Yeah, I've been stuck running Unity on Arch Linux for months now, I don't even know how it got there. One day "POOF", the developers pushed out a mandatory background update and I haven't even been able to reformat my computer. DAMN YOU CANONICAL!! Also urxvt was replaced with GNOME Term somehow.
Exactly, the current lecture based model is so antiquated it hurts. We have all this technology that can be used to make learning more available and easier, but unfortunately It'll probably take at least until the current generation of undergrads are the old crotchety professors before we see any real progress. "Back in my day we used to use the internet to learn things, you should WORK for your knowledge, not just get it for free though a mind meld!"
As I am about 50% self taught, very often I will want to learn about say "Probabilistic Graphical Models" but don't really feel like digging through all of the material out there to learn the basics before I can even think about understanding what articles and documents even say. This is one of the first free online courses sites I've seen that goes past "Hurr, Hurr, Learn what a variable is".
OK so you put different calorie counts for every snack combo: butter, no butter, extra butter, light butter (where butter = whatever the fuck that stuff actually is). All the old cups and printing plates at some point become landfill. Then a change is made... more landfill.
Except these things take a certain amount of time to implement and companies are generally given some leeway.
For example, recently Canada changed the warning labels on cigarettes again. You know how they worked the change, all packs made after a certain date had to have the new labeling. Thus we are currently in an in between period where some of the packs I buy have the new labeling and some have the old. Eventually the old packs run out, and all you have is the new labeling. Seems like they'd do the same thing for this Movie Snack thing if it was implemented.
Republicans are not distrustful of Science, they are distrustful of politicized scientists and various hangers on.
But I do think there are some that do completely disregard science (eg. Young Earth Creationists). I have been given the impression by the media that this is a significant part of the republican party, but who knows, it is the media we're talking about.
However I am curious as to what you mean by questionable science. Are you towing the standard "Climate Science isn't real science" line, or something more concrete than that?
I'm not trying to be contrary or anything, it's just I haven't kept up on American politics and domestic affairs nearly as much since I moved away and want to know what you are specifically referring to.
I like that the interface is very usable (especially compared to some downright horrific timelines I've used), however there really doesn't seem to be that much information in it, that may be the point or because it's in beta, but I'd like to see a lot more data and "milestones".
I agree with Mark Cuban, but only if it happens soon enough. Obviously nothing is guaranteed but there does seem to be a certain lifetime for social networking platforms (and facebook may or may not be reaching its own as shown by declining membership numbers in its initial markets), so they would have to win their suits before facebook collapses on its own, otherwise they end up with no money and no outrage from consumers.
In some ways Canada' s policies and agencies are far more progressive and useful than their American counterparts, however some of them just make me cringe. The CRTC is a prime example, I didn't think you could be more of the telecoms little bitch than the FCC, but apparently you can.
When the companies from the industry you are supposed to be regulating ask you to regulate (aka do your job) you know something is wrong.
I actually find that a combination of window managers is what fixes that issue for me (As in yes it is nice to see multiple things at once, but I do want SOME things to be maximized). On my work computer I have two monitors, one (the smaller one) that boots up with openbox on it and I usually use it for displaying a browser for research, testing, etc. The other has dwm for my terminal windows as I like to have more than one at a time up for editing multiple files, or other fun stuff. I also find that a tiling WM deals with multiple windows in a way that I find far less stressful.
This doesn't directly relate to the article but does relate to essentially every single comment ever on slashdot being a hate on for GNOME 3. There are several different arguments that people generally make so I'll address the ones I can think of.
1. GNOME 3 is different than [insert other DE here, usually GNOME 2] so I don't like it.... are you serious? I mean it may seem childish when I state it that way, but probably about 50% of the arguments against G3 don't consist of anything more than that.
2. The interface is too simple
Well what do you want? Whenever I'm looking for ways to change my own UI, the most easily findable ones are always how to simplify it, I assume that functional simplicity is a popular, and good, thing (especially among the non-linux users who everyone seems to think GNOME 3 will drive away).
3. I can't customize it enough
Well, yeah. Because it's new. The vast majority of customizations for GNOME 2 are third party programs and/or themes, which are available because it's been out for so long.
