Because there are other relations too that matter.
Locomotion is just one dimension. Most things are optimized compromises that try to achieve many things. Adaptability, fertility, finding food, problem solving to mention few when we talk about life.
If some life forms would be altogether dependant only on locomotion, they would propably develop wheel as their best form of existense or something similar depending on enviroment. Instead 'best' is best compromise when we take account 'what else species need to survive'.
I'm inclined to think that you're good what you have to do, locomotion is important thing but hardly to such extend it would override everything. If we look life in this planet, I'd wager we can't prove that owning fastest or most efficient locomotion would make any species most able to survive. Thus maxium effiency in locomotion isn't needed ever so it doesn't exist.
Or otherwise we would be all gaselles or something much more faster in locomotion than man is. I don't think dinosaurs where awfully effience and fast either were they?
It's a great error to think what is taugh in school is enough. There aren't superp teachers for everyone of us, so achieving what is required is no way to determine competence or that enough has been learned. Also I think schools are bit too easy. I don't know whatkind of they were before(born in 70's), but what I've heard before teachers demanded lot of students. I don't live in US, but looking general population, graduated and number of degress achieved in Western world, I'd claim quality has gone down in education.
Before teachers didn't just let pupils past courses to make it easy for themselves and pupils. They made sure, some to point of absurdity, that people who got through damn well knew what they were doing. And I guess in a way kept up their authority that way too. Even if they themselves weren't really good, they demanded precision and achievements,
I'm not saying that concentration camps should be set up, not many things really need A levels in something. What I do say, is that when something is done people should either do it well, or move out to do something else. And if they don't want to do either, somebody should force them to choose. Nobody needs professional deadbeats and people who figure out in worklife they're in a wrong profession. Wrong for the persons in question and wrong for the communit and clients the community serves.
Taxes can be also avoided, just like Microsof fees can be.
And I don't see the diffrence otherwise either. Nobody has to pay taxes. Just don't do anything that involves or handles money. There is no legal obligation to have income for example. Same applies to Microsoft software fees, you don't have to use things they cover either or even computers generally.
It's invidual choice in the end. Nobody is forcing to do either, both can be avoided.
So you right essentially, altough wrong about taxes.
Point isn't just about the problems with products, but how are they supported if such exists. It tells world about user which product to rely on. Don't have the statistic here, but by the PCWorld survey Dell had big problems in that departmet right now.
Can't say what's the point with Dell concerning laptops, but just last week I listened when a person complained about his new Dell being closely to useless. Her responce was to leave it to his workplace shelf and use another computer altogether(!).
My guess is that here is a diffrence of markets. HP, IBM and Sony propably sell lot of business laptops with extended onsite guarantee. About 3 years I'd guess. While Dell sells cheaply to mostly consumers and propably with shorter onsite support.
With desktop it can be a same thing, but not sure is it a positive diffrence to Dell. Corporate users obviously need much quicker working computers than home users do. In my experience, home users tend to be quite passive to get help and give up quickly if they don't. Your survey numbers tell these diffrences are eliminated by use, but can they really be if same problem is serious to corporate user but just an annoyance to home user? How one can tell that absolutely?
I can be wrong of course, just above as about how my mind see Dell brand and it's location in market.
Take latest PCWorld magazine and look Dell consumer rating. It sucks. It's sliding down, and fast. Their hardware with laptops has never been good, but it seems now be even more worst.
In essence, Dell is a cheap big volume retailer. Maybe OK for casual home users, rest be beware IMHO.
Do we really want to give linux bad name and image it is diffucult to u se, if end users end to tinker with manufacturers hardware defects that have nothing to do with Linux?
I mean just look the real world. Two opposite things are all same time true.
Bush: combat is over, but there is still some resistance Bush: There is no WMD's but I was right anyway Salesman: even higher quality with even lower prices than before Politician: lower taxes and higher spending Employer: lower wages, shorter hours and more motivated employees who do more & better.
Why, just look, obviously quantum mechanics are already at work every day! Einstein was right, but why do we need the cat to prove it? Who let the cat in?
Becoming more cynical is in a direct relation to snabby, wise-ass replies you read that cynical Slashdot readers give to prove how seasoned and intelligent they are.
