> However, honestly, half of the downtime I have at work is due to the inefficiencies of the workplace. Waiting for slow servers. Waiting for queries to run. Waiting for people to get back to me. Etc.
Exactly. Measuring this type of thing is what can actually improve my productivity, and those of my coworkers, significantly.
At my old job, I time was spent like this: Open a page from the dev web server and wait for it to load. Make a small change to the code. Refresh on the dev web server and wait for it to load. Make a small change to the code. Refresh on the dev web server and wait for it to load. Make a small change to the code. Refresh on the dev web server and wait for it to load.
Half of my day, and therefore half of my pay, was spent waiting for the dev web server to respond. If management identified that our computers spent half their time waiting on a response from dev.company.com, they could then decide it was worthwhile to spend $x,000 for faster response rather than paying me $xx,000 to wait for the server.
My current job is similar: Run a 30-minute security scan. Adjust a parameter to the scan, or some code. Run a 30-minute security scan. Adjust a parameter to the scan, or some code. Run a 30-minute security scan.
Right now I have a scan running, and my next task is to change the code and see if that makes the scan faster. Blocking Facebook won't help that. Adding machines to our test network will help, so I can run two scans, with different versions of the code, in parallel.
Except for, well the actual facts. Canonical does in fact put Ubuntu on phones. That's actually one of their products, Ubuntu Phone. Red Hat, on the other hand, sells Red Hat ENTERPRISE Linux. They do in fact have a different focus.
"It's all Linux", one might say. Both do use (different) Linux kernels, just like Android does. There are also differences, such as the focus on new features vs time-tested reliability. Red Hat doesn't get the hottest new stuff the moment that upstream releases a beta. They wait until it's stable and reliable. For mainframes, you probably want stable and reliable.
I agree that he hasn't articulated a cohesive, consistent set of beliefs which guide policy. So far, he seems more pragmatic, basing decisions on outcomes rather than principles (aka ideology) . Normally, I'd want a leader to have consistent principles, but with the current political situation someone who can stimulate and press negotiations in Congress may be as useful. Many in Congress have cohesive set of beliefs which make sense together, while across the aisle someone else has a conflicting set of principles. A paragmatic view of how to achieve the goals, apart from any particular idealogy, may be helpful right now.
> I suppose it's possible he could surround himself with the right policy experts (all Presidents ultimately do) but then who's policy is it?
Good presidents and leaders surround themselves with good people. Some sorround themselves with old buddies. Through his career Trump has sorrounded himself with effective people. I if he hires/appoints you to a high level position, you keep your job not by implementing a certain policy (such as strengthening or eliminating Common Core), but by getting good results, measurably good (such as actually improving US education ranking vs the rest of the world). In other words, he looks at the bottom line numbers, not HOW you did it, but HOW WELL you did it, by the numbers.
Of course, predictions about presidents are extremely difficult. George W Bush (junior) was known for facilitating compromise as governor of Texas. There was no gridlock, he got things done by getting lawmakers to come together and to compromise. Most people who knew anything about him thought he'd have at least that strength as president. Eh, no so much. Not beyond certain unifying events like 9-11. Obama was one of the most inspiring candidates in decades. I figured he might lead people down the wrong path, but he'd lead, he'd inspire the nation. Eh, not so much. So it's really hard to predict what a person will do as president.
> To the contrary, I think he might actually be better than most at diplomacy -- he knows how to negotiate and strike deals, even or especially with people who are hard to deal with.
Yep, that's EXACTLY what he's very good at, negotiating deals. That's why his book is called The Art of the Deal.
I won't vote for him, but I will acknowledge what his strengths are. He figures out what the other side ACTUALLY wants and what he actually wants, and comes up with a way for both sides to get most of the what they want. He _might_ help negotiate through the gridlock in Congress by proposing or supporting bills which allow most people to achieve their ends.
I say "what they ACTUALLY want" because most of the time, what people ask for isn't what they actually want. Software developers understand that. Somebody might propose a ban on SUVs when they want cleaner air, a foreign leader might make all sorts of demands when what they really want is to save face, to tell their constituents that they stood up to America. Trump's skill is to find a way to allow the foreign leader to declare victory while giving us what we want.
That said, I think his weakness is that he speaks too soon and too much, without first thinking about what he's going to say. I have a reputation which exceeds my actual skills and knowledge. The myth is that I know a LOT, that I almost always have the correct answer, that I'm virtually never wrong. The truth is that I simply keep my mouth shut when I don't know. It's not that I always have the right answer, it's that I don't often argue for an answer that's wrong. I shut up or just ask questions unless and until I have the right answer. Trump isn't like that.
What award? It's a best-seller for Amazon, which simply means that a lot of people bought it. Why get so many preorders before release? Because of the way the New York Times calculates their lists.
