It's not just awful in the classic reactionary way of "they changed what I"m used to", it's measurably worse.
1) It takes a greater number of clicks to get to where your going.
2) Finding certain things in the hierarchy is often more difficulty because of the alphabetic arrangement. (Finded rec.* in a pulldown of "p..s")
3) Default displays of groups and threads now have less information. You can get the "full content" displays similar to the old interface, but it costs additional clicks.
Some of the change log entries mention SVG. Does that mean that SVG support is going to be built-in or will we still be required to use a plug-in?
Re:Object instantiation is cheap!
on
How Tomcat Works
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Indeed. There are relatively few things that are expensive to instantiate, such as threads and databases connections. This isn't new, either, generational collection has been around since 1.3.
Another case of premature optimization hurting (in added complexity and potential bugs) more than it helps?
Re:The RIAA could make a lot of money here....
on
The Music Man
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Actually, this illustrates why the RIAA statistics about how much money they're losing is wrong.
I suspect a lot of people do this: Download because they can. They're pack rats and they're in it for the thrill of the hunt. There's no way they actually listent to all the music, and no way they'd ever buy the equivalent to everything they've downloaded.
So the 1 download = $1 lost revenue is completely bogus. But we knew that.
"It would be one thing if a startup's beta had sputtered. Not too many folks would have noticed. But this is Microsoft, earth's largest software company. And it trumpeted this test launch with a public-relations campaign to ensure that users around the world knew the service was ready for widespread use. So when MSN Search went down, a bit of Microsoft's credibility in the search-engine business went with it."
That may be overstating the case, but it does show that some people at least, aren't going to buy-in just because it's Microsoft.
Yes, and don't think Google wouldn't notice. My company had a summer intern that once wrote a program that started sucking a lot of information out of Google. They blocked our entire site for about three days until everything got straightened out.
The point is that if you are looking for proof that Google is bad at indexing relatively recent photos, you would pick an event that would illustrate this.
The recently elected senator of Illinois, Barak Obama, was a big hit at the Democratic National Convention. You would, therefore, expect to find pictures of him. As I pointed out, you can at other search engines, but not at Google.
It is, therefore, reasonable to believe that the same is true of the Abu Ghraib photos. Just a little appllication of the scientific method.
Yes, but that has an explanation, too. News images rotate in on a temporary basis from the "News" secton. You can find images from "Bush wins election 2004" as well (though not "Kerry concedes", but they may well disappear by December.
Sorry, conspiricy theorists. There's a simpler answer, and that's that Google isn't the right tool for the job. Use Yahoo or Picsearch.
To verify this, try the following search "Obama convention". You'll get hits on Yahoo and Picsearch, but not Google. Goolge image search simply isn't timely. Their image index cycle appears to be about six months, and the Abu Ghraib pictures in (I think) around June.
If Google were truly censoring, they'd censor the text search too, and you can easily find the pictures using the text search.
I saw the teaser for "The Incredibles" a long, long time ago, and laughed my ass off. It's not much to go on, granted, but based on that trailer, "Cars" will be Pixar's first dud.
Have you? According to researchers, the "crack baby" is a myth. Which isn't to say crack is not harmful, but the effects of having addicts for parents might be far worse than in utereo exposure itself.
This isn't just some plant god gave us to smoke.
No, it was meant to be chewed. This use of the coca leaf was practised for hundreds of years without the nasty side effects we see with crack.
It flat out kills people and ruins whole country's.
While it certainly has killed people (as has alcohol and other drugs), the ruin of countries tends to come not from the use of the plant, but by the war between the people growing and those who want to stop it. Some of the latter have motives just as dubious as those making money from the drugs.
First of all, this "study" was done with full knowledge of the outcome of the election.
Irrelelvant, as it applies to all elections that are close.
Second, this doesn't show any problem specific to electronic voting.
True, the same mechanisms could be used, however, the likelihood is higher with computer voting because the processes are often hidden even to those running the balloting, and a single manufacturer may supply an entire state (or states).
Finally - see that horse? It's dead. You can stop beating it. Electronic voting has happened, is happening, and will happen.
Not the point. No one suggested that we turn back the clock. The point is to show how seemingly trivial effects can have consequences.
If you told someone that in an election of several million voters, having a set of voting machines off by only a single vote would affect the results, they probably wouldn't believe you. This analysis shows otherwise.