Jus think Skype. If big operators and telecoms have to say what can be done without any rescrictions, soon there will be no Voip, except what they want to offer.
After all the operators are the bridges which connect customers to other bridges that form the internet. Do we want to allow some troll to block our way and tell how and which way we can walk in the bridge?
I don't, but if nothing is done, that's where it will end. Because even operators have to make a buck, and that's the easiest way. And they have a point that when they say they've put money to infastructure that others use, unfortunately.
Battlestar Galactica was darn good with first season. After that I think much of what happens feels awfully repeative, slow and farfetched. I'm really disappointed with 2:nd season, too much petty infighting while whole humanity is dying and I got the feeling they're stalling the story. Like they would be streching the shorter story to longer one.
But I think Lost instead has been pretty intresting last few episodes, before that I got the feeling they were just talking amids woods towards the end of first Season.
My vote however goes to Rome. Not because it's best and most intresting serie, but because it's actually few that actually tries to portray each minicule detail of some place that isn't right now and here. It's not just a serie written one place, and imitated poorly in another. It feels like story that happens in a real place. The characters also quite beliavable, and not too dramatic or shallow. Actors are quite good too, better than in prementioned two in my opionion. Story is bit short however, and maybe lacks some depth.
Because components in the computer define awfully lot. Like ethernet card, memory configuration, the motherboard and the OS.
I have ADSL with 8/1 speed, and three computers that all work in diffrent speeds despite they use the same router. And I don't mean the download speed, but how fast they update the screen when the traffic comes in. The user experience. When you browse a lot, the small things start to matter and you notice when something is slower.
And YES, you do notice the half second lag. Because you see the diffrence if one switches from a faster machine to slower. And when you have once gone fast, you don't want to go back.
My linux seems always most snappiest browsing platform so far ever. Windowses are fast, but not so snappy ever. Despite whatever configuration, router, graphic adaptor or motherboard or ethernet card I use.
Well, there allkinds of IDE's and my opionions one good should suffice for all. I use Eclipse and hope it developes to be that one.
Real problem is that many IDE's are itself buggy or just not intuitive at all. And many make dramatic changes between versions. Just image you're doing J2EE application on two or three application serves, and each of them have their own IDE that it is integrated to it. Then imagine you need to do bits PHP, C++ and.NET, and each of those you need second set of editors. Soon you're owner of many editors, which each excel something other doesn't. And a guinea pig for new versions of IDE's from the software vendors or programmers.
In one project, great problem what a buggy IDE version on all team members computers, that caused allkinds of confusion that slowed us down and frustated us.
And I do agree that when learning things, use text editos first. And I do agree that I wouldn't like to do everything by hand, like writing all XML settings to some application servers Enterprise bean's description file.
But, one shouldn't be dependant of IDE, it just should help to do faster things you already know how to do, not replace the knowledge. If IDE stops working, then you know what to do, one shouldn't be dependant on IDE in any case.
I'm bit surprised that what I replied got 5 and 'insightful' and the general hostiliness towards.NET & C#.
In work I use LAMP. I keep up Linux server for a hobby, which runs Debian. I've learned to program first with C, then with C++(OO), Visual C++ and Java. Most advanced learning in school and own time I've done with Java and J2EE. This all just to show I've not tied my fortune or past what MS does..NET is in my non-scholar opinion elegant architechture. Can't see why I would write in Windows enviroment something with plain C++ for example, or would advocate it's general use over.NET. Far as I know,.NET tries to fix common problems windows programming has had. Maybe it presents something new problems that are far worst than current, but that's still to be seen. To my knowledge,.NET doesn't take account what abstraction level is used(programming language) but it is possible(atleast in theory) to do it with Perl too.
Sure, I still wouldn't do my enterprise level software with.NET and/or C#. Neither would I'd like to use MS server software to use.NET. BUT,.NET is an intresting idea and shouldn't be overlooked so much just because it's Microsoft that is pushing it.
I also feel personally that C# is more intuitive to program than with Java. Java has lot of good points, but it is clumsy. In a way that's both strength and weakness of Java. Good when learning it, but becames a drag for us more advanced.
I have to agree with many other in this thread, The idea that mySQL is not 'good enough' can be true in some cases, but it doesn't mean it's enough good for many of us. Sounds like an elitism to me, or atleast somewhat shortsighted view.
