No, that would only work in the short-term. In the long-term it reduces the value of the ad which either encourages yet more intrusive ads.
The best solution is to get revenue for each set of eyes that see the ad. If you block the ad, I shouldn't get money for it. This encourages less annoying, more context sensitive ads that are more likely to be of interest to the viewer.
Except it would have to do better than Pandora. It seems like the more feedback (especially negative feedback) I give a Pandora station, the less likely I am to like what it plays for me.
If you were to re-read my posts in this thread, you would find that I'm asking about where I might find primary sources for evidence supporting/refuting the claims made in the referenced video.
I regret replying to your original post...it was obvious from the beginning that you hadn't actually understood what I was asking. I should have simply left it alone.
You misunderstand the argument. The argument is not that people don't contribute to the CO2 levels in the atmosphere. The argument is about whether or not CO2 levels in the atmosphere are capable of driving climate change. It is, after all, a minor greenhouse gas (compared to, say, water vapor).
That video claims that CO2 trends follow temperature trends by 800 years, indicating that rises in CO2 are caused by raised temperatures, not the other way around.
I've heard this before, but never from a primary source. Can anyone direct me to the studies that support/refute this conclusion?
Right now all I have to go on is 2 videos (Gore's the Swindle video). I don't particularly trust either.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but AAC isn't proprietary. The only proprietary piece that iTunes uses is the Fairplay DRM which isn't used on these new tracks.
These new tracks should play on anything that supports AAC.
Our corporate standard desktop is Windows + Outlook + a bunch of crap that lets infosec automatically monitor and update the machine. Fortunately, for those of us who can get managerial approval, exceptions are easy to get.
The bottom line is that we can't do our work in Windows, therefore we run something we can get our work done in.
It's your manager's job to make sure you have what you need to do your job. If you need Linux/Solaris/Whatever, talk to you manager.
Don't you know anything about how challenging and frustrating it is to program parallel HW?
Somehow I've been using threads and forked processes all these years without ever realizing that I was doing something hard. Really, it's not all that different from regular programming in that you hide all the tedious, error-prone bits inside classes/macros/functions/whatever. In fact, I would suspect that the learning curve for threads isn't any worse than the learning curve for pointers (maybe it's just me, but I had more problems learning to deal with pointers-to-pointers and declaring function pointers than I ever had wrapping my mind around concurrent techniques (conditionals were the hardest, but they still weren't that hard)).
Please, enlighten me. What makes concurrent programming so "challenging" and "frustrating"?
The PS3 is over a year behind - that's about 15-20% of the console's entire lifetime.
This is just speculation on my part, but it seems to me that the reason that consoles have historically had 5-6 year life-spans was because newer models were released when the next level of processing power became available. Now single processors have plateaued and additional performance is now, and for the foreseeable future, coming from parallel processing, it appears that the PS3 has leap-frogged the competition (at least a little) by going with the Cell architecture and, as such, will be much longer lived than the 360 and, especially, the Wii.
This is not to say that there's a compelling reason to get a PS3 right now, but in a couple of years when the PS3 comes into it's own, its competitors will have to release a new generation console just to catch up power-wise with the PS3 (which will already have a large market and the developers will know better how to program for it).
In the short-term, I think the PS3 has been fumbled some, but in the long-term, I think Sony's strategy for the PS3 was spot on. Of course, only time will tell.
I would be very surprised to find out that people still replace their machines every 2 or 3 years. In the 90s, people upgraded every year or two because they needed more performance. We're past that era. A six year old computer nowadays will only be replaced if it suffers some sort of hardware failure.
1. It's just like the manpage says "ooffice -headless" Headless mode is used all the time for use in servers.
You'd think so, wouldn't you. Here's the results of adding -headless when there's no X server running: localhost(1007)$ ooffice2 -headless -p Logger.doc/usr/lib/openoffice/program/soffice.bin X11 error: Can't open display:
Set DISPLAY environment variable, use -display option
or check permissions of your X-Server
(See "man X" resp. "man xhost" for details)
4. This will be fixed eventually, but the API is not multi-thread safe.:-( The only workaround is to start multiple processes, which is possible.
You can only start multiple processes if each is owned by a different user. If you try to start two instances by the same user, the second ooffice2 invocation detects the first and attaches to it. This is the behavior that frustrates me so much (although perhaps I didn't explain it well in the original post).
I mostly use openoffice to generate PDFs from formats that I don't have better tools for (like doc and ppt). I call openoffice on the commandline thusly: ooffice2 -p foo.ppt and, since I've set the default printer to be a PDF converter in the same directory, it creates a PDF in the current directory for me.
Here are my complaints:
1. openoffice won't start, even in this filter mode, unless it has an X display that it's allowed to use. This is retarded since as a filter, it should never even start the GUI. To get around this, I have to start X and then call openoffice with the display option set (-display localhost:0).
This means I can't use openoffice as a filter on headless machines that don't have X installed unless I'm allowed to set the display to some remote X server. Completely retarded.
2. openoffice won't let me specify the name of the output file that I want. Instead, it guesses the name based on the first text it finds in the file, and I have to look for the most recently created pdf in the current directory and rename it to something sensible.