As another poster mentioned, this would be great in a Mozilla/Firefox plug. Of the two above, SPAW requires IE/Windows, which kind of rules it out, but HTML Area looks pretty intriguing.
Hmmm. Seems to be the day for supernova news. This report says Germain scientists are investigating the possibility that a (relatively) nearby supernova affected earth's climate in a way favorable to human evolution.
While replacing Notes with a standards-based environment is a step in the right direction, mark up in Wikiland really sucks.
IMHO, the way to go is to combine the writableness of wikis with a reasonable WYSIWYG editor. The "do I use three brackets here or only two" issues with wikis are just too annoying.
Nit. A company does not make money when its share price goes up. Only the people selling the shares.
Of course,it's possible they have unsold shares lying about that they could sell, but they'd make money on that regardless of the change in price. It's just a question of how much.
They are, of course, flush with cash from their IPO.
Not saying that Microsoft is good, only that they opened the world of cheep [sic] computing to the general public.
This is, of course, complete nonsense. There were dozens of computer companies competing in the 8-bit market (C/PM) and that competition pushed prices down. MS took off when the IBM PC came on the scene, and IBM could just have easily chosen CP/M-86 (or even the UCSD P-System) as the default operating system.
Plus the killer app for PCs was VisiCalc (the first spreadsheet), which first appeared on the Apple II.
You're correct, if someone comes in unconscious, unknown, they scan would provide immediate data.
However, people who have chronic conditions (diabetes, epilepsy, etc.) often wear medical alert bracelets already, these could be adapted to the RFID system.
As far as emergency rooms go, I think that in most cases, their primary concern is to treat the urgent need, once the patient is stable, they can be indentified and put into the system through normal channels. It's only a few cases where important information would be lost, and, as noted above, there are techniques that an individual could use.
And putting an RFID tag in the bracelet is the right thing to do. You get all the advantages of the RFID and the patient can remove it when they go home.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not just awful in the classic reactionary way of "they changed what I"m used to", it's measurably worse.
1) It takes a greater number of clicks to get to where your going.
2) Finding certain things in the hierarchy is often more difficulty because of the alphabetic arrangement. (Finded rec.* in a pulldown of "p..s")
3) Default displays of groups and threads now have less information. You can get the "full content" displays similar to the old interface, but it costs additional clicks.
4) Feature are lost (search by date).
Some of the change log entries mention SVG. Does that mean that SVG support is going to be built-in or will we still be required to use a plug-in?
Indeed. There are relatively few things that are expensive to instantiate, such as threads and databases connections. This isn't new, either, generational collection has been around since 1.3.
Another case of premature optimization hurting (in added complexity and potential bugs) more than it helps?
Actually, this illustrates why the RIAA statistics about how much money they're losing is wrong.
I suspect a lot of people do this: Download because they can. They're pack rats and they're in it for the thrill of the hunt. There's no way they actually listent to all the music, and no way they'd ever buy the equivalent to everything they've downloaded.
So the 1 download = $1 lost revenue is completely bogus. But we knew that.
It may be beta, but as Business Week noted when they slammed it:
"It would be one thing if a startup's beta had sputtered. Not too many folks would have noticed. But this is Microsoft, earth's largest software company. And it trumpeted this test launch with a public-relations campaign to ensure that users around the world knew the service was ready for widespread use. So when MSN Search went down, a bit of Microsoft's credibility in the search-engine business went with it."
That may be overstating the case, but it does show that some people at least, aren't going to buy-in just because it's Microsoft.
Yes, and don't think Google wouldn't notice. My company had a summer intern that once wrote a program that started sucking a lot of information out of Google. They blocked our entire site for about three days until everything got straightened out.
5 of the 10 top machines use the Power archtecture, either the Power4 or PPC family.
...was that the scene in the teaser trailer, of Mr. I attempting to buckle his belt, is not in the film.
Other than that, a pretty good movie, though perhaps not in the same league as Toy Story and A Bug's Life.
The point is that if you are looking for proof that Google is bad at indexing relatively recent photos, you would pick an event that would illustrate this.
The recently elected senator of Illinois, Barak Obama, was a big hit at the Democratic National Convention. You would, therefore, expect to find pictures of him. As I pointed out, you can at other search engines, but not at Google.
It is, therefore, reasonable to believe that the same is true of the Abu Ghraib photos. Just a little appllication of the scientific method.