I've never been a MySQL fan, but I do use it at work where I develop and keep up a website. It doesn't cost anything directly to us(our webhost keeps it up), and it is far more than aduquote to most things one can come up with.
Maybe it's not a F1 car or latest Audi, but even if it is rusty old VM the cost/use ration is excellent if one just needs to move from point A to point B. Maybe it doesn't accelarate from 0-100 mph quickly enough, or maybe it doesn't have the latest GPS navigation system. But most of don't need them either. Not all business needs need the ultra hyper new database that can do EVERYTHING. Most of real life needs are just fetching the information and getting it to the webpage.
Infact I'd argue MySQL has more features that most people ever really need from a database. Outruling a case where one would become a de facto database expert.
If we take away spam and lot of phisphing attemps, what does it leave. 100 billion maybe? Where does the rest come from?
Are these numbers calculated by the idea that any crime that has something to do with computer and network is a cybercrime? So if I happen to be a columbian drug lord using excel, I guess my heinous activies are cybercrime too?
If so small wonder cybercrime is taking over drug related crime.....
Not sure which pages the person in the article has surfed. But somehow I suspect average page isn't The Economist, New York Times or Slashdot.
I don't doubt that getting spyware, viruses and malware wouldn't be easy, still to get computer full of them, suggests that person in question either was a Warez King or had a special needs that made the left hand mouse essential.....
I've avoided anti-virus programs far as I can recall. I use them, but I don't like to run them in real time or pay too much for them.
Basic problem with them is that they're just more complex code above already complex code, that tries to fix the problems that is mainly caused by that complexity in the first place.
Result is much slower computer that the anti-virus software inadvertly affects like a viruses would. Stopping programms, and causing something not work correctly.
All virus programs are basically parasites, anti-virus programs are just bigger parasites far as I'm concerned. They have their place, but they should be simple, free and not be the answer for security. When they are not, they're themselves a risk.
laws should passed to protect not only what information can be stored but by also how. And that outsourcing adds complexity and more weak points that can fail.
A stupid question:
how anyone can possibly get so much information by hacking somewhere?
Being semi-pro it person, i'd think downloading so much information at once would easy to spot and made impossible too(and who needs at once so much info anyway?) Or did they get so much information by getting it all one by one?
Somehow I think the distribution system or earning logic should change. Not sure how many people actually watch Enterprise world wide, but I'm pretty sure they exist in great numbers thanks to Internet.
It's bit funny that nowdays there are tv-series that span the globe without even advertising them, but companies don't know how or don't want to make money out it.
Just count was it costs to advertise world wide movies, all the effort etc. and compare how easily popular tv series find regular followers without a such efforst.
Risks are low, audience finds it's hits it's own, distribution is not the problem either, so why people don't make money out of it?
Much as I liked Enterprise, the whole point the serie is that they're underdogs and so it's whole Earth. It's all about unraveling the past and bumping problems from places A to B.
All right so was the original Trek too in some respect, diffrence being that Enterprise was sold and made to look like they were bit more human and less grandious with a purpose in mind.
They don't have Spock like person, Date or Weshley Crusher who can last minute solve galactic problems. Nor do they excel in anything except not having known lot of things which makes them more open to new solutions. A drastic diffrence to TOS and NG.
I can see why I'd look the movie, but I'd find it hard to explain why Enterprise would make a movie that could be marketed to non-Trekkers. Movies need somethig bigger than life and whole point of Enterprise they're just learning how to get there.
That's great. Not only do they stop to fourth season they also wrap two episodes and sell them as one. Two at price of one, really shows what's it's all about.
Not following the previous debate concerning the end of series, why it was ended at fourth season?
By Andromeda http://www.andromedatv.com/about/behind_billhamm01.html
they claimed that normal span of was five-sex years with the networks.
Do we also get four seasons instead of five?
Slashdot Mirror
True, but would it be impossible to develop a construct that could adjust to uneven surface?
There are cars that can move faster in a rocky enviroment with wheels, even faster than some animals can.
Because there are other relations too that matter.
Locomotion is just one dimension. Most things are optimized compromises that try to achieve many things. Adaptability, fertility, finding food, problem solving to mention few when we talk about life.