Anyways I could find more, but the point is this, there is nothing inherently wrong with it, one of the beautiful things about the linux world is that it gives you the chance to choose, not just choose the distribution, which widely vary, but your DE, IDE, dock, system monitor, terminal, shell, hell, you can even change things in the kernel if you know what your doing. This may astound people but I REALLY LIKE GNOME 3, and HATE GNOME 2. However I realize that this is a matter of personal preference and that there is nothing really wrong with gnome 2 persay. I like having a launcher in the launchy sytle (which is really efficient by the way, you hit one button and type in what you want), and dislike the menu system in GNOME 2. Does that mean it is bad, NO, it means I have an opinion, but I do think GNOME 2 was executed well.
So go use something else if you don't like it, and stop telling me that I'm the stupidest person on the face of the earth for an OPINION that is different than yours.
While I don't doubt that it's do-able, and that they may even be on the moon when they say they will, it seems a little bit early to me. I may be wrong about this as I only read space articles once in a while, but my impression is that they won't be pulling a profit for quite a while. Who's going to provide the volume of purchases necessary to turn a profit on a moon base?
Well seeing as a portion of those countries are G20 nations, and a G7 country as well....
Saying they have little worldly influence is like saying Google is a small company without much influence just because you can't see it behind ExxonMobile
Last I checked 230 + 230 = 460.
So if the shortest route is nearly 400 miles wouldn't the 230 mile battery pack work fine? I mean yeah you have to account for getting out of an into the city, but 60 extra miles seems like enough to me. So the owners of the 160 mile battery wouldn't be able to make it, which given the market for Tesla cars, I'm sure is a minority.
Additionally this is supposed to be the first of many, so they'll just have to wait a bit longer.
I may be wrong, but the submitter of the article seems to want to label this hope instilling progress as either not good enough or proof of electric cars not working, I'm not really sure.
Okay, while this was kinda cool, like most people have been mentioning, nothing new really... To be honest when I read the title I thought it was some sort of advancement of this caliber: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVS-npfVuY
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I've been stuck running Unity on Arch Linux for months now, I don't even know how it got there. One day "POOF", the developers pushed out a mandatory background update and I haven't even been able to reformat my computer. DAMN YOU CANONICAL!! Also urxvt was replaced with GNOME Term somehow.
Exactly, the current lecture based model is so antiquated it hurts. We have all this technology that can be used to make learning more available and easier, but unfortunately It'll probably take at least until the current generation of undergrads are the old crotchety professors before we see any real progress. "Back in my day we used to use the internet to learn things, you should WORK for your knowledge, not just get it for free though a mind meld!"
As I am about 50% self taught, very often I will want to learn about say "Probabilistic Graphical Models" but don't really feel like digging through all of the material out there to learn the basics before I can even think about understanding what articles and documents even say. This is one of the first free online courses sites I've seen that goes past "Hurr, Hurr, Learn what a variable is".
OK so you put different calorie counts for every snack combo: butter, no butter, extra butter, light butter (where butter = whatever the fuck that stuff actually is). All the old cups and printing plates at some point become landfill. Then a change is made... more landfill.
Except these things take a certain amount of time to implement and companies are generally given some leeway.
For example, recently Canada changed the warning labels on cigarettes again. You know how they worked the change, all packs made after a certain date had to have the new labeling. Thus we are currently in an in between period where some of the packs I buy have the new labeling and some have the old. Eventually the old packs run out, and all you have is the new labeling. Seems like they'd do the same thing for this Movie Snack thing if it was implemented.
Thus no extra fill for the landfill.
I partially agree with
Republicans are not distrustful of Science, they are distrustful of politicized scientists and various hangers on.
But I do think there are some that do completely disregard science (eg. Young Earth Creationists). I have been given the impression by the media that this is a significant part of the republican party, but who knows, it is the media we're talking about.
However I am curious as to what you mean by questionable science. Are you towing the standard "Climate Science isn't real science" line, or something more concrete than that?
I'm not trying to be contrary or anything, it's just I haven't kept up on American politics and domestic affairs nearly as much since I moved away and want to know what you are specifically referring to.
It only detected half of the plugins I have installed.....
