I can't speak to RIM and Microsoft, but Apple's own iSync has worked fine with the Bluetooth phones I've owned, and I'm pretty sure Palm Desktop for Mac worked fine with my Treo...
A system which associates on-line information with geographic areas, said system comprising:
a computer network wherein a plurality of computers have access to said computer network; and
an organizer executing in said computer network, wherein said organizer is configured to receive search requests from any one of said plurality of computers, said organizer comprising:
a database of information organized into a hierarchy of geographical areas wherein entries corresponding to each one of said hierarchy of geographical areas is further organized into topics; and
a search engine in communication with said database, said search engine configured to search geographically and topically, said search engine further configured to elect one of said hierarchy of geographical areas prior to selection of a topic so as to provide a geographical search area wherein within said hierarchy of geographical areas at least one of said entries associated with a border geographical area is dynamically replicated into at least one narrower geographical area, said search engine further configure to search said topics within said selected geographical search area.
Oh, um, you mean, kind of like the way Yahoo was searchable but also had everything indexed geographically? Back in, say, 1994-1995? Or is this somehow different?
... there's damned little you can do with Hubble (other than observe in the ultraviolet, and honestly, when was the last time you heard about that capability leading to some huge discovery?) that you can't do with a reasonably large terrestrial scope.
Hubble is, by today's terrestrial standards, small. Its resolving power is limited, even in the relative vacuum of space, by the size of its mirror, the size, age and design of its instruments, and so on.
Yes, Hubble finds stuff. But it doesn't find disproportionately more stuff than 8-10 meter terrestrial scopes like Gemini, Subaru, or Keck.
Do the astrophysicists want it? Hell yeah - sure, big scopes on the ground can deliver results as good as Hubble's, but there aren't a lot of those to go around, and there's a limited amount of darkness, good weather, etc. So having Hubble in the mix means more research can get done, simply because there's another good tool available.
If/index.html was owned by someone else, why did the ftp server let you overwrite it? Hmmm... perhaps I should say that/index.html had a different maintainer, and thus, the latest version of it did not live on my machine. In that sense, someone else owned it.
Yep. Much of the architecture was taken for NT 4 (along with a fair bit from VMS) and a Windows-95 style GUI was slapped on top.
NT4 begat Windows 2000, which begat Windows XP. You didn't even include the "...which begat Vista" part, but I get your point: total, unmitigated disaster.
~> ftp www.workplace.domain Connected to www.workplace.domain. 220 Microsoft FTP Service Name: shag 331 Password required for shag. Password: 230 User shag logged in. Remote system type is Windows_NT. ftp> cd/mis-typed/path 550/mis-typed/path: The system cannot find the file specified. ftp> put index.html local: index.html remote: index.html 227 Entering Passive Mode. 125 Data connection already open; Transfer starting. 226 Transfer complete. ftp>
The realization that one has just overwritten a public-facing, high-traffic/index.html with something that was supposed to be a couple levels down is bad enough.
It's worse when/index.html is owned by someone else entirely. Someone who now must be woken up in the middle of the night, in a different country...
After I did this two or three times, I decided to stop being such a hardcore geek and got an FTP application with a GUI.
when I sent this to my buddy who gradded a few years ago from law school he said he nearly fell off his chair laughing. He said for your friends sake he hopes this all just disappears. AC, you did explain to your buddy that things on Slashdot don't "just disappear," didn't you?
if I wasn't a slash dot reader since the 90s how would I know what the sync is and that there was a slashdot radio show on it. Probably the same way people know things about Ashley: Google.
If you were really a Slashdot reader in the '90s, how about logging back into your old account? That'd show us you're telling the truth.
(Hint: that account's user number should be less than, say, 100 times mine.)
Personally, I was just wondering why it had to be an either-or? Why can't the ultra-economy conscious have the intelligent sensors built into a hybrid car? One would imagine that this would be far better than either.
And don't forget the flex-fuel/turbodiesel. That's what I want... a turbodiesel-electric hybrid that'll run on vegetable fuels, with the sensors.:)
I made a complete switch away from IT 12 years ago (this month), and haven't looked back.
I don't think it needs to be that complete, even. I made an incomplete switch, personally.:)
There are a lot of areas where you can take your massive IT experience, knowledge and skills, combine them with personal interests, and be extremely valuable to an organization. 3 years ago next week, I bailed out of hardcore IT after 15 years, including several in the dot-com world. Took my skill set and resumé and got involved in government-funded academic stuff dealing with natural sciences and science policy.
I don't do it full-time, so overall it pays significantly less than the low 6 figures I peaked at during my dot-com days. But I travel all over the world (I'm +12h from home right now), meet tons of interesting people (astronauts, Nobel laureates, cabinet-level people, etc.), and spend fairly little time doing onerous stuff like the "laying on of hands" when a colleague's Windows laptop is ill. My cumulative IT experience is now something I "keep handy, just in case it's needed."
