So in other words, talking to someone while your driving makes you worse then 0.08 BAC?
That's not surprising, someone with a 0.08 BAC is hardly even impaired. That said, the researchers seem to be saying that talking to someone makes you a bad driver. I guess we'd better ban passengers! Or at least make sure the driver isn't talking to them, perhaps we could install dB meters in all cars that they can't run unless the cabin noise level is below a certain threshold.
But, he added: "This could someday replace transistors in computers, just as transistors replaced vacuum tubes and vacuum tubes replaced electromagnetic relays before them." Top of page
Someday, probably by the time their patents run out. Btw, whats the deal with saying that "HP" did it, rather then the researches who actualy worked on the thing. I'm sure there were plenty, but I'd try to at least get their names in (if I ran a big company).
Honestly, you'd rather have a bunch of ugly, old computer equipment sitting around (and plugged into the wall no less) in every room in your house then put in wireing? Are you planning on buying high-fidelity amps and good speakers for every room too?
As much as I hate apple, just buy an Ipod and cary it around with you if you can't stand to be stuck in just one room listening to music.
There's a diffrence between understanding something and agreeing with it. These kids may know perfictly well what the first amendment means, but that dosn't mean they have to go along with it if they think it's wrong.
My mom will write down list of spesific instructions on how to do things. I tried explaining webmail too her and one of the steps was to open netscape (this was back in the day, like 5+ years ago). If netscape didn't load quick enough she'd click it again and again, and like 50 instances of netscape would pop up.
Eventualy she admitted that she just didn't want to learn computers, and had no intrest in learning
that three year old has a 'soft' head, meaning you can still stick stuff into it. For a lot of people, growing up means they are done with school and never have to learn any of this 'new' crap. For those people the diffrence between a left and a right mouse button is much to difficult to learn. Not because it's hard, but because they don't want to learn.
Originally, the idea was for a mouse, and a one-handed chording keyboard. Imagine it, you'd be able to enter any textual command at any point on the screen.
Most geeks like command lines because they give you so much more expressive power. One sentence of command line can tell the computer to do just about anything. On the other hand with the mouse you can only tell it to do one thing (or two things if you have a multi-button mouse).
With the second window, that second thing becomes "open up a menu and let me see everything that I could really do to this object". And then you can click the menu and say "do this to the object I opened the menu on".
With a chording keyboard you could simply click on an object, and with your hand say anything you wanted about it. Just type in "do this."
But since we're stuck with qwerty boards (and foot-mice never caught on) we can't.
By the way, Macs don't really use one-button mice. You've got your open-apple-click, your ctrl-click, your shift-click, etc, etc. It's not a one-button mouse, it's a multi-button mouse with the extra buttons on the keyboard.
Dude, you're about 4 years too late. Honestly, it's amazing how little the editors and maintaners of slashdot actualy care about the site. If you've been around a while you'd see it. It's obvious that they lost intrest long ago and pretty much resent the readership. Only they can't move on to other things because of all the money, and for some reason don't want to give up control.
Intresting paragraph from an intresting article (the last link).
I have noticed that members of the Discovery Institute, the headquarters for lobbying for Intelligent Design, are also speaking out against embryonic stem cell research. It will be interesting to see if they try to embrace Gage and Varki's research while still trying to cast doubt on evolution. How on Earth, I wonder, could someone promoting Intellgent Design or Young Earth creationism make sense of these scientific results?
It actualy wouldn't be hard, they'd simply say that humans didn't have this sugar because they were god's chosen mammal, or something like that.
I'd much rather see a system similar to Europe's football leagues with their unfetter capitalistic approach. Rather then having X historic teams around forever, teams operate basically as businesses. They do all their own licensing, etc. and as teams get better they start playing better teams.
On the other hand, why even keep those organs around? The best rout to immortality is to maintain the brain only. Brain cells last for a long time, and if we can figure out how to get them to divide naturaly the way they do when we're young we could keep brains going forever. But rather then death, you'd have a slow 'fading' of old memories.
I don't know why camera companies make their camera's locked down, but it might have something to do with support costs. Make the software easy and limited and you don't have to worry about people fucking them up.
The other thing is, I think that the majority of people who buy a camera, digital or otherwise just want it to 'work'. The low-cost of actually using digital cameras, as opposed to their film counterparts has lead to a lot more people taking pictures as a hobby (I regularly see people randomly walking around snapping pictures of buildings and stuff now), which means more people are going to be interested in messing around with the shutter, etc.
But not many people are going to want to try hacking the CCD driver to to take prettier pictures. Not many people are going to want to play video games on their cameras when they could buy a gameboy or something, and really there aren't that many interesting applications to put on a camera.
(the few I can think of involve automation, for doing things like time-lapse photos and such, but you could always just hook a camera up to a regular computer to do that)
There are more people alive then dead. Think about that for a moment. There are more people living, today, then have ever lived and died in total in all the generations of human beings.