To sell many copies of a book, it really helps to be on the New York Times best-seller list for a particular week. But to get on the list, you have to sell many copies in a week. The trick is that the Times counts sales when the books are DELIVERED, not when they are ordered. So what you do is pre-sell books for a long time prior to publication. The week the book is released, and orders are fulfilled, the Times counts allb of those preorders as sales for that one week that the book is actually released. Hopefully, that's enough to get on the Times best-seller list and all of the publicity associated with that.
This is also why you'll see very attractive offers for preorders, things like "preorder my new book and you'll get the DVD, plus my last book, for free". They aren't trying to make money on preorders, they're trying to get enough preorders to get on the best- seller list for the week when they fulfill the preorders.
When Google decided to do R&D on self-driving cars, that was somewhat random. Only somewhat because Google has expertise in quickly making decisions based on a large amount of unreliable, noisy data - exactly the kind of fuzzy logic a self-driving car requires.
When Apple followed suit, that's not random, that's Apple emulating their largest competitor. Unwisely, perhaps, because this kind of thing isn't Apple's forte. Apple is good at making well-polished consumers electronics gadgets for consumers and marketing them to non-techies who value style and social cachet over utility and flexibility.
They do a very good job at what they do, for the market they target (which isn't tech nerds who hang out on Slashdot). They aren't a company who has a track record of success with moonshot products totally unrelated to their core business. (An iPad is just a big iPhone with the radio removed, for example, an evolutionary development.)
DIY _really_ isn't an option for anti-virus. You can get some protection by having good backups, good host security such as SELinux, and maybe even a host-based IDS similar to Tripwire watching for any changes, but AV (scanning files looking for potentially malicious ones) is a big, big job. Lots of things are DIY, but AV isn't one of them.
I just started work for a company that does something related. We have a full time TEAM of people just entering new threats all day long. Another team maintains the backend of the engine, and another team does the GUI - all full-time. Plus some man-hours to maintain the systems used to find and enter vulnerabilities, source control systems, the test network, WA, etc. With 20-30 full time developers, you can have something roughly as effective as one of the major brands after several years of development effort.
Maybe tell me this "eco pod" isn't hippy liberal as anything can be? Or that it's not totally inferior to a 1960s Airstream?
> Not to mention you're totally wrong.
The UK banned guns, violent crime immediately DOUBLED. Australia had a similar experience. Liberals cool idea for the US this year - try banning guns, it'll work, I'm sure!
Tell me again how liberals learn from the past and change their ideas based on what works and what doesn't.
I do appreciate that they get excited by cool new ideas, I really do. They just fail to check whether the idea is in fact new (it rarely is), or what happened the last 4,000 times the idea was tried.
Sure, someone could do a much better job of making and Airstream-like camper if they looked at what has worked well for many years, and what hasn't. This company is not ALLOWED to think about what has worked well for decades, though. They're liberal leftists, they have to pretend they're the first ones to think of it, and ignore all human experience with the idea. Looking at what has been done before is living in the past, it's old fashioned, conservative. They have to keep making the same mistakes over and over again, pretending that and idea that sounds good at first will work perfectly. Refuwing to learn from history is the defining characteristic of the liberal ethos.
> gadgets have to be tailored around existing battery shapes, such as cylinders, coin cells, and rectangles.
That's what lithium-polymer batteries are for, they can be made in any shape.
Also, their example was a coffee mug. If you want a battery on a coffee mug, a disk shape on the bottom is already a perfect fit. (A large coin cell.). There aren't that many applications which won't fit any of rectangles, disks, or cylinders, or a grouping of one of those shapes.
Sorry, they lied to you. That's not what the law says. The anti-patent activists have spread a misconception that "math can't be patented ", and therefore any use of math can't be patented. That's simply false. The actual text is "the LAWS of nature, including the LAWS of science and mathematics" are not patentable. In other words, you can't patent gravity, but you CAN patent an invention based on gravity, such as a new type of elevator. You can't patent magnetism, you can patent a new type of motor which uses magnetism. You can't patent multiplication, you can patent a new invention which uses multiplication to create some useful new thing (such as a better codec.). "Addition is commutative" is a law of mathematics. "Compress video this way" isn't a law of anything, it's a suggestion which may a good suggestion may not.
No, numbers aren't new. Prime numbers aren't new. A big prime number isn't new, it's existed since before humans.
Taxis aren't new. Uber is a taxi service, run much like many taxi services before it. When I was a kid, my uncle owned a cab, and contracted with a cab company to send him customers. It was pretty much exactly Uber, 35 years ago. Marketing the same old thing by applying a hippy image isn't new. See Ben and Jerry's ice cream as an example of prior art. All Uber did was apply an old style of marketing to an old product, exactly like Birkenstock and many others. Heck, even ILLEGAL taxis aren't at all new.
