By inferring that Linux in any form or shape might be not worthy of "online banking", I think this has hurt Linux an immense amount.
He probably just now blocked tens of thousands of people of trying *Canonical*, because the article reads "*Linux* is not good to do online banking with".
Smooth.
I wonder if he can do anything to repair the damage.:(
Most likely they put on new wheels for this test drive, and didn't bother to recalibrate the tyre pressure sensor (or the new wheels didn't have sensors). I get that warning light every time I switch between summer and winter wheels...
That, I think, is more on the point. "Is this a good course for medical doctors?"
As far as I'm concerned, I'd more like doctors who can keep up and keep up to date with today's medicine rather than someone who learned a lot 40 years ago.
That would probably require some other course than specialized chemistry. But then again, maybe not?
I don't really know what cars (and roads) you're talking about, but most Europeean cars are perfectly fine at Autobahn speeds, 180km/h... (Legal.)
Even the old Opel Astra 1.4 liter diesel was fine at 170km/h, even if it took a while to get there.
The Mercedes he used would be very, very fine at much, much higher speeds than that. It's *built* to overtake anything on the Autobahn. It's basically the idea of that model... (Mind, last time I were anywhere near the Mercedes plant in Stuttgart, that Autobahn was jammed most of the time, so I presume they do their testing somewhere else.)
Sometimes I think that only one website in the world is generating and captchas, and everyone else is just re-serving the same captchas to each other until some user solves it.
If the city really still uses incandescent light bulbs - someone confirm? - then indeed savings are ahead. Most of the rest of the world switched to high-pressure sodium years ago.
If the city already switched to sodium, it's hard to see that it's an improvement:
Wikipedia suffers from the same thing that happens to most huge - number of participants - open source projects.
After a while, the number of editors and people-who-know-best gets sufficiently large.
At this point, there is more editing and deleting of the material than creation of new material. The quality improves.
But the editing and deletion of material makes it a very high risk to contribute to the project. If you spend a lot of hours creating material to the project, and it gets deleted, you have wasted your time, and the level of criticism to your creativity is high.
At that point, the creative people that actually adds to the material of the projects starts leaving and doing something more rewarding. The editors stay.
The question here is: Why would anyone try to add anything to Wikipedia, when the risk of getting edited away or get your creation deleted is so high, and there's better projects you can spend your time and energy on?
In a paid project, at least someone will pay you for your work even if it gets deleted. Your motivation will drop, but at least the investment in time and energy wasn't purely your own.
I think all open source projects that grows to this scale needs to consider why people still contribute new materials, motivate them, and how to limit the amount of destruction of creativity done by editors in the name of quality.
The hardest part of a programmers job is working with people that 1) don't understand programming but 2) forces the programmers to work a certain way that doesn't fit the mindset or workflow of programmers and/or programming
with 1b) think they understand programming as a worst case.
Last time I checked out "economy extra" for the flight(s) I needed it was $3000 instead of $1500. Yay. $115 or 10% more would be totally acceptable, but not 100% for 2 more inches...
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone versus Linux. That's the ammunition he gave out for everyone outside the Linux world.
I run Ubuntu (actually I was trying Mint now, what's the difference again?) because I need support for half a year old hardware.
It's working so-so anyway, but Debian or Crunchbang just wasn't there at all.
By inferring that Linux in any form or shape might be not worthy of "online banking",
I think this has hurt Linux an immense amount.
He probably just now blocked tens of thousands of people of trying *Canonical*,
because the article reads "*Linux* is not good to do online banking with".
Smooth.
I wonder if he can do anything to repair the damage. :(
It passes the Bechdel test.
Isn't that what embassies are _for_?
Probably he just ran into a truck overtaking a truck, or roadworks.
You get those every few kilometers on the Autobahn.
Most likely they put on new wheels for this test drive, and didn't bother to recalibrate the tyre pressure sensor (or the new wheels didn't have sensors). I get that warning light every time I switch between summer and winter wheels...
Turns out best _user_ practice is not to get a product that forces you to register an email/password tupel...?
I'm sure Adobe then is more interested in getting customers.
But then again, maybe not.