If some life forms would be altogether dependant only on locomotion, they would propably develop wheel as their best form of existense or something similar depending on enviroment. Instead 'best' is best compromise when we take account 'what else species need to survive'.
I'm inclined to think that you're good what you have to do, locomotion is important thing but hardly to such extend it would override everything. If we look life in this planet, I'd wager we can't prove that owning fastest or most efficient locomotion would make any species most able to survive. Thus maxium effiency in locomotion isn't needed ever so it doesn't exist.
Or otherwise we would be all gaselles or something much more faster in locomotion than man is. I don't think dinosaurs where awfully effience and fast either were they?
It's a great error to think what is taugh in school is enough. There aren't superp teachers for everyone of us, so achieving what is required is no way to determine competence or that enough has been learned.
Also I think schools are bit too easy. I don't know whatkind of they were before(born in 70's), but what I've heard before teachers demanded lot of students. I don't live in US, but looking general population, graduated and number of degress achieved in Western world, I'd claim quality has gone down in education.
Before teachers didn't just let pupils past courses to make it easy for themselves and pupils. They made sure, some to point of absurdity, that people who got through damn well knew what they were doing. And I guess in a way kept up their authority that way too. Even if they themselves weren't really good, they demanded precision and achievements,
I'm not saying that concentration camps should be set up, not many things really need A levels in something. What I do say, is that when something is done people should either do it well, or move out to do something else. And if they don't want to do either, somebody should force them to choose. Nobody needs professional deadbeats and people who figure out in worklife they're in a wrong profession. Wrong for the persons in question and wrong for the communit and clients the community serves.
It's also waste of money and time.
Taxes can be also avoided, just like Microsof fees can be.
And I don't see the diffrence otherwise either. Nobody has to pay taxes.
Just don't do anything that involves or handles money. There is no legal obligation to have income for example. Same applies to Microsoft software fees, you don't have to use things they cover either or even computers generally.
It's invidual choice in the end. Nobody is forcing to do either, both can be avoided.
So you right essentially, altough wrong about taxes.
Point isn't just about the problems with products, but how are they supported if such exists. It tells world about user which product to rely on. Don't have the statistic here, but by the PCWorld survey Dell had big problems in that departmet right now.
Can't say what's the point with Dell concerning laptops, but just last week I listened when a person complained about his new Dell being closely to useless. Her responce was to leave it to his workplace shelf and use another computer altogether(!).
My guess is that here is a diffrence of markets. HP, IBM and Sony propably sell lot of business laptops with extended onsite guarantee. About 3 years I'd guess. While Dell sells cheaply to mostly consumers and propably with shorter onsite support.
With desktop it can be a same thing, but not sure is it a positive diffrence to Dell. Corporate users obviously need much quicker working computers than home users do. In my experience, home users tend to be quite passive to get help and give up quickly if they don't. Your survey numbers tell these diffrences are eliminated by use, but can they really be if same problem is serious to corporate user but just an annoyance to home user? How one can tell that absolutely?
I can be wrong of course, just above as about how my mind see Dell brand and it's location in market.
Take latest PCWorld magazine and look Dell consumer rating. It sucks. It's sliding down, and fast.
Their hardware with laptops has never been good, but it seems now be even more worst.
In essence, Dell is a cheap big volume retailer. Maybe OK for casual home users, rest be beware IMHO.
Do we really want to give linux bad name and image it is diffucult to u se, if end users end to tinker with manufacturers hardware defects that have nothing to do with Linux?
I mean just look the real world. Two opposite things are all same time true.
Bush: combat is over, but there is still some resistance
Bush: There is no WMD's but I was right anyway
Salesman: even higher quality with even lower prices than before
Politician: lower taxes and higher spending
Employer: lower wages, shorter hours and more motivated employees who do more & better.
Why, just look, obviously quantum mechanics are already at work every day!
Einstein was right, but why do we need the cat to prove it? Who let the cat in?
I doubt it.
Becoming more cynical is in a direct relation to snabby, wise-ass replies you read that cynical Slashdot readers give to prove how seasoned and intelligent they are.
Like this one.
Jus think Skype. If big operators and telecoms have to say what can be done without any rescrictions, soon there will be no Voip, except what they want to offer.
After all the operators are the bridges which connect customers to other bridges that form the internet.
