It's the fault of the obscure hardware mfg's that keep it around. Instead of designing something around USB.
Anyone who's ever done any work with microcontrollers knows why they still use serial in these devices. It's not a "fault" at all, it's simply a matter of complexity. I can bang out a crude serial interface in forty lines of C using two IC pins. Going USB would require either (a) writing a USB compliant interface and client driver for whatever computers might plug in, or (b) putting the same damn USB->serial chip you find in cheap adapter cables in the device and using their driver. Solution (a) requires a significant investment in time and materials (more code = more RAM = more $), and solution (b) will have the exact same timing problems as a separate USB->serial cable will.
K5 fell victim to the same sort of childish "I am clearly smarter than you even though I'm only 19" user base that kills most "intellectual" sites. The interesting people leave, and you have a bunch of dull folks talking about uninteresting stuff. I've largely quit reading Slashdot for the same reason. At least Slashdot has the odd interesting tech article. K5, not so much. What's on top there right now? NFL tax evasion, someone's trip to Cuba, and a critique of Obama's trip to china. Meh. Tech articles? Something on sed, gawk, and grep, something else on NetBSDs release schedule, someone rambling about how if Firefox isn't good in the future people will stop using it.... it's just boring.
They have been absorbed by DirectTV, so I'm sure that's the technology inside DirectTV's DVR units.
I wish! A friend of mine had a ReplayTV, and I can tell you that the software in my DirecTV DVR is definitely not anywhere near that good. No, DirecTV only picked up ReplayTV a couple years ago, and the DirecTV DVR software goes much farther back. When Rupert Murdoch bought DirecTV from GM/Hughes in 2003, he told TiVo to go piss up a rope, that he would have his marvelous geniuses at NDS make a DVR platform from scratch for him. What we got is one of the worst piles of crap I've ever seen.
I realize that I could pay for the travel, the lodging, the food, etc., up front, and then claim the expenses against my income tax
Don't forget the more important issue, that something being tax deductible just means you don't pay income tax on it. If the potential employer isn't covering this expense, it's still coming out of your pocket.
From what you've said, they're not actually taking your fingerprints. The machine they use for timekeeping uses biometrics, so you can't have a friend clock you in when you're not there. These machines don't keep an image of your fingerprint. When you "enroll" in the machine, your print is scanned and a vector map of certain aspects of your fingerprint is created. The geometry of this map is what identifies you. You certainly cannot reconstruct a fingerprint from the less than 100 byte map. It's like a hash value. Quit your worrying.
You'd think that in an article on Photoshop, they wouldn't make the irritating novice mistake of conflating "Adobe" (the company) with "Photoshop" (the product). I expect this from the idiots where I work, where complaints of "my Adobe isn't working!" are common, but from them?
There's has to be a lot of Asimov in the movie. Or else why take the trouble of licensing the work?
My take on it is that the producer told the writer something like this:
"The bad news is that your script is clearly a horrible, misguided mimicry of Asimov. The good news is that Will Smith likes it, and we have the rights to I, Robot, so it doesn't actually matter."
Who am I kidding? No producer is that intelligent.
I was under the impression commodore64's PROFESSORS believed in a Creator because "the initial singularity came from somewhere". THEY made the claim not C64_love, and if that's true then it's understandable why he told you "I don't know" and to go ask the college profs.
In that case, it falls under the definition of "fallacy of appeal to authority". It's no more rational to use unknown, unverified "professors" as proof of your assertion than it is to say "it's in the bible and god wrote the bible so THERE". Both arguments add nothing.
Don't buy what? That arthritis leaves evidence in the bones around it? That prehistoric hominid bones carry this evidence? You think this is all made up because your dog has arthritis? Where did they say that all arthritis is caused by walking on two legs?
Trouble with things like this is, they written broadly and we're assured they only want to fight "terrorists".... and then they go on to use it against political enemies, because verbal assurances that they'll follow intent are only worth the paper they're printed on. In law, the wording is all that matters. If it lets them jail someone for saying "fuck the police! Fuck the legislature! Fuck Congress! You all need to be run out of town!", then sooner or later an angry little pissant cracker DA with an axe to grind against the speaker is going to use it simply because he can.
Interesting. So when Jefferson said “Every generation needs a new revolution” and “The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive”, he would have easily been facing 10 years and a $25K fine for advising the [duty|necessity] of overthrowing the government
Perhaps they need a law that requires registration of fuckwit legislators, so when they pass laws like this we can send them to Gitmo or something.
Predictions of the death of the stand-alone automotive GPS market are premature. Screens on cell phones are not really large enough for anything but simple rudimentary navigation, and because cell phones will always remain small, this will never change.