> NOT the job being done or the idea of doing the job.
The idea of doing the job is generally not useful, without a good way of getting it done.
If you invent a _useful_ _new_ way of compressing video, you can in fact patent it. It doesn't matter if you implement your method in pure silicon (an asic), vacuum tubes, C, or copper relays. If it's new and and useful, it's patentable.
You can't patent the laws of physics, such as Newton's first law, and you can't patent multiplication. You can patent things that use gravity, and you can patent things that use multiplication. BTW, gears are for doing multiplication. If you could NOT patent anything that uses multiplication, you couldn't patent anything that uses gears.
Certain parties regularly point to patent applications that purport to have invented something that isn't new, and claim "therefore software patents should be outlawed". Well, patents on things that aren't new are ALREADY not legal. They exist - the patent office isn't perfect, but the law is that such are not valid. Similarly, non-useful "inventions" which are no more than wishes or concepts such as "time travel" or "compress video" are already not allowed. You have to invent a useful new way to doing time travel, or a useful new way of doing video compression, in order to have a legally valid patent.
It all comes down to levers. Any machine made of metal or wood is a bunch of levers, arranged in some way to be useful. (Realizing that cranks and gears are simply levers that go all the way around).
If someone invents a NEW way of arranging levers to make something that does something USEFUL, they can apply for a limited-time"monopoly on that invention. If someone invents a NEW way of arranging of arranging goto statements to create a new thing that something something useful, they can similarly also apply for a patent.
Such is necessary because software is a large series of logic 'gates'. That exact same arrangement of gates can be built in C, silicon, PHP, or copper coils. A scissor is a scissor whether it's made in steel or in brass. An mpeg decoder is an mpeg decoder whether it's made in silicon or made in C - it's the same machine.
Because patents are issued by government bureaucrats, there is little incentive for the patent workers to do a good job, so we end up with bad patents, patents on "inventions" which are not new, and are not useful. That happens with "inventions" made with wood and"inventions made with C#.
The anti-patent activists have spread a misconception that "math can't be patented ", and therefore any use of math can't be patented. That's plain false. The actual text is "the laws of nature, including the laws of science and mathematics" are not patentable. In other words, you can't patent gravity, but you CAN patent an invention based on gravity, such as a new type of elevator. You can't patent magnetism, you can patent a new type of motor which uses magnetism. You can't patent multiplication, you can patent a new invention which uses multiplication to create some useful new thing (such as a better code ).
The Deep Freeze does require thawing before you can go about your uninstall. If you forgot the password and you are using the full version, it is advisable to follow this step carefully.
This one is a whole hell of challenge to attempt by going to your Registry Editor to do the necessary deleting of files. Please, be very careful not to do anything stupid here because this part controls how your system and applications are carried out.
Before anything go to your BIOS and back date it to 6 years into the future. Deep Freeze is a Windows service and a set of dlls, which are loaded by Windows and which use system dlls such as vbscript.dll. Try renaming renaming vbscript.dll and you'll notice Deep Freeze no longer works. Why? Because it uses (and therefore trusts) vbscript.dll.
It just so happens that I do this stuff for a living, so I'm sorry if you bought into their sales pitch and feel silly now. Here's how you can uninstall Deep Freeze without using their uninstaller , by just setting Windows to not run it. You can try this yourself if you want:
Step 1: Go to START -- >Run .
Step 2: Type regedit and click OK to open the Registry Editor. Please, do not anything silly if you aren't familiar with the registry.
(a) [+] HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT
(b) [+] HKEY_CURRENT_USER
(c) [+] HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE
(d) [+] HKEY_USERS
(e) [+] HKEY_CURRENT_CONFIG
Step 3: Simply click (c) [+] HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE and click SYSTEM --> a sub-menus will appear. In the sub-menus click ControlSet001 -->Services---> DepFrzHi(Right-click on it and delete this file)-->DepFrzLo(Right-click on it and delete the file)-->DFServEx(This is the deep freeze executable file. Right-click on it and delete this file).
Step 4:At(c) [+] HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE-->SYSTEM-->ControlSet003-->Services-->DepFrzHi(Right-click on it and delete this file)-->DepfrzLo(Right-click on it and delete this file)-->DFServEx(This is the executable file. Right-click on it and delete this file).
Step 5: Do the same thing to (c) [+] HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE--SYSTEM-->CurrentControlSet--> Services-->DepFrzHi (Right-click on it and delete this file)-->DepfrzLo(Right-click on it and delete thif file). Next one is DepFrzHi(Right-click on it and delete this file) and --> DFServEx(This is the deep freeze executable file.Right-click on it and delete this file).
