Don't be silly. PDF files are very useful to distribute printable materials, such as books, spec sheets, PR and corporate bullshit (ugh), brochures, etc... Remember that PDF is essentially Postscript wrapped in an Adobe straightjacket.
What does piss me off is:
- People who use PDFs to make read-only documents - People who use PDFs where html or text is adequat and sufficient.
I don't see why they require me to lauch that hateful Acrobat Reader when a browser does a better job.
It's not the PDF format that sucks, it's Acrobat Reader.
Indeed Acrobat Reader sucks. But for that type of document, using a 700K file to write something that essentially fits in under 10K for an html page is dumb.
- It runs acroread slowly, instead of loading in my already opened browser quickly
- Uses huge ugly fonts
- Has silly graphics that bring nothing to the point
- Acroread requires two clicks to close (one for the document, one for acroread)
- Yes, I want a pony
RAID for "personal computers"? but why?
on
Basics of RAID
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Okay I guess it appeals to geeks and fancy computer modders and all. But really, when it comes down to it, a decent main hard-disk, a tray in the second bay for backup hard-disks, and a reasonable backup regimen that people keep up is all a "personal" computer user needs.
Personally, I have 3 backup hard-disks, one that keeps a "clean" base system that I update every 6 months or so, and 2 that I do full differential backups on every 3 days. The "clean" hard-disk is kept off-site, and a script tells me when to do the backups on the other 2. And for very very important files, I just write them on a CD on the spot.
With that, I've yet to lose a single file since I started using Linux in 93 or 94. My solution is cheap and doesn't involve fancy raiding. And I'm quite sure I overdo it, most people could do just fine with one main hard-disk, one backup hard-disk and a little discipline.
When is the last time you've really gotten excited about something NASA was doing? The mars rovers???
Yes, Spirit and Opportunity do great science, and their longevity is nothing short of amazing. That gets me excited.
The blowing up of some inconsequential comet passing by???
Well, I must say I'm not terribly impressed by the method chosen, I'd have prefered a landing, but otherwise I have to say I'm very impressed by the navigational part of the mission, that can find a teensy asteroid so far away and actually hit it. That too is amazing. Not quite exciting, but very interesting.
Now my question: does a mission to Mars that everybody knows won't happen excite you? does a mission to the moon where we've already been several times, with rovers and all, excite you?
Science itself is exciting. If you need fuzzy pictures of guys in spacesuit saying "it's a small step for man" and other prearranged grandiosities to get excited, as opposed to just admiring well-done science and true worthwhile space exploration done right (i.e. with robots), then I guess you must prefer reading Popular Mechanics than Science...
So NASA is supposed to do all that in two years? or will the expenditures carry on until the next president has another "vision"?
What NASA does (or perhaps is forced to do) is waste money, because everybody knows none of these grandiose plans will ever occur. The Mars mission will be international or won't be at all, because there's no cold war to justify n-times the cost of sending some bozo to Mars where robots do just as well for cheaper.
So, like Slashdot just told me very accurately, nothing for you to see here, please move along.
There's a huge difference between what it could be used for and what it is being used for; and what it is being used for isn't worth putting up with the 0.0001% legitimate useage.
Tell that Kin Yu Jong who's being at risk of being arrested any moment now because he dared write "uh, I dunno, but maybe Tiananmen wasn't so groovy after all" in his fanzine.
Only well-fed and wealthy people like you who live in relative safety in their countries have the luxury to think their comfort rates higher than the needs of the oppressed.
The best I've found so far is DataDepositBox.com. Continous back up for 1c/meg/day. Secure website, download files from it, yadda yadda. Just like every other service I guess.
Holy crap, at that price they'd better be good!
I mean gee, if I wanted to backup my work directories on there, which amounts to about 2G, that'd be about 7.5 grand a year, not counting ISP costs. And that's not even close to fulfilling my true, complete backup needs.
For that price, I'll get a boxful of hard-disks, trays, and a secure box in some bank (mine's $100/yr) to store them in. I'll true the hard-disks and the bank much more than DataDepositBox.com really...
I made the switch to Vonage and disconnected my land line several months ago.
Okay, I'm not about to do that, primarily because I don't use the phone that much myself, but I'm curious: what happens with 911? do you even get someone at the other end? or is the number just not there?
To preserve any state (login, for instance) in an essentially stateless mechanism, cookies are the simplest path.
I understand that, what I'm saying is: how many sites requiring cookies actually need cookies other than for tracking viewer habits? The only sites I let use cookies are Slashdot for login, and various reputable online merchants for shopping carts. All the others I visit either have static content (no need for cookies there, so why do they use them? tracking) or use the old variables-in-URL method.
