Resolution. Computers have (classically) run at much higher ppi than televisions. HD is roughly what you would use on a 20" monitor. If you want to use the TV as a monitor and sit close (to benefit more from the screen size), all of fonts and stuff will be huge (because of the limited resolution and relative non-flexibility of most software).
Going in the other direction, building a TV to support resolutions higher than HD makes it cost more.
Sure, I assumed it was moderately reliable, but in the event that the article is correct, my parent poster is some combination of confused, deliberately obfuscatory and bizarrely narrow in his interpretation of the grandparent (who was alluding to the fact that security becomes rather Rumsfeldian, not looking to quibble over jargon).
Depends on how you do your accounting; the spectrum sale netted more than the combined costs of the coupon programs, so the government profited, second coupon program or not. That the second program was appropriated separately and after the income was spent makes it easy to say "Oh, they are spending new money on that", but that means you are also ignoring the previous profit (which may make sense to you, but most people would tend to group the whats, not the whens).
Part of the problem stems from the fact that it can be misleading to non-practitioners, since security is not being proved; only a reduction from security to some other unproven assumptions.
According to that, provable security doesn't mean that anything has been proven to be secure.
If China tried to call in its credit, it would get lots of nice green paper, and a polite invitation not to do business in the U.S. anymore.
It would be tough for the U.S. to deal with (anything that China produces a lot of would suddenly get more expensive; good thing they don't provide all that much food, energy or basic material...), but it would be disastrous for China (the stability of the country depends on the government providing economic growth and opportunity).
I'm not sure that those people who believe in angels will be so blithe about it (I don't think they think that angels are alive or that they exist somewhere else in the universe.).
I don't recall seeing a lock advertised like that...
(I agree that people need to temper the expectations they have towards the $50 box, but software companies also need to have honest advertising, which includes being clear regarding what the software does)
You fucked up; you should have waited until a good box was available and then applied (they are a technology product, being first is not a good thing!).
(I applied ~June and got my coupons in September, at which point stores were chock full...)
As long as electric is substantially coal, I don't see any reason to pay more for a less capable vehicle, so the electric with a 200 mile range needs to be cheaper (for me and a whole pile of other folks) to even be a consideration, and that hasn't happened yet (fuel is usually much less than 1/2 of the cost of the vehicle, so the savings from cheaper energy don't add up quite enough). Even if electric were entirely clean, I would have to think on it.
To reclaim the spectrum (the fcc auctioned off access to the reclaimed spectrum for more than the converter box program spent).
Broadcast stations got much of that spectrum for a song, but it isn't particularly ridiculous that some of the funds were spent on mitigating the impact of the switch.
My favorite explanation is that pimple fetishes aren't that common (DVD leaves enough to the imagination, HD shows you everything you didn't want to see).
So how come no one has stepped in and built one? Certainly, tens of millions of sure sales (after all, they are terrific...) is enough to get funding.
I'm pretty sure the problem is battery technology, just to make that clear (especially relative to cheap gas/oil...). In the last ten years, they have improved significantly and are reaching the point where you can build a practical vehicle around them (but that vehicle still isn't as practical as a gasoline vehicle, especially if gas costs $3).
Slashdot Mirror
Resolution. Computers have (classically) run at much higher ppi than televisions. HD is roughly what you would use on a 20" monitor. If you want to use the TV as a monitor and sit close (to benefit more from the screen size), all of fonts and stuff will be huge (because of the limited resolution and relative non-flexibility of most software).
Going in the other direction, building a TV to support resolutions higher than HD makes it cost more.
The converters only cost $60.
Sure, I assumed it was moderately reliable, but in the event that the article is correct, my parent poster is some combination of confused, deliberately obfuscatory and bizarrely narrow in his interpretation of the grandparent (who was alluding to the fact that security becomes rather Rumsfeldian, not looking to quibble over jargon).
Depends on how you do your accounting; the spectrum sale netted more than the combined costs of the coupon programs, so the government profited, second coupon program or not. That the second program was appropriated separately and after the income was spent makes it easy to say "Oh, they are spending new money on that", but that means you are also ignoring the previous profit (which may make sense to you, but most people would tend to group the whats, not the whens).
It's a two way relationship. Theater owners will simply close down if the studios try to impose too much stupid.
So what's wrong with the wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provable_security
Quoting:
Part of the problem stems from the fact that it can be misleading to non-practitioners, since security is not being proved; only a reduction from security to some other unproven assumptions.
According to that, provable security doesn't mean that anything has been proven to be secure.
Theater owners don't have any particular reason to care all that about piracy. They won't install metal detectors or ask you to check your phone.
If China tried to call in its credit, it would get lots of nice green paper, and a polite invitation not to do business in the U.S. anymore.
It would be tough for the U.S. to deal with (anything that China produces a lot of would suddenly get more expensive; good thing they don't provide all that much food, energy or basic material...), but it would be disastrous for China (the stability of the country depends on the government providing economic growth and opportunity).
I'm not sure that those people who believe in angels will be so blithe about it (I don't think they think that angels are alive or that they exist somewhere else in the universe.).
I don't recall seeing a lock advertised like that...
(I agree that people need to temper the expectations they have towards the $50 box, but software companies also need to have honest advertising, which includes being clear regarding what the software does)
You fucked up; you should have waited until a good box was available and then applied (they are a technology product, being first is not a good thing!).
(I applied ~June and got my coupons in September, at which point stores were chock full...)
If you are in a situation where seconds matter, why not act preemptively?
As long as electric is substantially coal, I don't see any reason to pay more for a less capable vehicle, so the electric with a 200 mile range needs to be cheaper (for me and a whole pile of other folks) to even be a consideration, and that hasn't happened yet (fuel is usually much less than 1/2 of the cost of the vehicle, so the savings from cheaper energy don't add up quite enough). Even if electric were entirely clean, I would have to think on it.
To reclaim the spectrum (the fcc auctioned off access to the reclaimed spectrum for more than the converter box program spent).
Broadcast stations got much of that spectrum for a song, but it isn't particularly ridiculous that some of the funds were spent on mitigating the impact of the switch.
The content on that site is dynamically inserted into a template and the site has commenting features...
There have been plenty "It will work fine" posts, many of which included "Here's why".
I have this idea for a reality television show that would organize and officiate fights between internet blowhards.
The working title is "Spaz-fight".
It wouldn't be like the time Uwe Boll kicked that guys ass every week, but plenty of good would come with the bad.
Why is it sad?
What you mean is that someone thought of it. It wasn't quite done.
Depends on the wear leveling. It certainly could move static blocks, I've no idea if the performance trade off would be worth it.
Is porn doing well on Blu-ray?
My favorite explanation is that pimple fetishes aren't that common (DVD leaves enough to the imagination, HD shows you everything you didn't want to see).
It isn't just the producers, consumers are benefiting right along with them.
I would think you could buy drives that looked nice sitting under the mini.
So how come no one has stepped in and built one? Certainly, tens of millions of sure sales (after all, they are terrific...) is enough to get funding.
I'm pretty sure the problem is battery technology, just to make that clear (especially relative to cheap gas/oil...). In the last ten years, they have improved significantly and are reaching the point where you can build a practical vehicle around them (but that vehicle still isn't as practical as a gasoline vehicle, especially if gas costs $3).
GM's overseas operations are profitable. They aren't spending money in Russia, they are earning it.