Step 6: After finishing with the processes above, click File at the top left corner of you Registry Editor and go to exit to close it. You may want to restart your computer. Deep Freeze will be gone.
Try that yourself if you want, then ask yourself- do you think I (or a malware author) couldn't write a macro to do that? That my malware kit couldn't just as easily remove or disable Deep Freeze?
Yes, you can counter sue for damages if they act negligently, like these people apparently did. Another relevant term is "good faith". Those apply. Perjury doesn't, by statute.
> You must sign under penalty of perjury that you know the infringement to be true.
The statement under penalty of perjury is that the person filing the complaint represents the author or their assigns.
Whether or not a work is infringing, vs whether it's fair use, coincidentally similar, etc is a judgement call. It isn't a knowable fact anyone could witness to anyway. You could find a song that sounds just like an Emininem song and reasonably believe that they copied from Emininem, then later find out that the "copy" was in fact made 30 years earlier, before Emininem was born. So you realize the Aerosmith song is the original. Until you find out that Someone else did it fifty years before Aerosmith. Infringement is a JUDGEMENT that can only be said to be true after it's litigated. "I represent Emininem " is a factual statement someone can swear to.
> If competence can be overridden by the color of someones skin than that only bolsters the idea that there are inferior races that need to be graded on a different scale.
I wish I could mod this up. It's infuriating that Jesse Jackson and the other race baiters tell my daughter that's she's too stupid to compete on her merits, that everyone should give her extra points to make it fair because black people like her aren't as good as white people.
My daughter is smarter and harder working than than you, Mr liberal whiner, and therefore more competent. Se doesn't need your pity, protection, or special favors. She needs you to get the heck out of the way so she can fix the mess you made because you refuse to do simple arithmetic and planning, instead thinking everything will work out if you wish hard enough.
The paragraphs of fluff "introduction" has always bugged me, but lately I've run into a few articles which have all the fluff, then completely forget to address the question, to EVER get to the point. Stuff like:
HOW TO BOOT DIAGNOSTIC MODE IN ANDROID
Android is the world's most popular... Cell phones are now more popular than PCs...
Diagnostic mode should be used with care... Some carriers disable diagnostic mode...
THE END
Hey asshole! You forgot to say how to boot into diagnostic mode!
The size of the economy is measured in constant dollars, growth is measured in percent. That's how it's always done, so labeling it is a bit unnecessary and redundant.
You'll notice that economic growth has ALWAYS gotten worse under the EVERY democrat administration's budgets
> The actual facts [cnn.com] show you have that backwards
Did you LOOK at that page before linking to it? Your CNN link says that median income improved under Reagan, Bush, etc. So if you choose to trust that CNN is giveaway you correct numbers, you now know that traditional republican policies increase incomes.
Your second link is garbage. The numbers overall are WAY too high especially their democrat numbers; it looks like they treated inflation as growth rather than using constant dollars. Really they showed that inflation is higher under democrat policies, and presented that as if it were a good thing. Secondly, a president's first budget takes effect a year after they are inaugurated . (The effects start to be visible about a year later). The second link assigns the results during 2009, for example, to Obama - while Bush's budget was still in effect. That's misleading. The year Bush took office, we were operating under Clinton's budget, Clinton's policies. The state of the economy isn't much effected by the guy who just got elected, it's much more effected by the federal budget policies we're operating under.
And economic policies have economic consequences. When you make it more expensive to hire people, fewer people get hired.
> Just because things happen in a temporal order doesn't mean they are causal.
Repeated experiments are good for seeing if two events are coincidence or if they are causal. Keep doing A and see if B keeps happening as a result. This chart was made before Obama was elected, but it does show 40 years of trying dem policies and trying republican policies: http://bettercgi.com/tmp/clint...
You'll notice that economic growth has ALWAYS gotten worse under the EVERY democrat administration's budgets, and ALWAYS gotten better during every republican administration. When it happens every single time, that's not coincidence.
The chart was made just before Bush started spending like Ted Kennedy at a strip club, with the results you'd expect.
What I mentioned is the same concept as Deep Freeze, except far more secure. Deep Freeze is an application running WITHIN the OS. It uses (and trusts) the OS to actually write to the proper areas of the disk, and to avoid writing to areas it doesn't want written to. When the OS is compromised, you can't trust that it's obeying the instructions it's getting from Deep Freeze.
By doing the same thing from the outside of the operating system, using the hypervisor or SAN, you aren't having to trust the OS to protect it's own integrity.
Slashdot Mirror
> However, honestly, half of the downtime I have at work is due to the inefficiencies of the workplace. Waiting for slow servers. Waiting for queries to run. Waiting for people to get back to me. Etc.
Exactly. Measuring this type of thing is what can actually improve my productivity, and those of my coworkers, significantly.