Do we want to allow some troll to block our way and tell how and which way we can walk in the bridge?
I don't, but if nothing is done, that's where it will end. Because even operators have to make a buck, and that's the easiest way. And they have a point that when they say they've put money to infastructure that others use, unfortunately.
Battlestar Galactica was darn good with first season. After that I think much of what happens feels awfully repeative, slow and farfetched. I'm really disappointed with 2:nd season, too much petty infighting while whole humanity is dying and I got the feeling they're stalling the story. Like they would be streching the shorter story to longer one.
But I think Lost instead has been pretty intresting last few episodes, before that I got the feeling they were just talking amids woods towards the end of first Season.
My vote however goes to Rome. Not because it's best and most intresting serie, but because it's actually few that actually tries to portray each minicule detail of some place that isn't right now and here. It's not just a serie written one place, and imitated poorly in another. It feels like story that happens in a real place. The characters also quite beliavable, and not too dramatic or shallow. Actors are quite good too, better than in prementioned two in my opionion. Story is bit short however, and maybe lacks some depth.
Rome is more portray than a play in my opionion.
Because components in the computer define awfully lot. Like ethernet card, memory configuration, the motherboard and the OS.
I have ADSL with 8/1 speed, and three computers that all work in diffrent speeds despite they use the same router.
And I don't mean the download speed, but how fast they update the screen when the traffic comes in.
The user experience. When you browse a lot, the small things start to matter and you notice when something is slower.
And YES, you do notice the half second lag. Because you see the diffrence if one switches from a faster machine to slower. And when you have once gone fast, you don't want to go back.
My linux seems always most snappiest browsing platform so far ever. Windowses are fast, but not so snappy ever. Despite whatever configuration, router, graphic adaptor or motherboard or ethernet card I use.
Higher than running with ISS?
What, is it Christmas already?!
I was just yesterday surfing!
Gosh, I guess installing linux really takes some time...;-)
Well, there allkinds of IDE's and my opionions one good should suffice for all. I use Eclipse and hope it developes to be that one.
.NET, and each of those you need second set of editors. Soon you're owner of many editors, which each excel something other doesn't. And a guinea pig for new versions of IDE's from the software vendors or programmers.
Real problem is that many IDE's are itself buggy or just not intuitive at all. And many make dramatic changes between versions.
Just image you're doing J2EE application on two or three application serves, and each of them have their own IDE that it is integrated to it. Then imagine you need to do bits PHP, C++ and
In one project, great problem what a buggy IDE version on all team members computers, that caused allkinds of confusion that slowed us down and frustated us.
And I do agree that when learning things, use text editos first.
And I do agree that I wouldn't like to do everything by hand, like writing all XML settings to some application servers Enterprise bean's description file.
But, one shouldn't be dependant of IDE, it just should help to do faster things you already know how to do, not replace the knowledge. If IDE stops working, then you know what to do, one shouldn't be dependant on IDE in any case.
Here is my 5 cents.
.NET & C#.
.NET is in my non-scholar opinion elegant architechture. Can't see why I would write in Windows enviroment something with plain C++ for example, or would advocate it's general use over .NET. Far as I know, .NET tries to fix common problems windows programming has had. Maybe it presents something new problems that are far worst than current, but that's still to be seen. To my knowledge, .NET doesn't take account what abstraction level is used(programming language) but it is possible(atleast in theory) to do it with Perl too.
.NET and/or C#. Neither would I'd like to use MS server software to use .NET. BUT, .NET is an intresting idea and shouldn't be overlooked so much just because it's Microsoft that is pushing it.
I'm bit surprised that what I replied got 5 and 'insightful' and the general hostiliness towards
In work I use LAMP. I keep up Linux server for a hobby, which runs Debian. I've learned to program first with C, then with C++(OO), Visual C++ and Java. Most advanced learning in school and own time I've done with Java and J2EE. This all just to show I've not tied my fortune or past what MS does.
Sure, I still wouldn't do my enterprise level software with
I also feel personally that C# is more intuitive to program than with Java. Java has lot of good points, but it is clumsy. In a way that's both strength and weakness of Java. Good when learning it, but becames a drag for us more advanced.
I have to agree with many other in this thread, The idea that mySQL is not 'good enough' can be true in some cases, but it doesn't mean it's enough good for many of us. Sounds like an elitism to me, or atleast somewhat shortsighted view.