Oh, I see. And the Li-fi is maybe too bright for malware, that needs to stay in the shadows? :)
I thought the trend these days was to build a computer network using the built-in speakers and microphones, outside of the human hearing range. ;)
Also, that looks indeed like specialized hardware?
That, I think, is more on the point. "Is this a good course for medical doctors?"
As far as I'm concerned, I'd more like doctors who can keep up and keep up to date with today's medicine rather than someone who learned a lot 40 years ago.
That would probably require some other course than specialized chemistry. But then again, maybe not?
I don't really know what cars (and roads) you're talking about, but most Europeean cars are perfectly fine at Autobahn speeds, 180km/h... (Legal.)
Even the old Opel Astra 1.4 liter diesel was fine at 170km/h, even if it took a while to get there.
The Mercedes he used would be very, very fine at much, much higher speeds than that. It's *built* to overtake anything on the Autobahn. It's basically the idea of that model... (Mind, last time I were anywhere near the Mercedes plant in Stuttgart, that Autobahn was jammed most of the time, so I presume they do their testing somewhere else.)
It sounds like a plan to clone geniuses in a plot to take over the world!
I'm afraid you think too highly of the average user.
Then again, if you are running say a forum, you might want to do this kind of tests on the users. ;)
Sometimes I think that only one website in the world is generating and captchas, and everyone else is just re-serving the same captchas to each other until some user solves it.
If the city really still uses incandescent light bulbs - someone confirm? - then indeed savings are ahead. Most of the rest of the world switched to high-pressure sodium years ago.
If the city already switched to sodium, it's hard to see that it's an improvement:
low-pressure sodium: up to 183 lm/W [http://www.sla.net.au/sites/default/files/SLP.Pdf ]
high-pressure sodium vapour lamp: 93 lm/W [http://www.unep.org/climatechange/mitigation/sean-cc/Portals/141/doc_resources/TrainingEEtechnologies/EE%20Lighting_Asthana.pdf]
LED: 100-120 lm/W according to manufacturers
or worse: 50 lm/W
[http://www.ledlightingexplained.com/led-lighting-myths/]
Is there a solution to this?
Can you just kick out all the admins, and start over somehow?
Can you replace the admins with a small group of professionals?
Can you automatically remove editing rights to editors that mainly revert articles without discussion? Would it help?
Wikipedia suffers from the same thing that happens to most huge - number of participants - open source projects.
After a while, the number of editors and people-who-know-best gets sufficiently large.
At this point, there is more editing and deleting of the material than creation of new material. The quality improves.
But the editing and deletion of material makes it a very high risk to contribute to the project. If you spend a lot of hours creating material to the project, and it gets deleted, you have wasted your time, and the level of criticism to your creativity is high.
At that point, the creative people that actually adds to the material of the projects starts leaving and doing something more rewarding. The editors stay.
The question here is: Why would anyone try to add anything to Wikipedia, when the risk of getting edited away or get your creation deleted is so high, and there's better projects you can spend your time and energy on?
In a paid project, at least someone will pay you for your work even if it gets deleted. Your motivation will drop, but at least the investment in time and energy wasn't purely your own.
I think all open source projects that grows to this scale needs to consider why people still contribute new materials, motivate them, and how to limit the amount of destruction of creativity done by editors in the name of quality.
If it's a problem for some users that it's not on per default, why not just add a plugin with a whitelist? It can't be that hard.
Noscript et al already does the reverse.
Doesn't all cars have a mile-counter already?
Why do the government need any extra boxes for that?
The hardest part of a programmers job is working with people that
1) don't understand programming
but
2) forces the programmers to work a certain way that doesn't fit the mindset or workflow of programmers and/or programming
with
1b) think they understand programming
as a worst case.
Or wasn't that was what meant?
"doing brain games and more math" -- please do this to your kid regardless of testing and test results. :/
Can someone explain to me why they don't just build the airplanes of the correct size to start with?
Or is the weight of the passengers + luggage so negotiable that you want the planes as small as possible?
Last time I checked out "economy extra" for the flight(s) I needed it was $3000 instead of $1500. Yay. $115 or 10% more would be totally acceptable, but not 100% for 2 more inches...
(Business class for the same flight was $6000.)
Removing those armrests sounds like a good idea, then you can squeeze in more seats!