At my old job, I time was spent like this:
Open a page from the dev web server and wait for it to load.
Make a small change to the code.
Refresh on the dev web server and wait for it to load.
Make a small change to the code.
Refresh on the dev web server and wait for it to load.
Make a small change to the code.
Refresh on the dev web server and wait for it to load.
Half of my day, and therefore half of my pay, was spent waiting for the dev web server to respond. If management identified that our computers spent half their time waiting on a response from dev.company.com, they could then decide it was worthwhile to spend $x,000 for faster response rather than paying me $xx,000 to wait for the server.
My current job is similar:
Run a 30-minute security scan.
Adjust a parameter to the scan, or some code.
Run a 30-minute security scan.
Adjust a parameter to the scan, or some code.
Run a 30-minute security scan.
Right now I have a scan running, and my next task is to change the code and see if that makes the scan faster. Blocking Facebook won't help that. Adding machines to our test network will help, so I can run two scans, with different versions of the code, in parallel.
Except for, well the actual facts. Canonical does in fact put Ubuntu on phones. That's actually one of their products, Ubuntu Phone. Red Hat, on the other hand, sells Red Hat ENTERPRISE Linux. They do in fact have a different focus.
"It's all Linux", one might say. Both do use (different) Linux kernels, just like Android does. There are also differences, such as the focus on new features vs time-tested reliability. Red Hat doesn't get the hottest new stuff the moment that upstream releases a beta. They wait until it's stable and reliable. For mainframes, you probably want stable and reliable.
I agree that he hasn't articulated a cohesive, consistent set of beliefs which guide policy. So far, he seems more pragmatic, basing decisions on outcomes rather than principles (aka ideology) . Normally, I'd want a leader to have consistent principles, but with the current political situation someone who can stimulate and press negotiations in Congress may be as useful. Many in Congress have cohesive set of beliefs which make sense together, while across the aisle someone else has a conflicting set of principles. A paragmatic view of how to achieve the goals, apart from any particular idealogy, may be helpful right now.
> I suppose it's possible he could surround himself with the right policy experts (all Presidents ultimately do) but then who's policy is it?
Good presidents and leaders surround themselves with good people. Some sorround themselves with old buddies. Through his career Trump has sorrounded himself with effective people. I if he hires/appoints you to a high level position, you keep your job not by implementing a certain policy (such as strengthening or eliminating Common Core), but by getting good results, measurably good (such as actually improving US education ranking vs the rest of the world). In other words, he looks at the bottom line numbers, not HOW you did it, but HOW WELL you did it, by the numbers.
Of course, predictions about presidents are extremely difficult. George W Bush (junior) was known for facilitating compromise as governor of Texas. There was no gridlock, he got things done by getting lawmakers to come together and to compromise. Most people who knew anything about him thought he'd have at least that strength as president. Eh, no so much. Not beyond certain unifying events like 9-11. Obama was one of the most inspiring candidates in decades. I figured he might lead people down the wrong path, but he'd lead, he'd inspire the nation. Eh, not so much. So it's really hard to predict what a person will do as president.
> To the contrary, I think he might actually be better than most at diplomacy -- he knows how to negotiate and strike deals, even or especially with people who are hard to deal with.
Yep, that's EXACTLY what he's very good at, negotiating deals. That's why his book is called The Art of the Deal.
I won't vote for him, but I will acknowledge what his strengths are. He figures out what the other side ACTUALLY wants and what he actually wants, and comes up with a way for both sides to get most of the what they want. He _might_ help negotiate through the gridlock in Congress by proposing or supporting bills which allow most people to achieve their ends.
I say "what they ACTUALLY want" because most of the time, what people ask for isn't what they actually want. Software developers understand that. Somebody might propose a ban on SUVs when they want cleaner air, a foreign leader might make all sorts of demands when what they really want is to save face, to tell their constituents that they stood up to America. Trump's skill is to find a way to allow the foreign leader to declare victory while giving us what we want.
That said, I think his weakness is that he speaks too soon and too much, without first thinking about what he's going to say. I have a reputation which exceeds my actual skills and knowledge. The myth is that I know a LOT, that I almost always have the correct answer, that I'm virtually never wrong. The truth is that I simply keep my mouth shut when I don't know. It's not that I always have the right answer, it's that I don't often argue for an answer that's wrong. I shut up or just ask questions unless and until I have the right answer. Trump isn't like that.
What award? It's a best-seller for Amazon, which simply means that a lot of people bought it. Why get so many preorders before release? Because of the way the New York Times calculates their lists.