I've never been a MySQL fan, but I do use it at work where I develop and keep up a website. It doesn't cost anything directly to us(our webhost keeps it up), and it is far more than aduquote to most things one can come up with.
Maybe it's not a F1 car or latest Audi, but even if it is rusty old VM the cost/use ration is excellent if one just needs to move from point A to point B. Maybe it doesn't accelarate from 0-100 mph quickly enough, or maybe it doesn't have the latest GPS navigation system. But most of don't need them either. Not all business needs need the ultra hyper new database that can do EVERYTHING. Most of real life needs are just fetching the information and getting it to the webpage.
Infact I'd argue MySQL has more features that most people ever really need from a database. Outruling a case where one would become a de facto database expert.
I mean 105 billion US dollars from cybercrime?
If we take away spam and lot of phisphing attemps, what does it leave. 100 billion maybe?
Where does the rest come from?
Are these numbers calculated by the idea that any crime that has something to do with computer and network is a cybercrime? So if I happen to be a columbian drug lord using excel, I guess my heinous activies are cybercrime too?
If so small wonder cybercrime is taking over drug related crime.....
Not sure which pages the person in the article has surfed. But somehow I suspect average page isn't The Economist, New York Times or Slashdot.
I don't doubt that getting spyware, viruses and malware wouldn't be easy, still to get computer full of them, suggests that person in question either was a Warez King or had a special needs that made the left hand mouse essential.....
I've avoided anti-virus programs far as I can recall. I use them, but I don't like to run them in real time or pay too much for them.
Basic problem with them is that they're just more complex code above already complex code, that tries to fix the problems that is mainly caused by that complexity in the first place.
Result is much slower computer that the anti-virus software inadvertly affects like a viruses would.
Stopping programms, and causing something not work correctly.
All virus programs are basically parasites, anti-virus programs are just bigger parasites far as I'm concerned.
They have their place, but they should be simple, free and not be the answer for security. When they are not, they're themselves a risk.
I looked more closey now the links given, and by CNN link it was a script in a database that seeked certain kind of information.
What it doesn't state is that how that information was then relayed forward.
laws should passed to protect not only what information can be stored but by also how.
And that outsourcing adds complexity and more weak points that can fail.
A stupid question:
how anyone can possibly get so much information by hacking somewhere?
Being semi-pro it person, i'd think downloading so much information at once would easy to spot and made impossible too(and who needs at once so much info anyway?)
Or did they get so much information by getting it all one by one?
Damn! Now I must rip my doctoral thesis of how farting Martians have caused the methane.
Same here.
Somehow I think the distribution system or earning logic should change. Not sure how many people actually watch Enterprise world wide, but I'm pretty sure they exist in great numbers thanks to Internet.
It's bit funny that nowdays there are tv-series that span the globe without even advertising them, but companies don't know how or don't want to make money out it.
Just count was it costs to advertise world wide movies, all the effort etc. and compare how easily popular tv series find regular followers without a such efforst.
Risks are low, audience finds it's hits it's own, distribution is not the problem either, so why
people don't make money out of it?
Somehow I can't see them at silver screen.
Much as I liked Enterprise, the whole point the serie is that they're underdogs and so it's whole Earth. It's all about unraveling the past and bumping problems from places A to B.
All right so was the original Trek too in some respect, diffrence being that Enterprise was sold and made to look like they were bit more human and less grandious with a purpose in mind.
They don't have Spock like person, Date or Weshley Crusher who can last minute solve galactic problems. Nor do they excel in anything except not having known lot of things which makes them more open to new solutions. A drastic diffrence to TOS and NG.
I can see why I'd look the movie, but I'd find it hard to explain why Enterprise would make a movie that could be marketed to non-Trekkers.
Movies need somethig bigger than life and whole point of Enterprise they're just learning how to get there.
That's great. Not only do they stop to fourth season they also wrap two episodes and sell them as one. Two at price of one, really shows what's it's all about. Not following the previous debate concerning the end of series, why it was ended at fourth season? By Andromeda http://www.andromedatv.com/about/behind_billhamm01 .html
they claimed that normal span of was five-sex years with the networks.
Do we also get four seasons instead of five?