I've found that image editing applications can work fine in a touch environment. It's actually better for drawing since you're inputting directly on the screen.
Don't discount that as stupid. Most of what he said is true. Evolution makes you write code that works, not good or clean code, just code that works. The only time evolution comes into lay is when the code can't even compile.
Neither is democracy any more stable. Most democracies before the US (and some after) did not last long due to the difficulties of starting one. After the US got itself established, democracies had more of a fighting chance because the US generally supports them. Communism never really had a country where it went into a stable state (the revolutions which led up to establishing them did not help) so there was no role model or guiding hand to keep them from becoming totalitarian states.
However, Democracy/Capitalism have the same problems as Communism when it comes to long term success. After a while, people in democracy realize that by voting for people, they can get more money. At this point, they do not vote based on the competence or political views (unrelated to money) of the candidate, but on how much money the candidate pledges to give to them. In a similar way, people in communist states (to each according to his needs) realize that no matter how much they work, they will still receive the same amount of money. Even in socialist states (to each according to his contribution), people realize that, much like in democracies, they can influence the amount of money they receive. Either way, the government will slowly devolve into a totalitarian state.
I am not denouncing either of these ideas, though. They are the best methods by which we have come up with for governing, and may be the best we will ever think of. The United States has done very well over its 200+ year course. Nothing can really be said about communism, since at this point it is still waiting to be actually put into practice and not be used as just a slogan. Unfortunately, the US is already showing signs of decline: the national debt is growing as politicians try to bribe voters with even more money while corporations and banks gain even more power (Oligarchy, anyone?). All this will be solved when we get some angels to govern us, but until then, this is the best we've got.
Can you honestly tell me that'd you'd guess "The nuances devour"? (past passphrase). Having substitutions in there isn't going to help you, they'll only confuse you when you try to remember what was replaced with what. This whole "password" thing is shit as well. That's a relic from the 80s when you only had enough of your previous space to store one word at most. In the modern world where space is cheap, all "passwords" should be passphrases.
Another dumb thing that I see a lot is that sites will have the obnoxious rules to increase passphrase "safety". What they're really doing is narrowing down the possible passphrases, thus/decreasing/ security, instead of increasing it. The only requirement that is actually legit, and that should be on every site, in/minimum/ passphrase length. Sadly, some sites are deluded into putting max passphrase length (Which means they're storing it as plaintext in a database like idiots). It doesn't f***ing matter how long a passphrase is. When it's hashed, a one word password will turn out the same as a 200 word passphrase, in terms of length. Any other restrictions just make it harder to remember.
For example, my school recently changed its restrictions on passwords. After I got locked out of my account, they decided to change my passphrase to the school name, because that was the easiest way they knew how to fix locked accounts (Dumb Windows). Of couse, now I can't use spaces, punctuation, or anything else to increase the strength of my password. So I didn't even bother changing it to something stronger, because I'd never remember where I put the underscores and- whoops, I forgot, I can't use punctuation now. Forcing users to go from a multi-word, secure passphrase, to a one-word password that's easily guessable, is ludicrous. The restrictions have to have an end put to them, and now is the time.
What're you guys talking about? Microsoft tries to make an OS based on tablets/smartphones. It fails miserably due to android and iOS (as it has before). It also alienates desktop users. Looking for a new, less pricy OS, people stumbe upon linux. The last time something like this happened (early 2000s), linux wasn't ready for it (Had problems with user-friendlyness, configuration, compatability with earlier systems), and we lost that crowd. Now linux has answered all of these problems (And it looks/good/ at it too). Here's when we can really surge back as Microsoft pulls off one of their biggest failures ever: Windows 8.
Also, grading is just spoiling all joy, because it's in general completely arbitrary.
Grades let you know how well you have absorbed the information. It's simply feedback.
The only thing that grades show is how good the teacher is !
Well, if you get poor grades you didn't learn, and if you were trying to learn and didn't then yes, the teacher failed.
