I wonder if this strategy could be used as a means to averting terrorism?
That is, don't just offer large amounts of money for the most important terrorists (like bin Laden), but also offer varying amounts of money for reports that stop terrorism.
In Elder Scrolls 5, you'll be able to buy Coke and Pepsi alongside "Cheap Wine," mead, and other RPG beverages. It's worse than that. At the first bar, you'll probably get "Coke, no Pepsi" and, at the next bar, you'll probably get "Pepsi, no Coke". This, of course, will lead you into "The Great Cola War" where you'll have to pick the right side in order to be awarded some talisman of great power.
Back in the pre-spam days of Usenet or early bulletin boards, you could put your email address on the boards so that it could email you whenever somebody replied to your post. Now the spam is so thick that people are hiding their email address as much as possible (note all the Anonymous Cowards here). We've lost A LOT in the friendliness of the Internet in the last ten years...
You presume that the world can achieve "full" employment. I'm beginning to wonder if that is truly possible. As artificial intelligence and automation rise, the number of jobs in the low-end diminishes. It's not likely that high-end jobs will ever be plentiful to the point of providing a job for everyone in the world.
Are there any good stories left in the Trek Universe? Between the books, the movies, and the television shows, what more could they do that would be a "good story"?
Your second point brings up the question of the dividing line. All programs are now in (at least) three layers: the GUI, the application, the database. The problem is that, as more and more power is put into the GUI or the database, the application gets squeezed down to just bare essentials. For those people that standardize on a particular GUI or database, this is a good thing. However, swap out the GUI or database and things become much more dicey.
This seems like an unnecessary expense. You're incurring an executable execution (openapp) to find out where the actual executable is. Other UNIX systems would cache the names of all executables in the PATH to speed up finding the one you want.
So, DLL hell is a problem with the naming of library files and not where in the directory hierarchy they are placed. Actually, a symlink-based package manager can facilitate managing DLL hell by making more explicit where libraries come from and providing means to decide which version of the library (assuming they aren't version named) can become the default version.
True and this is what various package managers do (like Pkglink). Without the package manager approach, the next problem is keeping track of what to symlink.
Potentially, libraries are not the only thing that is shared amongst programs. Plus, the designer of a program may build a library that is intended to be shared, but no one comes and shares it -- who's fault is that?
Of course, the problems with this is that, if everyone follows this approach, then PATH variables can become HUGE! Also, there can be unintended side-effects in the ordering of the PATH variable.
Slashdot Mirror
EMACS
I wonder if this strategy could be used as a means to averting terrorism?
That is, don't just offer large amounts of money for the most important terrorists (like bin Laden), but also offer varying amounts of money for reports that stop terrorism.
Did you believe them when they said, since cable TV has subscription fees, there won't be any need to advertise during the shows...
It will probably be in the hidden sex scene...
Imagine putting one of these in your garage. If the ground traffic is at a standstill, then take to the the third dimension and rise into the air!
Imagine the SPAM... 8-)
How long would it be before your brain shuts down due to too much spam... 8-)
Back in the pre-spam days of Usenet or early bulletin boards, you could put your email address on the boards so that it could email you whenever somebody replied to your post. Now the spam is so thick that people are hiding their email address as much as possible (note all the Anonymous Cowards here). We've lost A LOT in the friendliness of the Internet in the last ten years...
They're already here. They're called ATM cameras...
You presume that the world can achieve "full" employment. I'm beginning to wonder if that is truly possible. As artificial intelligence and automation rise, the number of jobs in the low-end diminishes. It's not likely that high-end jobs will ever be plentiful to the point of providing a job for everyone in the world.
Does this address the requirement to change control pictures and other binary data?
I'd take a look at what they said, evaluate it against the knowledge I currently have, and then decide if either is worth further investigation.
And if you don't have knowledge directly (or indirectly) pertaining to the issue, how do you evaluate the statements? Appeal to authority?
And POD...
The government??
Think about it...
Clay is ignoring the value of a penny to both the retailer and the customer.
Are there any good stories left in the Trek Universe? Between the books, the movies, and the television shows, what more could they do that would be a "good story"?
Obviously you've never tried coverting word/excel/powerpoint docs to a new release of word/excel/powerpoint...
Your second point brings up the question of the dividing line. All programs are now in (at least) three layers: the GUI, the application, the database. The problem is that, as more and more power is put into the GUI or the database, the application gets squeezed down to just bare essentials. For those people that standardize on a particular GUI or database, this is a good thing. However, swap out the GUI or database and things become much more dicey.
But those are exactly the ones that should be analyzed and changed according to the environment you're working in.
This seems like an unnecessary expense. You're incurring an executable execution (openapp) to find out where the actual executable is. Other UNIX systems would cache the names of all executables in the PATH to speed up finding the one you want.
So, DLL hell is a problem with the naming of library files and not where in the directory hierarchy they are placed. Actually, a symlink-based package manager can facilitate managing DLL hell by making more explicit where libraries come from and providing means to decide which version of the library (assuming they aren't version named) can become the default version.
True and this is what various package managers do (like Pkglink). Without the package manager approach, the next problem is keeping track of what to symlink.
Explain DLL hell and how symbolic links could contribute to it...
Why do you say "arbitrary"?
Potentially, libraries are not the only thing that is shared amongst programs. Plus, the designer of a program may build a library that is intended to be shared, but no one comes and shares it -- who's fault is that?
Of course, the problems with this is that, if everyone follows this approach, then PATH variables can become HUGE! Also, there can be unintended side-effects in the ordering of the PATH variable.