To sell many copies of a book, it really helps to be on the New York Times best-seller list for a particular week. But to get on the list, you have to sell many copies in a week. The trick is that the Times counts sales when the books are DELIVERED, not when they are ordered. So what you do is pre-sell books for a long time prior to publication. The week the book is released, and orders are fulfilled, the Times counts allb of those preorders as sales for that one week that the book is actually released. Hopefully, that's enough to get on the Times best-seller list and all of the publicity associated with that.
This is also why you'll see very attractive offers for preorders, things like "preorder my new book and you'll get the DVD, plus my last book, for free". They aren't trying to make money on preorders, they're trying to get enough preorders to get on the best- seller list for the week when they fulfill the preorders.
When Google decided to do R&D on self-driving cars, that was somewhat random. Only somewhat because Google has expertise in quickly making decisions based on a large amount of unreliable, noisy data - exactly the kind of fuzzy logic a self-driving car requires.
When Apple followed suit, that's not random, that's Apple emulating their largest competitor. Unwisely, perhaps, because this kind of thing isn't Apple's forte. Apple is good at making well-polished consumers electronics gadgets for consumers and marketing them to non-techies who value style and social cachet over utility and flexibility.
They do a very good job at what they do, for the market they target (which isn't tech nerds who hang out on Slashdot). They aren't a company who has a track record of success with moonshot products totally unrelated to their core business. (An iPad is just a big iPhone with the radio removed, for example, an evolutionary development.)
DIY _really_ isn't an option for anti-virus. You can get some protection by having good backups, good host security such as SELinux, and maybe even a host-based IDS similar to Tripwire watching for any changes, but AV (scanning files looking for potentially malicious ones) is a big, big job. Lots of things are DIY, but AV isn't one of them.
I just started work for a company that does something related. We have a full time TEAM of people just entering new threats all day long. Another team maintains the backend of the engine, and another team does the GUI - all full-time. Plus some man-hours to maintain the systems used to find and enter vulnerabilities, source control systems, the test network, WA, etc. With 20-30 full time developers, you can have something roughly as effective as one of the major brands after several years of development effort.
Maybe tell me this "eco pod" isn't hippy liberal as anything can be? Or that it's not totally inferior to a 1960s Airstream?
> Not to mention you're totally wrong.
The UK banned guns, violent crime immediately DOUBLED.
Australia had a similar experience. Liberals cool idea for the US this year - try banning guns, it'll work, I'm sure!
Solar electric was the future in 1954.
http://www.beatriceco.com/bti/...
Tell me again how liberals learn from the past and change their ideas based on what works and what doesn't.
I do appreciate that they get excited by cool new ideas, I really do. They just fail to check whether the idea is in fact new (it rarely is), or what happened the last 4,000 times the idea was tried.
Sure, someone could do a much better job of making and Airstream-like camper if they looked at what has worked well for many years, and what hasn't. This company is not ALLOWED to think about what has worked well for decades, though. They're liberal leftists, they have to pretend they're the first ones to think of it, and ignore all human experience with the idea. Looking at what has been done before is living in the past, it's old fashioned, conservative. They have to keep making the same mistakes over and over again, pretending that and idea that sounds good at first will work perfectly. Refuwing to learn from history is the defining characteristic of the liberal ethos.
> gadgets have to be tailored around existing battery shapes, such as cylinders, coin cells, and rectangles.
That's what lithium-polymer batteries are for, they can be made in any shape.
Also, their example was a coffee mug. If you want a battery on a coffee mug, a disk shape on the bottom is already a perfect fit. (A large coin cell.). There aren't that many applications which won't fit any of rectangles, disks, or cylinders, or a grouping of one of those shapes.
> no maths can be patentented
Sorry, they lied to you. That's not what the law says. The anti-patent activists have spread a misconception that "math can't be patented ", and therefore any use of math can't be patented. That's simply false. The actual text is "the LAWS of nature, including the LAWS of science and mathematics" are not patentable. In other words, you can't patent gravity, but you CAN patent an invention based on gravity, such as a new type of elevator. You can't patent magnetism, you can patent a new type of motor which uses magnetism. You can't patent multiplication, you can patent a new invention which uses multiplication to create some useful new thing (such as a better codec.). "Addition is commutative" is a law of mathematics. "Compress video this way" isn't a law of anything, it's a suggestion which may a good suggestion may not.
No, numbers aren't new. Prime numbers aren't new. A big prime number isn't new, it's existed since before humans.
Taxis aren't new. Uber is a taxi service, run much like many taxi services before it. When I was a kid, my uncle owned a cab, and contracted with a cab company to send him customers. It was pretty much exactly Uber, 35 years ago. Marketing the same old thing by applying a hippy image isn't new. See Ben and Jerry's ice cream as an example of prior art. All Uber did was apply an old style of marketing to an old product, exactly like Birkenstock and many others. Heck, even ILLEGAL taxis aren't at all new.
> NOT the job being done or the idea of doing the job.