Most interesting to me was that in the sample, less than 4% used any non alpha-numerics in their #$#%'ing passwords.
Why is it any surprise that people tend to approach passwords as a pass-WORD? It has to be something they can remember, and remembering a string of characters they can't pronounce is far more difficult than remembering (say) their favorite basketball team and the year they graduated high school.
How many single mothers? How many people from poor families? How many, say, don't have enough money to own a home? But don't mind me; continue bragging about your unrepresentative democracy.
Those people don't get into the legislature in any state. They're too busy trying to manage their own lives to worry about the lives of others.
the "time-warping" feature of DVRs? The "pause live tv" feature? How exactly is this novel and unique once you get the video into the computer that runs the DVR?
They didn't patent the features, they patented a particular method of implementing those features. If you'd actually read the patent, you'd see that the method is pretty freakin' complicated and definitely non-obvious.
For what?
Making a VCR with a computer?
What single thing did they actually come up with?
Why don't you read the fucking patent instead of just pretending they "patented recording TV with a computer" and getting all uppity "cos dat's bullshit"? Their patent is for their method of event and data buffering that allowed them to record TV on a ridiculously cheap 54mHz system. This is why there were (and are) still non-TiVo DVRs.
No, it means they cross license, and the only ones who lose are those third parties who wish to enter the same market and will now have to license both patents.
Microsoft bought the stock directly from AT&T, so yes, they did pay them... directly. There is a difference, but it's largely semantic.
HOWEVER, this stock buy was in 1999, and the deal was with the old AT&T, not the current AT&T who used to be SBC before they bought the name. The old AT&T from which Microsoft bought $5 billion worth of stock is essentially now a chunk of Comcast, who bought AT&T's cable TV division. The $400 million dollar deal between Microsoft and AT&T for the Uverse infrastructure is wholly unrelated to the earlier deal.
Slashdot Mirror
It's the fault of the obscure hardware mfg's that keep it around. Instead of designing something around USB.
Anyone who's ever done any work with microcontrollers knows why they still use serial in these devices. It's not a "fault" at all, it's simply a matter of complexity. I can bang out a crude serial interface in forty lines of C using two IC pins. Going USB would require either (a) writing a USB compliant interface and client driver for whatever computers might plug in, or (b) putting the same damn USB->serial chip you find in cheap adapter cables in the device and using their driver. Solution (a) requires a significant investment in time and materials (more code = more RAM = more $), and solution (b) will have the exact same timing problems as a separate USB->serial cable will.
K5 fell victim to the same sort of childish "I am clearly smarter than you even though I'm only 19" user base that kills most "intellectual" sites. The interesting people leave, and you have a bunch of dull folks talking about uninteresting stuff. I've largely quit reading Slashdot for the same reason. At least Slashdot has the odd interesting tech article. K5, not so much. What's on top there right now? NFL tax evasion, someone's trip to Cuba, and a critique of Obama's trip to china. Meh. Tech articles? Something on sed, gawk, and grep, something else on NetBSDs release schedule, someone rambling about how if Firefox isn't good in the future people will stop using it.... it's just boring.
They have been absorbed by DirectTV, so I'm sure that's the technology inside DirectTV's DVR units.
I wish! A friend of mine had a ReplayTV, and I can tell you that the software in my DirecTV DVR is definitely not anywhere near that good. No, DirecTV only picked up ReplayTV a couple years ago, and the DirecTV DVR software goes much farther back. When Rupert Murdoch bought DirecTV from GM/Hughes in 2003, he told TiVo to go piss up a rope, that he would have his marvelous geniuses at NDS make a DVR platform from scratch for him. What we got is one of the worst piles of crap I've ever seen.
I realize that I could pay for the travel, the lodging, the food, etc., up front, and then claim the expenses against my income tax
Don't forget the more important issue, that something being tax deductible just means you don't pay income tax on it. If the potential employer isn't covering this expense, it's still coming out of your pocket.
"We didn't do what everyone thinks we did, and we promise to never do it again!"
From what you've said, they're not actually taking your fingerprints. The machine they use for timekeeping uses biometrics, so you can't have a friend clock you in when you're not there. These machines don't keep an image of your fingerprint. When you "enroll" in the machine, your print is scanned and a vector map of certain aspects of your fingerprint is created. The geometry of this map is what identifies you. You certainly cannot reconstruct a fingerprint from the less than 100 byte map. It's like a hash value. Quit your worrying.
In February of 1990, Adobe 1.0 was released.