People can complain all they want, but cookies are necessary to make surfing experiences less problematic.
Oh yeah? I have my Mozilla configured to ask me, if a site wants to install a cookie, whether I want to let it or not. Usually, I just click DENY more or less automatically. Once in a while though, I do that and a realize the site doesn't work without cookies so I go and explicitely re-enable cookies for it.
How often does that happen? I'd say about 10 times this year, no more. And I can tell you, I click on the DENY button about 50 times per day, because just about every website owner and his dog wants to set cookies.
So, "cookies are necessary" my hiney. I don't buy that...
It doesn't seem to have dawned on marketers that many, many people already associate Flash with "annoying advertising", "high CPU usage for nothing" and "general nuisance", and that it is disabled in many browsers as a consequence.
Speaking for myself, Flash is disabled. When I need it occasionally (that is, when I happen to want to play this about once a year), I re-enable it. But otherwise, I've yet to see a website sporting Flash that doesn't use it for useless eye-candy or advertising.
If perchance you happen to be more in the know than I am on the subject
I don't know much about it, but my understanding is that the epilepsy stimulator acts on the vagus nerve, which is in the neck. The thalamic implant acts on the thalamus, which is a rice-grain-sized mass of neurons deep inside the brain. The electrodes of the former are implanted in the neck, whereas the electrodes of the latter are implanted inside the brain, through trepanation.
Seriously, Depression is a dissease that affects almost everyone at some point in our lives.
I think there's a distinction between true depression, which is a chronic weird state one cannot get out of, and that can get one to commit suicide in the worst cases, and "feeling down" or "having the blues", which everybody occasionally has as part of normal life, and which is usually connected to events in life.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay thanks. Remix == hack now.
:-)
Gotta remember that to look groovy with the kids
For us un-hip people not in the know: could you tell us what "remix" means in this context? The only definition I know of is what DJs do.
Even more astute: if you have spam, you have an e-mail account.
Don't be silly. PDF files are very useful to distribute printable materials, such as books, spec sheets, PR and corporate bullshit (ugh), brochures, etc... Remember that PDF is essentially Postscript wrapped in an Adobe straightjacket.
What does piss me off is:
- People who use PDFs to make read-only documents
- People who use PDFs where html or text is adequat and sufficient.
I don't see why they require me to lauch that hateful Acrobat Reader when a browser does a better job.
It's not the PDF format that sucks, it's Acrobat Reader.
Indeed Acrobat Reader sucks. But for that type of document, using a 700K file to write something that essentially fits in under 10K for an html page is dumb.
You know, after a few tens of thousands of hits from /., his server will be damned to hell, so it's fitting.
- It runs acroread slowly, instead of loading in my already opened browser quickly
- Uses huge ugly fonts
- Has silly graphics that bring nothing to the point
- Acroread requires two clicks to close (one for the document, one for acroread)
- Yes, I want a pony
Okay I guess it appeals to geeks and fancy computer modders and all. But really, when it comes down to it, a decent main hard-disk, a tray in the second bay for backup hard-disks, and a reasonable backup regimen that people keep up is all a "personal" computer user needs.
Personally, I have 3 backup hard-disks, one that keeps a "clean" base system that I update every 6 months or so, and 2 that I do full differential backups on every 3 days. The "clean" hard-disk is kept off-site, and a script tells me when to do the backups on the other 2. And for very very important files, I just write them on a CD on the spot.
With that, I've yet to lose a single file since I started using Linux in 93 or 94. My solution is cheap and doesn't involve fancy raiding. And I'm quite sure I overdo it, most people could do just fine with one main hard-disk, one backup hard-disk and a little discipline.
When is the last time you've really gotten excited about something NASA was doing? The mars rovers???
Yes, Spirit and Opportunity do great science, and their longevity is nothing short of amazing. That gets me excited.
The blowing up of some inconsequential comet passing by???
Well, I must say I'm not terribly impressed by the method chosen, I'd have prefered a landing, but otherwise I have to say I'm very impressed by the navigational part of the mission, that can find a teensy asteroid so far away and actually hit it. That too is amazing. Not quite exciting, but very interesting.
Now my question: does a mission to Mars that everybody knows won't happen excite you? does a mission to the moon where we've already been several times, with rovers and all, excite you?
Science itself is exciting. If you need fuzzy pictures of guys in spacesuit saying "it's a small step for man" and other prearranged grandiosities to get excited, as opposed to just admiring well-done science and true worthwhile space exploration done right (i.e. with robots), then I guess you must prefer reading Popular Mechanics than Science...
This is the perfect opportunity for the United States to peak childrens interest in science and mathematics
and english.