When people ask what I do now, I just tell 'em that I make sure some small portion of their taxes is spent on worthwhile things, instead of hookers for beltway types.
Maybe the OP should consider doing something similar - being a "soft IT" type in a non-IT organization.
1. Indoor photography where flash is not an option. (f/1.8, ASA 1600) 2. Photographing moving targets where shutter lag is not an option. 3. Long-exposure star trail or milky way type shots. 4. Rudimentary time-lapse intervalometry.
A phone that can take decently detailed pictures of nearby, still objects under good lighting is one thing. A phone that gives me the ability to do any of the four above would be quite a surprise.
I must point out that Apple is specifically targeting Mac users, and their terms are much more onerous than Microsoft's in this case.
The terms someone stated before were that you can run one copy of the OS, on an Apple-labeled computer.
Right?
Mac users are, by definition, using Apple-labeled computers, so I fail to see how this license is at all onerous (burdensome) to them, unless they want to run OS X within virtualization on OS X, or install some other OS and run multiple instances of OS X simultaneously within virtualization under that... neither of which any more than a vanishingly small minority ever want to do.
It's sort of like the arcane/weird/funny laws on the books some places, banning things that basically nobody ever wanted to do anyway. Illegal to ride your bicycle through a fountain? Help, help, I'm being suppressed!
Which *nix systems other than linux can run linux specific apps?
What on earth are "linux specific apps"? Do you mean Linux binaries compiled from code that would probably also compile, either as-is or with minor adjustments, on just about any other *nix out there, including OS X?
I think your question does more to point out the differences between open and closed source software than the differences between Linux and OS X.
Actually just the other night on the news (here in Scotland) they were talking about racially motivated crime being on the rise. Not violence, per se, just property crime. But overall, though, it's a pretty nice place.
Mobs of drunken Scots pose little threat to strangers, although they're quite commonly encountered. They seem to primarily just beat each other up, presumably realizing that other members of their own little drunken mob are unlikely to go to the police, while strangers would probably do so.
Mobs of sober Scots pose little threat to strangers as well, primarily because you can't find enough sober Scots at once to form a mob.;)
The corn based ethanol craze is founded in subsidies, not practicality.
Yep. I sometimes work with folks from a sustainability think-tank in Winnipeg, and the Globe and Mail (a newspaper somewhere in Canada) just ran an op-ed piece by its president, pointing out that (among other problems) the US government spends $500 in corn-based ethanol subsidies to reduce CO2 emissions by 1 metric tonne, while on the Chicago Climate Exchange (US-based, obviously, and market-driven, which I thought the Bushies liked?) that $500 would buy more than 30 metric tonnes of carbon offsets.
Just doesn't seem like a good deal. Must be that new math again...
Call me a Bitch-Hermit, but I think it really depends on the nature and schedule of your work.
Since you're asking this on Slashdot, okay, maybe you've got some kind of vaguely traditional corporate concept, with business hours, a location, ongoing projects, and all that stuff. In which case, yeah, you probably do need to get together sometimes. And I don't think most products out there are going to scale well enough to do 10-way videoconferencing right now, so "face time" might be hard to get on-screen.
Of course, you could take turns hosting meetings at your houses...:)
That all said, there are organizations out there that are virtual by default, and only periodically lapse into meat-space on an ad hoc basis. I sporadically help with a team that has about 60 consultants in about 30 countries, with different skill sets and expertise. If something needs to be done somewhere specific, anywhere from 2 to 15 people will fly in from wherever they're based (literally around the world), bust their asses for anywhere from a few days to a couple weeks, and then fly out. In between, it's all e-mail, intranet, IMs and Skype.
This works (perhaps surprisingly) because, I think, when actual work is being done, the consultants are working around each other in person, for anywhere from 12 to 20 hours a day. In between "crunch times," all the newfangled communication tools are good for sharing knowledge and info and basically preparing everyone so they can hit the ground running.
So again, it really depends on what kind of work you're doing, how it's scheduled, and stuff like that.
Actually, if you go to the International Women's Day web site, the US government is listed as among those supporting it.
The minor detail, of course, is that the US government supports it as it applies to women who are, well, "international." Which is to say, not in the US.
It's more of an international aid/foreign policy footnote than a holiday, to them.
There's no impact in 2029, but I'm skeptical that even a transponder would tell us exactly what its orbit after the 2029 near-miss will be. It'd have to be very accurate, since a little distance closer to or further from Earth will result in a different post-2029 orbit.
Well, it'd need to have significantly more mass than a Shuttle, and be able to get further from earth than a Shuttle, but you're thinking of the gravity tractor proposed a couple years ago by two of NASA's own astronauts.