The idea of doing the job is generally not useful, without a good way of getting it done.
It writes at 1.8 GB/s, so the math is correct. The English is bad because they mentioned the read speed in between two mentions of the write speed.
> no invention is necessary
An invention is a novel (new) and useful thing. Is it your position that nobody has ever done anything new and useful with computers?
That was supposed to say "codec", not "code".
If you invent a _useful_ _new_ way of compressing video, you can in fact patent it. It doesn't matter if you implement your method in pure silicon (an asic), vacuum tubes, C, or copper relays. If it's new and and useful, it's patentable.
You can't patent the laws of physics, such as Newton's first law, and you can't patent multiplication. You can patent things that use gravity, and you can patent things that use multiplication. BTW, gears are for doing multiplication. If you could NOT patent anything that uses multiplication, you couldn't patent anything that uses gears.
Certain parties regularly point to patent applications that purport to have invented something that isn't new, and claim "therefore software patents should be outlawed". Well, patents on things that aren't new are ALREADY not legal. They exist - the patent office isn't perfect, but the law is that such are not valid. Similarly, non-useful "inventions" which are no more than wishes or concepts such as "time travel" or "compress video" are already not allowed. You have to invent a useful new way to doing time travel, or a useful new way of doing video compression, in order to have a legally valid patent.
It's still a point system, race is just worth fewer points. There are other factors also worth points. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
It all comes down to levers. Any machine made of metal or wood is a bunch of levers, arranged in some way to be useful. (Realizing that cranks and gears are simply levers that go all the way around).
If someone invents a NEW way of arranging levers to make something that does something USEFUL, they can apply for a limited-time"monopoly on that invention. If someone invents a NEW way of arranging of arranging goto statements to create a new thing that something something useful, they can similarly also apply for a patent.
Such is necessary because software is a large series of logic 'gates'. That exact same arrangement of gates can be built in C, silicon, PHP, or copper coils. A scissor is a scissor whether it's made in steel or in brass. An mpeg decoder is an mpeg decoder whether it's made in silicon or made in C - it's the same machine.
Because patents are issued by government bureaucrats, there is little incentive for the patent workers to do a good job, so we end up with bad patents, patents on "inventions" which are not new, and are not useful. That happens with "inventions" made with wood and"inventions made with C#.
The anti-patent activists have spread a misconception that "math can't be patented ", and therefore any use of math can't be patented. That's plain false. The actual text is "the laws of nature, including the laws of science and mathematics" are not patentable. In other words, you can't patent gravity, but you CAN patent an invention based on gravity, such as a new type of elevator. You can't patent magnetism, you can patent a new type of motor which uses magnetism. You can't patent multiplication, you can patent a new invention which uses multiplication to create some useful new thing (such as a better code ).
The Deep Freeze does require thawing before you can go about your uninstall. If you forgot the password and you are using the full version, it is advisable to follow this step carefully.
This one is a whole hell of challenge to attempt by going to your Registry Editor to do the necessary deleting of files. Please, be very careful not to do anything stupid here because this part controls how your system and applications are carried out.
Before anything go to your BIOS and back date it to 6 years into the future.
Deep Freeze is a Windows service and a set of dlls, which are loaded by Windows and which use system dlls such as vbscript.dll. Try renaming renaming vbscript.dll and you'll notice Deep Freeze no longer works. Why? Because it uses (and therefore trusts) vbscript.dll.
It just so happens that I do this stuff for a living, so I'm sorry if you bought into their sales pitch and feel silly now. Here's how you can uninstall Deep Freeze without using their uninstaller , by just setting Windows to not run it. You can try this yourself if you want:
Step 1: Go to START -- >Run .
Step 2: Type regedit and click OK to open the Registry Editor. Please, do not anything silly if you aren't familiar with the registry.
(a) [+] HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT
(b) [+] HKEY_CURRENT_USER
(c) [+] HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE
(d) [+] HKEY_USERS
(e) [+] HKEY_CURRENT_CONFIG
Step 3: Simply click (c) [+] HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE and click SYSTEM --> a sub-menus will appear. In the sub-menus click ControlSet001 -->Services---> DepFrzHi(Right-click on it and delete this file)-->DepFrzLo(Right-click on it and delete the file)-->DFServEx(This is the deep freeze executable file. Right-click on it and delete this file).
Step 4:At(c) [+] HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE-->SYSTEM-->ControlSet003-->Services-->DepFrzHi(Right-click on it and delete this file)-->DepfrzLo(Right-click on it and delete this file)-->DFServEx(This is the executable file. Right-click on it and delete this file).