Did you actually look at the images or just notice that images were returned?
A search on google.co.uk does not return any of the torture photos.
Yes, but that has an explanation, too. News images rotate in on a temporary basis from the "News" secton. You can find images from "Bush wins election 2004" as well (though not "Kerry concedes", but they may well disappear by December.
Uh, you were supposed to do an image search. It returns about 71.8K fewer links.
Sorry, conspiricy theorists. There's a simpler answer, and that's that Google isn't the right tool for the job. Use Yahoo or Picsearch.
To verify this, try the following search "Obama convention". You'll get hits on Yahoo and Picsearch, but not Google. Goolge image search simply isn't timely. Their image index cycle appears to be about six months, and the Abu Ghraib pictures in (I think) around June.
If Google were truly censoring, they'd censor the text search too, and you can easily find the pictures using the text search.
I saw the teaser for "The Incredibles" a long, long time ago, and laughed my ass off. It's not much to go on, granted, but based on that trailer, "Cars" will be Pixar's first dud.
Have you ever seen a crack baby?
Have you? According to researchers, the "crack baby" is a myth. Which isn't to say crack is not harmful, but the effects of having addicts for parents might be far worse than in utereo exposure itself.
This isn't just some plant god gave us to smoke.
No, it was meant to be chewed. This use of the coca leaf was practised for hundreds of years without the nasty side effects we see with crack.
It flat out kills people and ruins whole country's.
While it certainly has killed people (as has alcohol and other drugs), the ruin of countries tends to come not from the use of the plant, but by the war between the people growing and those who want to stop it. Some of the latter have motives just as dubious as those making money from the drugs.
First of all, this "study" was done with full knowledge of the outcome of the election.
Irrelelvant, as it applies to all elections that are close.
Second, this doesn't show any problem specific to electronic voting.
True, the same mechanisms could be used, however, the likelihood is higher with computer voting because the processes are often hidden even to those running the balloting, and a single manufacturer may supply an entire state (or states).
Finally - see that horse? It's dead. You can stop beating it. Electronic voting has happened, is happening, and will happen.
Not the point. No one suggested that we turn back the clock. The point is to show how seemingly trivial effects can have consequences.
If you told someone that in an election of several million voters, having a set of voting machines off by only a single vote would affect the results, they probably wouldn't believe you. This analysis shows otherwise.
As another poster mentioned, this would be great in a Mozilla/Firefox plug. Of the two above, SPAW requires IE/Windows, which kind of rules it out, but HTML Area looks pretty intriguing.
Hmmm. Seems to be the day for supernova news. This report says Germain scientists are investigating the possibility that a (relatively) nearby supernova affected earth's climate in a way favorable to human evolution.
While replacing Notes with a standards-based environment is a step in the right direction, mark up in Wikiland really sucks.
IMHO, the way to go is to combine the writableness of wikis with a reasonable WYSIWYG editor. The "do I use three brackets here or only two" issues with wikis are just too annoying.
Nit. A company does not make money when its share price goes up. Only the people selling the shares.
Of course,it's possible they have unsold shares lying about that they could sell, but they'd make money on that regardless of the change in price. It's just a question of how much.
They are, of course, flush with cash from their IPO.
Not saying that Microsoft is good, only that they opened the world of cheep [sic] computing to the general public.
This is, of course, complete nonsense. There were dozens of computer companies competing in the 8-bit market (C/PM) and that competition pushed prices down. MS took off when the IBM PC came on the scene, and IBM could just have easily chosen CP/M-86 (or even the UCSD P-System) as the default operating system.
Plus the killer app for PCs was VisiCalc (the first spreadsheet), which first appeared on the Apple II.
Nearly 200 responses and nobody has asked if it runs Linux.
Over my dead body....oh, wait.
You're correct, if someone comes in unconscious, unknown, they scan would provide immediate data.
However, people who have chronic conditions (diabetes, epilepsy, etc.) often wear medical alert bracelets already, these could be adapted to the RFID system.
As far as emergency rooms go, I think that in most cases, their primary concern is to treat the urgent need, once the patient is stable, they can be indentified and put into the system through normal channels. It's only a few cases where important information would be lost, and, as noted above, there are techniques that an individual could use.
And putting an RFID tag in the bracelet is the right thing to do. You get all the advantages of the RFID and the patient can remove it when they go home.
No freakin implants required.