So NASA is supposed to do all that in two years? or will the expenditures carry on until the next president has another "vision"?
What NASA does (or perhaps is forced to do) is waste money, because everybody knows none of these grandiose plans will ever occur. The Mars mission will be international or won't be at all, because there's no cold war to justify n-times the cost of sending some bozo to Mars where robots do just as well for cheaper.
So, like Slashdot just told me very accurately, nothing for you to see here, please move along.
There's a huge difference between what it could be used for and what it is being used for; and what it is being used for isn't worth putting up with the 0.0001% legitimate useage.
Tell that Kin Yu Jong who's being at risk of being arrested any moment now because he dared write "uh, I dunno, but maybe Tiananmen wasn't so groovy after all" in his fanzine.
Only well-fed and wealthy people like you who live in relative safety in their countries have the luxury to think their comfort rates higher than the needs of the oppressed.
any good thing doesn't require you to hide behind anything.
Well for example, it can be used by dissidents to safely express their political views, be it in the PRC, Burma or the United States...
The best I've found so far is DataDepositBox.com. Continous back up for 1c/meg/day. Secure website, download files from it, yadda yadda. Just like every other service I guess.
Holy crap, at that price they'd better be good!
I mean gee, if I wanted to backup my work directories on there, which amounts to about 2G, that'd be about 7.5 grand a year, not counting ISP costs. And that's not even close to fulfilling my true, complete backup needs.
For that price, I'll get a boxful of hard-disks, trays, and a secure box in some bank (mine's $100/yr) to store them in. I'll true the hard-disks and the bank much more than DataDepositBox.com really...
Duncan Pringle
With a name like that, you'd think he would choose to work for these guys...
Wiflyer: $150
20ft phone cord: $5
Hospital bill after you trip on the phone cord and knock yourself unconscious on the bed post: priceless.
I made the switch to Vonage and disconnected my land line several months ago.
Okay, I'm not about to do that, primarily because I don't use the phone that much myself, but I'm curious: what happens with 911? do you even get someone at the other end? or is the number just not there?
By disabled, I meant uninstalled.
Wow, that's the best piece of advice I've had in a year. Thanks!
Anyone who runs a log analysis of their web server collects click-depth by ip address, which is no different.
:-)
It is different: there are 5 persons NATed behind my IP, and my IP is dynamic. Good luck tracking me with my IP
I just can't muster up much outrage either way.
I'm not outraged about cookie-tracking, just annoyed, the same way that I'm annoyed when I find unwanted ads in my mailbox.
To preserve any state (login, for instance) in an essentially stateless mechanism, cookies are the simplest path.
I understand that, what I'm saying is: how many sites requiring cookies actually need cookies other than for tracking viewer habits? The only sites I let use cookies are Slashdot for login, and various reputable online merchants for shopping carts. All the others I visit either have static content (no need for cookies there, so why do they use them? tracking) or use the old variables-in-URL method.
People can complain all they want, but cookies are necessary to make surfing experiences less problematic.
Oh yeah? I have my Mozilla configured to ask me, if a site wants to install a cookie, whether I want to let it or not. Usually, I just click DENY more or less automatically. Once in a while though, I do that and a realize the site doesn't work without cookies so I go and explicitely re-enable cookies for it.
How often does that happen? I'd say about 10 times this year, no more. And I can tell you, I click on the DENY button about 50 times per day, because just about every website owner and his dog wants to set cookies.
So, "cookies are necessary" my hiney. I don't buy that...
Flash-based tracking system is mentioned
It doesn't seem to have dawned on marketers that many, many people already associate Flash with "annoying advertising", "high CPU usage for nothing" and "general nuisance", and that it is disabled in many browsers as a consequence.
Speaking for myself, Flash is disabled. When I need it occasionally (that is, when I happen to want to play this about once a year), I re-enable it. But otherwise, I've yet to see a website sporting Flash that doesn't use it for useless eye-candy or advertising.
If perchance you happen to be more in the know than I am on the subject
I don't know much about it, but my understanding is that the epilepsy stimulator acts on the vagus nerve, which is in the neck. The thalamic implant acts on the thalamus, which is a rice-grain-sized mass of neurons deep inside the brain. The electrodes of the former are implanted in the neck, whereas the electrodes of the latter are implanted inside the brain, through trepanation.
Seriously, Depression is a dissease that affects almost everyone at some point in our lives.
I think there's a distinction between true depression, which is a chronic weird state one cannot get out of, and that can get one to commit suicide in the worst cases, and "feeling down" or "having the blues", which everybody occasionally has as part of normal life, and which is usually connected to events in life.