Step 5: Do the same thing to (c) [+] HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE--SYSTEM-->CurrentControlSet--> Services-->DepFrzHi (Right-click on it and delete this file)-->DepfrzLo(Right-click on it and delete thif file). Next one is DepFrzHi(Right-click on it and delete this file) and --> DFServEx(This is the deep freeze executable file.Right-click on it and delete this file).
Step 6: After finishing with the processes above, click File at the top left corner of you Registry Editor and go to exit to close it. You may want to restart your computer. Deep Freeze will be gone.
Try that yourself if you want, then ask yourself- do you think I (or a malware author) couldn't write a macro to do that? That my malware kit couldn't just as easily remove or disable Deep Freeze?
Yes, you can counter sue for damages if they act negligently, like these people apparently did. Another relevant term is "good faith". Those apply. Perjury doesn't, by statute.
> You must sign under penalty of perjury that you know the infringement to be true.
The statement under penalty of perjury is that the person filing the complaint represents the author or their assigns.
Whether or not a work is infringing, vs whether it's fair use, coincidentally similar, etc is a judgement call. It isn't a knowable fact anyone could witness to anyway. You could find a song that sounds just like an Emininem song and reasonably believe that they copied from Emininem, then later find out that the "copy" was in fact made 30 years earlier, before Emininem was born. So you realize the Aerosmith song is the original. Until you find out that Someone else did it fifty years before Aerosmith. Infringement is a JUDGEMENT that can only be said to be true after it's litigated. "I represent Emininem " is a factual statement someone can swear to.
> If competence can be overridden by the color of someones skin than that only bolsters the idea that there are inferior races that need to be graded on a different scale.
I wish I could mod this up. It's infuriating that Jesse Jackson and the other race baiters tell my daughter that's she's too stupid to compete on her merits, that everyone should give her extra points to make it fair because black people like her aren't as good as white people.
My daughter is smarter and harder working than than you, Mr liberal whiner, and therefore more competent. Se doesn't need your pity, protection, or special favors. She needs you to get the heck out of the way so she can fix the mess you made because you refuse to do simple arithmetic and planning, instead thinking everything will work out if you wish hard enough.
The paragraphs of fluff "introduction" has always bugged me, but lately I've run into a few articles which have all the fluff, then completely forget to address the question, to EVER get to the point. Stuff like:
HOW TO BOOT DIAGNOSTIC MODE IN ANDROID
Android is the world's most popular ... ...
Cell phones are now more popular than PCs
Diagnostic mode should be used with care ... ...
Some carriers disable diagnostic mode
THE END
Hey asshole! You forgot to say how to boot into diagnostic mode!
The size of the economy is measured in constant dollars, growth is measured in percent. That's how it's always done, so labeling it is a bit unnecessary and redundant.
You'll notice that economic growth has ALWAYS gotten worse under the EVERY democrat administration's budgets
> The actual facts [cnn.com] show you have that backwards
Did you LOOK at that page before linking to it? Your CNN link says that median income improved under Reagan, Bush, etc. So if you choose to trust that CNN is giveaway you correct numbers, you now know that traditional republican policies increase incomes.
Your second link is garbage. The numbers overall are WAY too high especially their democrat numbers; it looks like they treated inflation as growth rather than using constant dollars. Really they showed that inflation is higher under democrat policies, and presented that as if it were a good thing. Secondly, a president's first budget takes effect a year after they are inaugurated . (The effects start to be visible about a year later). The second link assigns the results during 2009, for example, to Obama - while Bush's budget was still in effect. That's misleading. The year Bush took office, we were operating under Clinton's budget, Clinton's policies. The state of the economy isn't much effected by the guy who just got elected, it's much more effected by the federal budget policies we're operating under.
Lots of things happen, for lots of reasons.
And economic policies have economic consequences. When you make it more expensive to hire people, fewer people get hired.
> Just because things happen in a temporal order doesn't mean they are causal.
Repeated experiments are good for seeing if two events are coincidence or if they are causal. Keep doing A and see if B keeps happening as a result. This chart was made before Obama was elected, but it does show 40 years of trying dem policies and trying republican policies:
http://bettercgi.com/tmp/clint...
You'll notice that economic growth has ALWAYS gotten worse under the EVERY democrat administration's budgets, and ALWAYS gotten better during every republican administration. When it happens every single time, that's not coincidence.
The chart was made just before Bush started spending like Ted Kennedy at a strip club, with the results you'd expect.
What I mentioned is the same concept as Deep Freeze, except far more secure. Deep Freeze is an application running WITHIN the OS. It uses (and trusts) the OS to actually write to the proper areas of the disk, and to avoid writing to areas it doesn't want written to. When the OS is compromised, you can't trust that it's obeying the instructions it's getting from Deep Freeze.
By doing the same thing from the outside of the operating system, using the hypervisor or SAN, you aren't having to trust the OS to protect it's own integrity.