You'd think that in an article on Photoshop, they wouldn't make the irritating novice mistake of conflating "Adobe" (the company) with "Photoshop" (the product). I expect this from the idiots where I work, where complaints of "my Adobe isn't working!" are common, but from them?
Einstein was speaking outside his area of expertise. And you do shoulder some blame here for citing a physicist as an authority on morality.
Possibly the longest running.
No. Doctor Who.
Hopping down the beach on one hand, chased by goons.... IN AMAZING 3D!!!!!!
(shudder)
There's has to be a lot of Asimov in the movie. Or else why take the trouble of licensing the work?
My take on it is that the producer told the writer something like this:
"The bad news is that your script is clearly a horrible, misguided mimicry of Asimov. The good news is that Will Smith likes it, and we have the rights to I, Robot, so it doesn't actually matter."
Who am I kidding? No producer is that intelligent.
I was under the impression commodore64's PROFESSORS believed in a Creator because "the initial singularity came from somewhere". THEY made the claim not C64_love, and if that's true then it's understandable why he told you "I don't know" and to go ask the college profs.
In that case, it falls under the definition of "fallacy of appeal to authority". It's no more rational to use unknown, unverified "professors" as proof of your assertion than it is to say "it's in the bible and god wrote the bible so THERE". Both arguments add nothing.
I don't buy it.
Don't buy what? That arthritis leaves evidence in the bones around it? That prehistoric hominid bones carry this evidence? You think this is all made up because your dog has arthritis? Where did they say that all arthritis is caused by walking on two legs?
(I'm looking at you, Bing and Yahoo).
I think you mean Bing-Yahoo. Yahoo dumped their search engine and now contracts with Microsoft to serve up Bing results with Yahoo ads.
I have never used google docs, and never will.
Hey, google docs is GREAT for tracking treasure and experience points for role playing games.... but yeah, I wouldn't trust it for anything else.
Trouble with things like this is, they written broadly and we're assured they only want to fight "terrorists".... and then they go on to use it against political enemies, because verbal assurances that they'll follow intent are only worth the paper they're printed on. In law, the wording is all that matters. If it lets them jail someone for saying "fuck the police! Fuck the legislature! Fuck Congress! You all need to be run out of town!", then sooner or later an angry little pissant cracker DA with an axe to grind against the speaker is going to use it simply because he can.
Interesting. So when Jefferson said “Every generation needs a new revolution” and “The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive”, he would have easily been facing 10 years and a $25K fine for advising the [duty|necessity] of overthrowing the government
Perhaps they need a law that requires registration of fuckwit legislators, so when they pass laws like this we can send them to Gitmo or something.
He means people don't know how to count seconds. Nobody thinks the subjects didn't know the numbers from 1-60.
Predictions of the death of the stand-alone automotive GPS market are premature. Screens on cell phones are not really large enough for anything but simple rudimentary navigation, and because cell phones will always remain small, this will never change.
Most interesting to me was that in the sample, less than 4% used any non alpha-numerics in their #$#%'ing passwords.
Why is it any surprise that people tend to approach passwords as a pass-WORD? It has to be something they can remember, and remembering a string of characters they can't pronounce is far more difficult than remembering (say) their favorite basketball team and the year they graduated high school.
How many single mothers? How many people from poor families? How many, say, don't have enough money to own a home? But don't mind me; continue bragging about your unrepresentative democracy.
Those people don't get into the legislature in any state. They're too busy trying to manage their own lives to worry about the lives of others.
the "time-warping" feature of DVRs? The "pause live tv" feature? How exactly is this novel and unique once you get the video into the computer that runs the DVR?
They didn't patent the features, they patented a particular method of implementing those features. If you'd actually read the patent, you'd see that the method is pretty freakin' complicated and definitely non-obvious.
For what? Making a VCR with a computer? What single thing did they actually come up with?
Why don't you read the fucking patent instead of just pretending they "patented recording TV with a computer" and getting all uppity "cos dat's bullshit"? Their patent is for their method of event and data buffering that allowed them to record TV on a ridiculously cheap 54mHz system. This is why there were (and are) still non-TiVo DVRs.
No, it means they cross license, and the only ones who lose are those third parties who wish to enter the same market and will now have to license both patents.
Microsoft bought the stock directly from AT&T, so yes, they did pay them... directly. There is a difference, but it's largely semantic.
HOWEVER, this stock buy was in 1999, and the deal was with the old AT&T, not the current AT&T who used to be SBC before they bought the name. The old AT&T from which Microsoft bought $5 billion worth of stock is essentially now a chunk of Comcast, who bought AT&T's cable TV division. The $400 million dollar deal between Microsoft and AT&T for the Uverse infrastructure is wholly unrelated to the earlier deal.