Woman, after they reach menopause won't be able to have any more children, so people probably won't have much longer child-bearing ages then they do now. (although culture might adapt to have children raised by their 'young' and healthy grandparents or something, rather then young and inexperianced 30somethings).
But as studies have shown wealth usualy means people produce less children (I guess rich people have more intresting things to do with their time). Since life-extension will probably be expensive only rich, low-fertility people will be able to afford it.
I think it will also make people lazy, as they have will have infinite time to acomplish things they'll spend much less time working.
What you're doing is more commonly done using a spreadsheet like Excel or OpenOffice, a high-end database like postgresql is totaly overkill for your project (not that they'res anything wrong with that, I'm sure it was a fun learning experiance).
The ability out output a plain text is universal in spreadsheet programs, as far as I know. And Microsoft's SQL enterprise manager can output plain text copies of your database.
One of the missing features in MySQL programming is the lack of IF statements. Using Microsoft SQL Server 2000 I can do just about anything in a query, including testing to see if something exists. Is there a way to do the following in MySQL with a single query?:
1) insert a row if it dosn't exist, or update one if it does?
2) insert something with automaticaly generated Private Key value, read that value back and use it to have another record in another table point to the record you just made?
Several paragraphs saying "the game is fun." wow. Several paragraphs to explain an apparently simple concept ('boost'). The writing is so boring it makes me want to avoid the game. The most basic information like how many cars there are, how many courses there are is left out. I'm not going to spend $50 on something that will give me 6 or 7 hours of entertainment.
Lame, Lame, Lame. You know, the people who run Slashdot had a real opportunity to build something interesting, and they failed miserably.
This is a problem with a lot of people's ability to think. They believe that because they can apply a metaphor, and then can then draw conclusions based on that metaphor.
The earth's atmosphere is an atmosphere, not an egg, what happens to eggs on roofs is of no consequence to the actual atmosphere. I don't know anything about meteorology, maybe this idea is true, or maybe it isn't. I'm all for responsible stewardship of the environment, and I'm happy to differ to the experts.
Slashdot Mirror
So in other words, talking to someone while your driving makes you worse then 0.08 BAC?
That's not surprising, someone with a 0.08 BAC is hardly even impaired. That said, the researchers seem to be saying that talking to someone makes you a bad driver. I guess we'd better ban passengers! Or at least make sure the driver isn't talking to them, perhaps we could install dB meters in all cars that they can't run unless the cabin noise level is below a certain threshold.
But, he added: "This could someday replace transistors in computers, just as transistors replaced vacuum tubes and vacuum tubes replaced electromagnetic relays before them." Top of page
Someday, probably by the time their patents run out. Btw, whats the deal with saying that "HP" did it, rather then the researches who actualy worked on the thing. I'm sure there were plenty, but I'd try to at least get their names in (if I ran a big company).
Honestly, you'd rather have a bunch of ugly, old computer equipment sitting around (and plugged into the wall no less) in every room in your house then put in wireing? Are you planning on buying high-fidelity amps and good speakers for every room too?
As much as I hate apple, just buy an Ipod and cary it around with you if you can't stand to be stuck in just one room listening to music.
There's a diffrence between understanding something and agreeing with it. These kids may know perfictly well what the first amendment means, but that dosn't mean they have to go along with it if they think it's wrong.
These kids arn't stupid, they're just facist.
"greatest impact" Do they mean the first-order derivative of recognition or something? Or just their opinion.
My mom will write down list of spesific instructions on how to do things. I tried explaining webmail too her and one of the steps was to open netscape (this was back in the day, like 5+ years ago). If netscape didn't load quick enough she'd click it again and again, and like 50 instances of netscape would pop up.
Eventualy she admitted that she just didn't want to learn computers, and had no intrest in learning
that three year old has a 'soft' head, meaning you can still stick stuff into it. For a lot of people, growing up means they are done with school and never have to learn any of this 'new' crap. For those people the diffrence between a left and a right mouse button is much to difficult to learn. Not because it's hard, but because they don't want to learn.
That is, if he were dead.
Originally, the idea was for a mouse, and a one-handed chording keyboard. Imagine it, you'd be able to enter any textual command at any point on the screen.
Most geeks like command lines because they give you so much more expressive power. One sentence of command line can tell the computer to do just about anything. On the other hand with the mouse you can only tell it to do one thing (or two things if you have a multi-button mouse).
With the second window, that second thing becomes "open up a menu and let me see everything that I could really do to this object". And then you can click the menu and say "do this to the object I opened the menu on".
With a chording keyboard you could simply click on an object, and with your hand say anything you wanted about it. Just type in "do this."
But since we're stuck with qwerty boards (and foot-mice never caught on) we can't.
By the way, Macs don't really use one-button mice. You've got your open-apple-click, your ctrl-click, your shift-click, etc, etc. It's not a one-button mouse, it's a multi-button mouse with the extra buttons on the keyboard.
