3.5" drive bays and expansion slots.
It's only expensive if you buy it from Apple.
You live in a functional (if not perfect) democracy, thus the government getting the money is the people getting the money. You get your share in the form of services and/or lower taxes.
Do you not think making everyone else pay for the stuff you use makes you a selfish, obnoxious twat?
Cue negative mods by ad-blocking, selfish, obnoxious twats.
It's much easier to spot the greats in hindsight.
All Saints sold 10 million records. It maybe crap, but it's the kind of crap the market seems to want. A lot of people just want something that sounds nice and don't care if it sounds nice because of great musicians, great singers or great technology in the hands of a great producer.
You have absolutely no conception just how big a number 2^128 is, do you? Every human who has ever lived could have a billion devices, each with a billion sub-components with their own public IP address. Doing that would use less than one billionth of the address space.
Sentences start with a capital letter. This is not difficult.
There are a lot more reserved addresses than just those reserved for private networks. There are 30 or so /8s reserved for multicast and future use, for example.
If China moved to IPv6 they'd still need a bunch of hefty gateways to connect to the rest of the world, which is still using IPv4. An IPv6 - IPv4 gateway is doing pretty similar work to a NAT gateway, so I doubt they would really be that much cheaper than NAT boxes.
If 25 companies (are there even that many with /8s?) gave back their entire allocation, that would still only add 10% to the pool. That might buy a little time (a year, if we're at 80% and have two years left), but it's hardly going to solve the problem.
In that case it's pretty obvious it should abort the operation. The only options are to do the deletion or to not do the deletion. Doing it without consent would be insanity, so your only option is to not do it. If you hate your users you can give them another popup explaining that you aborted. If you're a proper sadist you could even re-ask them the very same question they just declined to answer.
It rais...oh, fuck it. They haven't just been sitting on it, they've already bought back $40bn worth of their own stock this decade. Then there's the billions they've invested in XBox and Zune, plus they were trying to use a lot of money earlier this year to buy Yahoo!. You can't just buy $40bn worth of a stock overnight because the price would go through the roof. This new buyback is scheduled to take 5 years.
I think it's much more likely that Microsoft has implementable ideas, they just don't need all of that $40bn to implement them. They're absolutely rolling in cash. They can easily implement all the good ideas they have, many of the bad ideas and many of the pie-in-the-sky ideas and still have $40bn spare. I imagine it must actually be pretty hard to spend $40bn and make a profit with the resulting business. No tech industry in the history of the world cost anything like that much to set up. They'd have to burn money at XBox rates on half a dozen projects and I just don't think there are that many markets big enough to justify that kind of investment.
The attitude that users who do something wrong are idiots is a large part of why computers, operating systems and applications are generally pretty shit. They're made by and for geeks, not normal people. If 1% of your users do the wrong thing they may well be idiots. If 50% of your users are doing the wrong thing, you are the idiot for designing your software so badly half the population can't use it.
(I mean "you" in the general sense, not the parent specifically)
Things in geo-stationary orbit don't fall back down, they have exactly the orbital velocity required to maintain altitude, by definition. Well, there's a smidgen of drag so things will eventually fall back down, but not for a very long time. You would need to go further than geostationary orbit to give probes leaving the Earth's gravitational well an extra push, but I think satellite launching is the main market and satellites don't escape from the earth.
They are typically the same, but I suppose if you had significant variations in the gravitational field across and object the centre of mass and centre of gravity may not coincide.
The fact that obscene levels of military spending sometimes produces results for the population as a whole doesn't make it good value. For example, how would the results of military spending compare to spending 80% of the military budget on higher education and academic research?
If two rounds of DVDs per month is below your threshold for death, DVD was never alive for most people.
I virtually always get over 0.5Mbps from my HSDPA connection, and frequently saturate the 2.1Mbps Bluetooth 2.0 link to my phone, which is more than adequate for browsing without compression. 3G/3.5G networks are rapidly expanding around the world. Proxies were a great idea back in the days of GPRS, but I just don't think it's worth pissing about with them any more. Just wait till everyone in the world has a phone ten times as fast as their old one, which should only take a couple of years.
0.6% of the 500 server sample is 3 servers. 3 out of 500? Surely that's close to the level of statistical noise anyway.
On occasion I find myself in foreign country, unable to understand the local the language. Usually I find myself wondering what the locals are saying to one another. But sometimes, I don't.