I like that the interface is very usable (especially compared to some downright horrific timelines I've used), however there really doesn't seem to be that much information in it, that may be the point or because it's in beta, but I'd like to see a lot more data and "milestones".
I agree with Mark Cuban, but only if it happens soon enough. Obviously nothing is guaranteed but there does seem to be a certain lifetime for social networking platforms (and facebook may or may not be reaching its own as shown by declining membership numbers in its initial markets), so they would have to win their suits before facebook collapses on its own, otherwise they end up with no money and no outrage from consumers.
In some ways Canada' s policies and agencies are far more progressive and useful than their American counterparts, however some of them just make me cringe. The CRTC is a prime example, I didn't think you could be more of the telecoms little bitch than the FCC, but apparently you can. When the companies from the industry you are supposed to be regulating ask you to regulate (aka do your job) you know something is wrong.
I actually find that a combination of window managers is what fixes that issue for me (As in yes it is nice to see multiple things at once, but I do want SOME things to be maximized). On my work computer I have two monitors, one (the smaller one) that boots up with openbox on it and I usually use it for displaying a browser for research, testing, etc. The other has dwm for my terminal windows as I like to have more than one at a time up for editing multiple files, or other fun stuff. I also find that a tiling WM deals with multiple windows in a way that I find far less stressful.
This doesn't directly relate to the article but does relate to essentially every single comment ever on slashdot being a hate on for GNOME 3. There are several different arguments that people generally make so I'll address the ones I can think of.
... are you serious? I mean it may seem childish when I state it that way, but probably about 50% of the arguments against G3 don't consist of anything more than that.
1. GNOME 3 is different than [insert other DE here, usually GNOME 2] so I don't like it.
2. The interface is too simple Well what do you want? Whenever I'm looking for ways to change my own UI, the most easily findable ones are always how to simplify it, I assume that functional simplicity is a popular, and good, thing (especially among the non-linux users who everyone seems to think GNOME 3 will drive away).
3. I can't customize it enough Well, yeah. Because it's new. The vast majority of customizations for GNOME 2 are third party programs and/or themes, which are available because it's been out for so long.
Anyways I could find more, but the point is this, there is nothing inherently wrong with it, one of the beautiful things about the linux world is that it gives you the chance to choose, not just choose the distribution, which widely vary, but your DE, IDE, dock, system monitor, terminal, shell, hell, you can even change things in the kernel if you know what your doing. This may astound people but I REALLY LIKE GNOME 3, and HATE GNOME 2. However I realize that this is a matter of personal preference and that there is nothing really wrong with gnome 2 persay. I like having a launcher in the launchy sytle (which is really efficient by the way, you hit one button and type in what you want), and dislike the menu system in GNOME 2. Does that mean it is bad, NO, it means I have an opinion, but I do think GNOME 2 was executed well.
So go use something else if you don't like it, and stop telling me that I'm the stupidest person on the face of the earth for an OPINION that is different than yours.
I fail to the correlation, making a silly name takes 3 seconds, writing a driver does not.
While I don't doubt that it's do-able, and that they may even be on the moon when they say they will, it seems a little bit early to me. I may be wrong about this as I only read space articles once in a while, but my impression is that they won't be pulling a profit for quite a while. Who's going to provide the volume of purchases necessary to turn a profit on a moon base?
Well seeing as a portion of those countries are G20 nations, and a G7 country as well.... Saying they have little worldly influence is like saying Google is a small company without much influence just because you can't see it behind ExxonMobile
Last I checked 230 + 230 = 460. So if the shortest route is nearly 400 miles wouldn't the 230 mile battery pack work fine? I mean yeah you have to account for getting out of an into the city, but 60 extra miles seems like enough to me. So the owners of the 160 mile battery wouldn't be able to make it, which given the market for Tesla cars, I'm sure is a minority. Additionally this is supposed to be the first of many, so they'll just have to wait a bit longer. I may be wrong, but the submitter of the article seems to want to label this hope instilling progress as either not good enough or proof of electric cars not working, I'm not really sure.
Okay, while this was kinda cool, like most people have been mentioning, nothing new really... To be honest when I read the title I thought it was some sort of advancement of this caliber: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVS-npfVuY