"Knock" is a bad word. You don't want to be playing pool with asteroids for balls. Hit it wrong and you just spin it around... even hitting it right, you don't know where it's going to end up.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't speak to RIM and Microsoft, but Apple's own iSync has worked fine with the Bluetooth phones I've owned, and I'm pretty sure Palm Desktop for Mac worked fine with my Treo...
- a computer network wherein a plurality of computers have access to said computer network; and
- an organizer executing in said computer network, wherein said organizer is configured to receive search requests from any one of said plurality of computers, said organizer comprising:
- a database of information organized into a hierarchy of geographical areas wherein entries corresponding to each one of said hierarchy of geographical areas is further organized into topics; and
- a search engine in communication with said database, said search engine configured to search geographically and topically, said search engine further configured to elect one of said hierarchy of geographical areas prior to selection of a topic so as to provide a geographical search area wherein within said hierarchy of geographical areas at least one of said entries associated with a border geographical area is dynamically replicated into at least one narrower geographical area, said search engine further configure to search said topics within said selected geographical search area.
Oh, um, you mean, kind of like the way Yahoo was searchable but also had everything indexed geographically? Back in, say, 1994-1995? Or is this somehow different?... there's damned little you can do with Hubble (other than observe in the ultraviolet, and honestly, when was the last time you heard about that capability leading to some huge discovery?) that you can't do with a reasonably large terrestrial scope.
Hubble is, by today's terrestrial standards, small. Its resolving power is limited, even in the relative vacuum of space, by the size of its mirror, the size, age and design of its instruments, and so on.
Yes, Hubble finds stuff. But it doesn't find disproportionately more stuff than 8-10 meter terrestrial scopes like Gemini, Subaru, or Keck.
Do the astrophysicists want it? Hell yeah - sure, big scopes on the ground can deliver results as good as Hubble's, but there aren't a lot of those to go around, and there's a limited amount of darkness, good weather, etc. So having Hubble in the mix means more research can get done, simply because there's another good tool available.
Just a thought.
NT4 begat Windows 2000, which begat Windows XP. You didn't even include the "...which begat Vista" part, but I get your point: total, unmitigated disaster.
~> ftp www.workplace.domain /mis-typed/path /mis-typed/path: The system cannot find the file specified.
/index.html with something that was supposed to be a couple levels down is bad enough.
/index.html is owned by someone else entirely. Someone who now must be woken up in the middle of the night, in a different country...
Connected to www.workplace.domain.
220 Microsoft FTP Service
Name: shag
331 Password required for shag.
Password:
230 User shag logged in.
Remote system type is Windows_NT.
ftp> cd
550
ftp> put index.html
local: index.html remote: index.html
227 Entering Passive Mode.
125 Data connection already open; Transfer starting.
226 Transfer complete.
ftp>
The realization that one has just overwritten a public-facing, high-traffic
It's worse when
After I did this two or three times, I decided to stop being such a hardcore geek and got an FTP application with a GUI.
If you were really a Slashdot reader in the '90s, how about logging back into your old account? That'd show us you're telling the truth.
(Hint: that account's user number should be less than, say, 100 times mine.)
And don't forget the flex-fuel/turbodiesel. That's what I want... a turbodiesel-electric hybrid that'll run on vegetable fuels, with the sensors.
I don't think it needs to be that complete, even. I made an incomplete switch, personally.
There are a lot of areas where you can take your massive IT experience, knowledge and skills, combine them with personal interests, and be extremely valuable to an organization. 3 years ago next week, I bailed out of hardcore IT after 15 years, including several in the dot-com world. Took my skill set and resumé and got involved in government-funded academic stuff dealing with natural sciences and science policy.
I don't do it full-time, so overall it pays significantly less than the low 6 figures I peaked at during my dot-com days. But I travel all over the world (I'm +12h from home right now), meet tons of interesting people (astronauts, Nobel laureates, cabinet-level people, etc.), and spend fairly little time doing onerous stuff like the "laying on of hands" when a colleague's Windows laptop is ill. My cumulative IT experience is now something I "keep handy, just in case it's needed."
When people ask what I do now, I just tell 'em that I make sure some small portion of their taxes is spent on worthwhile things, instead of hookers for beltway types.
Maybe the OP should consider doing something similar - being a "soft IT" type in a non-IT organization.
And here I thought it was that he'd found a reason to hire conjoined twins...
Great.
And under non-average conditions?
Didn't think so.
The things I use my cheap DSLR for the most are:
1. Indoor photography where flash is not an option. (f/1.8, ASA 1600)
2. Photographing moving targets where shutter lag is not an option.
3. Long-exposure star trail or milky way type shots.
4. Rudimentary time-lapse intervalometry.
A phone that can take decently detailed pictures of nearby, still objects under good lighting is one thing. A phone that gives me the ability to do any of the four above would be quite a surprise.
I must point out that Apple is specifically targeting Mac users, and their terms are much more onerous than Microsoft's in this case.