Grades are BS. I know lots about some subjects, but I hate doing homework, and so I get bad grades in those classes. I do the best in classes that don't have lots of homework, even if they aren't my best subjects. If I had to teach myself, I'd probably pick some of the classes I was interested in the most to focus on, even though I don't do so well in them.
I'm a new linux user (6 months) and I've tried the modern versions of all the DEs. I must say that I like xfce the best, though.
I first started out with KDE. I liked how it had a familliar interface out of the box, and had tons of tools and games. I really liked crusader, as well. All this was well and good, but I discovered that it was slowly eating up my CPU cycles. The problem with KDE is that it's become bloated to the point of using up all the processing power of a computer, even on a midrange one.
GNOME I tried next. I was bewildered by an unfamilliar interface, and not being able to configure even basic aspects of the UI (Such as panel osition) without another package. Even then, I was put off by it's strange way of organizing stuff in the menu(Alphabetacally, not Fuctionally.) It was also almost as heavy on processing power as KDE.
Finally, I tried xfce. Immediately I noticed the lack of the bloat of KDE, and the intuitiveness of the interface. I like how I could right-click on the panel, and change everything around. It had easy ways to add just what I wanted, unlike in GNOME where I had to wrench it into doing what I wanted, not what the designers thought looked best. It was also lightweight, no sucking up all the cycles. It includes only 20 programs, unlike the hundreds in KDE.
I think this clearly sets xfce above everything else, except maybe lxde. Xfce includes a few features that lxde doesn't have, but lxde is almost twice as light. This makes it better for smaller systems, but xfce has a larger support base. GNOME and the Kool Desktop Environment don't have anything on xfce. Light, fast, and functional; What else could I want?
Slashdot Mirror
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_past_the_post#Wasted_votes
I've found that image editing applications can work fine in a touch environment. It's actually better for drawing since you're inputting directly on the screen.
http://tauday.com/
Did you even rtfa? It is proven that this device can work. Unless they seriously screwed all this up, they will have a net thrust, air or no.
Dosbox
Don't discount that as stupid. Most of what he said is true. Evolution makes you write code that works, not good or clean code, just code that works. The only time evolution comes into lay is when the code can't even compile.
Neither is democracy any more stable. Most democracies before the US (and some after) did not last long due to the difficulties of starting one. After the US got itself established, democracies had more of a fighting chance because the US generally supports them. Communism never really had a country where it went into a stable state (the revolutions which led up to establishing them did not help) so there was no role model or guiding hand to keep them from becoming totalitarian states.
However, Democracy/Capitalism have the same problems as Communism when it comes to long term success. After a while, people in democracy realize that by voting for people, they can get more money. At this point, they do not vote based on the competence or political views (unrelated to money) of the candidate, but on how much money the candidate pledges to give to them. In a similar way, people in communist states (to each according to his needs) realize that no matter how much they work, they will still receive the same amount of money. Even in socialist states (to each according to his contribution), people realize that, much like in democracies, they can influence the amount of money they receive. Either way, the government will slowly devolve into a totalitarian state.
I am not denouncing either of these ideas, though. They are the best methods by which we have come up with for governing, and may be the best we will ever think of. The United States has done very well over its 200+ year course. Nothing can really be said about communism, since at this point it is still waiting to be actually put into practice and not be used as just a slogan. Unfortunately, the US is already showing signs of decline: the national debt is growing as politicians try to bribe voters with even more money while corporations and banks gain even more power (Oligarchy, anyone?). All this will be solved when we get some angels to govern us, but until then, this is the best we've got.
Because that one password is completely unbreakable.
What if you are killed on the ground when the plane crashes on you?
Can you honestly tell me that'd you'd guess "The nuances devour"? (past passphrase). Having substitutions in there isn't going to help you, they'll only confuse you when you try to remember what was replaced with what. This whole "password" thing is shit as well. That's a relic from the 80s when you only had enough of your previous space to store one word at most. In the modern world where space is cheap, all "passwords" should be passphrases.