Dude, you're about 4 years too late. Honestly, it's amazing how little the editors and maintaners of slashdot actualy care about the site. If you've been around a while you'd see it. It's obvious that they lost intrest long ago and pretty much resent the readership. Only they can't move on to other things because of all the money, and for some reason don't want to give up control.
Someone needs to just say it: Apple got it really really really right this time.
And I'm sure the first one to do it, too!
Just wear a paper bag over your head.
Intresting paragraph from an intresting article (the last link).
I have noticed that members of the Discovery Institute, the headquarters for lobbying for Intelligent Design, are also speaking out against embryonic stem cell research. It will be interesting to see if they try to embrace Gage and Varki's research while still trying to cast doubt on evolution. How on Earth, I wonder, could someone promoting Intellgent Design or Young Earth creationism make sense of these scientific results?
It actualy wouldn't be hard, they'd simply say that humans didn't have this sugar because they were god's chosen mammal, or something like that.
I'd much rather see a system similar to Europe's football leagues with their unfetter capitalistic approach. Rather then having X historic teams around forever, teams operate basically as businesses. They do all their own licensing, etc. and as teams get better they start playing better teams.
You know, I kind of doubt it would really be possible to convice a highschooler that they really will wish they studied harder once they're an adult.
On the other hand, why even keep those organs around? The best rout to immortality is to maintain the brain only. Brain cells last for a long time, and if we can figure out how to get them to divide naturaly the way they do when we're young we could keep brains going forever. But rather then death, you'd have a slow 'fading' of old memories.
I don't know why camera companies make their camera's locked down, but it might have something to do with support costs. Make the software easy and limited and you don't have to worry about people fucking them up.
The other thing is, I think that the majority of people who buy a camera, digital or otherwise just want it to 'work'. The low-cost of actually using digital cameras, as opposed to their film counterparts has lead to a lot more people taking pictures as a hobby (I regularly see people randomly walking around snapping pictures of buildings and stuff now), which means more people are going to be interested in messing around with the shutter, etc.
But not many people are going to want to try hacking the CCD driver to to take prettier pictures. Not many people are going to want to play video games on their cameras when they could buy a gameboy or something, and really there aren't that many interesting applications to put on a camera.
(the few I can think of involve automation, for doing things like time-lapse photos and such, but you could always just hook a camera up to a regular computer to do that)
There are more people alive then dead. Think about that for a moment. There are more people living, today, then have ever lived and died in total in all the generations of human beings.
Woman, after they reach menopause won't be able to have any more children, so people probably won't have much longer child-bearing ages then they do now. (although culture might adapt to have children raised by their 'young' and healthy grandparents or something, rather then young and inexperianced 30somethings).
But as studies have shown wealth usualy means people produce less children (I guess rich people have more intresting things to do with their time). Since life-extension will probably be expensive only rich, low-fertility people will be able to afford it.
I think it will also make people lazy, as they have will have infinite time to acomplish things they'll spend much less time working.
600 records?
What you're doing is more commonly done using a spreadsheet like Excel or OpenOffice, a high-end database like postgresql is totaly overkill for your project (not that they'res anything wrong with that, I'm sure it was a fun learning experiance).
The ability out output a plain text is universal in spreadsheet programs, as far as I know. And Microsoft's SQL enterprise manager can output plain text copies of your database.
One of the missing features in MySQL programming is the lack of IF statements. Using Microsoft SQL Server 2000 I can do just about anything in a query, including testing to see if something exists. Is there a way to do the following in MySQL with a single query?:
1) insert a row if it dosn't exist, or update one if it does?
2) insert something with automaticaly generated Private Key value, read that value back and use it to have another record in another table point to the record you just made?
Well, I'll probably rent the PS version at least and see if I like it. Gotta have something to kill time with before GT4 comes out :P
Your post was more informative then the entire review.
Well, you should try fucking her around 10pm. Then you'll probably be asleep by 11 as well.
Why is this Palbum even posted here?
Several paragraphs saying "the game is fun." wow. Several paragraphs to explain an apparently simple concept ('boost'). The writing is so boring it makes me want to avoid the game. The most basic information like how many cars there are, how many courses there are is left out. I'm not going to spend $50 on something that will give me 6 or 7 hours of entertainment.
Lame, Lame, Lame. You know, the people who run Slashdot had a real opportunity to build something interesting, and they failed miserably.
This is a problem with a lot of people's ability to think. They believe that because they can apply a metaphor, and then can then draw conclusions based on that metaphor.
The earth's atmosphere is an atmosphere, not an egg, what happens to eggs on roofs is of no consequence to the actual atmosphere. I don't know anything about meteorology, maybe this idea is true, or maybe it isn't. I'm all for responsible stewardship of the environment, and I'm happy to differ to the experts.
A friend of mine got a call from a spyware company a few months back, trying to get him to buy a $50k advertizing package.