The terms someone stated before were that you can run one copy of the OS, on an Apple-labeled computer.
Right?
Mac users are, by definition, using Apple-labeled computers, so I fail to see how this license is at all onerous (burdensome) to them, unless they want to run OS X within virtualization on OS X, or install some other OS and run multiple instances of OS X simultaneously within virtualization under that... neither of which any more than a vanishingly small minority ever want to do.
It's sort of like the arcane/weird/funny laws on the books some places, banning things that basically nobody ever wanted to do anyway. Illegal to ride your bicycle through a fountain? Help, help, I'm being suppressed!
Which *nix systems other than linux can run linux specific apps?
What on earth are "linux specific apps"? Do you mean Linux binaries compiled from code that would probably also compile, either as-is or with minor adjustments, on just about any other *nix out there, including OS X?
I think your question does more to point out the differences between open and closed source software than the differences between Linux and OS X.
Actually, since the NT Kernel was heavily influenced by some coders (and code) from DEC...
We're talking about UNIX and VMS.
Welcome back to 1987, only with smaller boxen that fit with your decor and have slicker UIs. Oh, and the games are better, for the most part.
Oh, and remember how UNIX vs. VMS turned out?
(Unfortunately, it's harder to turn your old computer into a bar now...)
You know what else tends to reside in the path of the jet stream? Storm systems.
Seems like 10km up would also be right about... ah yes, cruising altitude for jetliners! What fun!
Actually just the other night on the news (here in Scotland) they were talking about racially motivated crime being on the rise. Not violence, per se, just property crime. But overall, though, it's a pretty nice place.
;)
Mobs of drunken Scots pose little threat to strangers, although they're quite commonly encountered. They seem to primarily just beat each other up, presumably realizing that other members of their own little drunken mob are unlikely to go to the police, while strangers would probably do so.
Mobs of sober Scots pose little threat to strangers as well, primarily because you can't find enough sober Scots at once to form a mob.
The corn based ethanol craze is founded in subsidies, not practicality.
Yep. I sometimes work with folks from a sustainability think-tank in Winnipeg, and the Globe and Mail (a newspaper somewhere in Canada) just ran an op-ed piece by its president, pointing out that (among other problems) the US government spends $500 in corn-based ethanol subsidies to reduce CO2 emissions by 1 metric tonne, while on the Chicago Climate Exchange (US-based, obviously, and market-driven, which I thought the Bushies liked?) that $500 would buy more than 30 metric tonnes of carbon offsets.
Just doesn't seem like a good deal. Must be that new math again...
No e?
Maybe (s)h(it)e is what you need.
Plus it's Queen's-English-Approved(TM).
Call me a Bitch-Hermit, but I think it really depends on the nature and schedule of your work.
:)
Since you're asking this on Slashdot, okay, maybe you've got some kind of vaguely traditional corporate concept, with business hours, a location, ongoing projects, and all that stuff. In which case, yeah, you probably do need to get together sometimes. And I don't think most products out there are going to scale well enough to do 10-way videoconferencing right now, so "face time" might be hard to get on-screen.
Of course, you could take turns hosting meetings at your houses...
That all said, there are organizations out there that are virtual by default, and only periodically lapse into meat-space on an ad hoc basis. I sporadically help with a team that has about 60 consultants in about 30 countries, with different skill sets and expertise. If something needs to be done somewhere specific, anywhere from 2 to 15 people will fly in from wherever they're based (literally around the world), bust their asses for anywhere from a few days to a couple weeks, and then fly out. In between, it's all e-mail, intranet, IMs and Skype.
This works (perhaps surprisingly) because, I think, when actual work is being done, the consultants are working around each other in person, for anywhere from 12 to 20 hours a day. In between "crunch times," all the newfangled communication tools are good for sharing knowledge and info and basically preparing everyone so they can hit the ground running.
So again, it really depends on what kind of work you're doing, how it's scheduled, and stuff like that.
Actually, if you go to the International Women's Day web site, the US government is listed as among those supporting it.
The minor detail, of course, is that the US government supports it as it applies to women who are, well, "international." Which is to say, not in the US.
It's more of an international aid/foreign policy footnote than a holiday, to them.
There's no impact in 2029, but I'm skeptical that even a transponder would tell us exactly what its orbit after the 2029 near-miss will be. It'd have to be very accurate, since a little distance closer to or further from Earth will result in a different post-2029 orbit.
Well, it'd need to have significantly more mass than a Shuttle, and be able to get further from earth than a Shuttle, but you're thinking of the gravity tractor proposed a couple years ago by two of NASA's own astronauts.
"Knock" is a bad word. You don't want to be playing pool with asteroids for balls. Hit it wrong and you just spin it around... even hitting it right, you don't know where it's going to end up.
:)
"Pull" is a better word.