Another dumb thing that I see a lot is that sites will have the obnoxious rules to increase passphrase "safety". What they're really doing is narrowing down the possible passphrases, thus /decreasing/ security, instead of increasing it. The only requirement that is actually legit, and that should be on every site, in /minimum/ passphrase length. Sadly, some sites are deluded into putting max passphrase length (Which means they're storing it as plaintext in a database like idiots). It doesn't f***ing matter how long a passphrase is. When it's hashed, a one word password will turn out the same as a 200 word passphrase, in terms of length. Any other restrictions just make it harder to remember.
For example, my school recently changed its restrictions on passwords. After I got locked out of my account, they decided to change my passphrase to the school name, because that was the easiest way they knew how to fix locked accounts (Dumb Windows). Of couse, now I can't use spaces, punctuation, or anything else to increase the strength of my password. So I didn't even bother changing it to something stronger, because I'd never remember where I put the underscores and- whoops, I forgot, I can't use punctuation now. Forcing users to go from a multi-word, secure passphrase, to a one-word password that's easily guessable, is ludicrous. The restrictions have to have an end put to them, and now is the time.
What're you guys talking about? Microsoft tries to make an OS based on tablets/smartphones. It fails miserably due to android and iOS (as it has before). It also alienates desktop users. Looking for a new, less pricy OS, people stumbe upon linux. The last time something like this happened (early 2000s), linux wasn't ready for it (Had problems with user-friendlyness, configuration, compatability with earlier systems), and we lost that crowd. Now linux has answered all of these problems (And it looks /good/ at it too). Here's when we can really surge back as Microsoft pulls off one of their biggest failures ever: Windows 8.
I name all my computers after mechanical devices from THHGTTG. My desktop is Marvin, and my laptop is Deep Thought.
Also, grading is just spoiling all joy, because it's in general completely arbitrary.
Grades let you know how well you have absorbed the information. It's simply feedback.
The only thing that grades show is how good the teacher is !
Well, if you get poor grades you didn't learn, and if you were trying to learn and didn't then yes, the teacher failed.
Grades are BS. I know lots about some subjects, but I hate doing homework, and so I get bad grades in those classes. I do the best in classes that don't have lots of homework, even if they aren't my best subjects. If I had to teach myself, I'd probably pick some of the classes I was interested in the most to focus on, even though I don't do so well in them.
Yes. Me.
God, what the heck do they think they're doing? They lost already. Why the heck are they beating their own dead horse?
I'm a new linux user (6 months) and I've tried the modern versions of all the DEs. I must say that I like xfce the best, though.
I first started out with KDE. I liked how it had a familliar interface out of the box, and had tons of tools and games. I really liked crusader, as well. All this was well and good, but I discovered that it was slowly eating up my CPU cycles. The problem with KDE is that it's become bloated to the point of using up all the processing power of a computer, even on a midrange one.
GNOME I tried next. I was bewildered by an unfamilliar interface, and not being able to configure even basic aspects of the UI (Such as panel osition) without another package. Even then, I was put off by it's strange way of organizing stuff in the menu(Alphabetacally, not Fuctionally.) It was also almost as heavy on processing power as KDE.
Finally, I tried xfce. Immediately I noticed the lack of the bloat of KDE, and the intuitiveness of the interface. I like how I could right-click on the panel, and change everything around. It had easy ways to add just what I wanted, unlike in GNOME where I had to wrench it into doing what I wanted, not what the designers thought looked best. It was also lightweight, no sucking up all the cycles. It includes only 20 programs, unlike the hundreds in KDE.
I think this clearly sets xfce above everything else, except maybe lxde. Xfce includes a few features that lxde doesn't have, but lxde is almost twice as light. This makes it better for smaller systems, but xfce has a larger support base. GNOME and the Kool Desktop Environment don't have anything on xfce. Light, fast, and functional; What else could I want?