3. openoffice always exits with a status of 0, even when it had problems. If there's a problem (unknown file format, for example), it should exit with a non-zero status so that I can detect the problem immediately.
4. openoffice won't allow you to run multiple instances concurrently. If you start four filters, only the last one started will generate a result. The rest will quietly not do anything (and, of course, won't set status to a value that would tell you anything went wrong). As a result, you have to serialize all your calls to openoffice.
If anyone knows how to deal with these issues, I'd love to hear the solution.
Slashdot Mirror
If the situation is dire enough to shoot at all, you shoot to kill.
Until I can store and manage my email locally through a webmail interface, I will always prefer a standalone app.
No, that would only work in the short-term. In the long-term it reduces the value of the ad which either encourages yet more intrusive ads.
The best solution is to get revenue for each set of eyes that see the ad. If you block the ad, I shouldn't get money for it. This encourages less annoying, more context sensitive ads that are more likely to be of interest to the viewer.
Most of the annoying adds are blocked by NoScript. If you don't mind the other ads, then Adblock is overkill.
YMMV
I'm still not convinced because I haven't heard any compelling arguments.
Everything I've heard has been hype and appeals to questionable authorities.
The more I try to listen, the more it sounds like a religious argument.
Except it would have to do better than Pandora. It seems like the more feedback (especially negative feedback) I give a Pandora station, the less likely I am to like what it plays for me.
The disk thrashed till i turned off indexing
Forgive my ignorance, but by turning off indexing aren't you giving up the fast desktop search?
This isn't 1994 anymore. The arguments against MS for making unstable operating systems ended when NT was released.
Uh, didn't Windows ME come after NT?
Yes, yes it did.
Since Windows 2000, MS has made stable operating systems that really are usable by the average joe without difficulty.
This is mostly true. I've had issues with 2000 and XP, but they are certainly improvements over the MS products that they replaced.
I went on Newegg and spec'd out components similar to the "entry-level" $4000 Mac Pro... for about $2000.
If you show your work, we can verify that you're actually doing a fair comparison.
I made no such claims, directly or implicitly.
If you were to re-read my posts in this thread, you would find that I'm asking about where I might find primary sources for evidence supporting/refuting the claims made in the referenced video.
I regret replying to your original post...it was obvious from the beginning that you hadn't actually understood what I was asking. I should have simply left it alone.
Thanks. I'll listen to the radio show after work.
Should be interesting to get the actual researcher's perspective.
I fail to see the contradiction between those statements.
The first statement says that according to the video previously referenced, changes in CO2 levels is a symptom of climate change, not a cause.
The second statement points out that you're arguing against the wrong argument.
You misunderstand the argument. The argument is not that people don't contribute to the CO2 levels in the atmosphere. The argument is about whether or not CO2 levels in the atmosphere are capable of driving climate change. It is, after all, a minor greenhouse gas (compared to, say, water vapor).
That video claims that CO2 trends follow temperature trends by 800 years, indicating that rises in CO2 are caused by raised temperatures, not the other way around.
I've heard this before, but never from a primary source. Can anyone direct me to the studies that support/refute this conclusion?
Right now all I have to go on is 2 videos (Gore's the Swindle video). I don't particularly trust either.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but AAC isn't proprietary. The only proprietary piece that iTunes uses is the Fairplay DRM which isn't used on these new tracks.
These new tracks should play on anything that supports AAC.
I didn't realize that masturbating counted as a disability.
Or, perhaps, you missed the joke.
Our corporate standard desktop is Windows + Outlook + a bunch of crap that lets infosec automatically monitor and update the machine. Fortunately, for those of us who can get managerial approval, exceptions are easy to get.
The bottom line is that we can't do our work in Windows, therefore we run something we can get our work done in.
It's your manager's job to make sure you have what you need to do your job. If you need Linux/Solaris/Whatever, talk to you manager.
So if Sun ever releases OpenSolaris under GPL3, all your wants will be fulfilled?
Don't you know anything about how challenging and frustrating it is to program parallel HW?
Somehow I've been using threads and forked processes all these years without ever realizing that I was doing something hard. Really, it's not all that different from regular programming in that you hide all the tedious, error-prone bits inside classes/macros/functions/whatever. In fact, I would suspect that the learning curve for threads isn't any worse than the learning curve for pointers (maybe it's just me, but I had more problems learning to deal with pointers-to-pointers and declaring function pointers than I ever had wrapping my mind around concurrent techniques (conditionals were the hardest, but they still weren't that hard)).
Please, enlighten me. What makes concurrent programming so "challenging" and "frustrating"?
What are you talking about? We've known how to manage processes and threads for decades now.
Software that needs more horsepower will adapt to use concurrent programming methods
It's not like concurrent programming is a new thing.
Nerds of all ages and walks who prefer the console-for-gaming, computer-for-linux combo
Aw, crap! So I'm a nerd now? When did using the right tool for the job become a sufficient condition?
The PS3 is over a year behind - that's about 15-20% of the console's entire lifetime.
This is just speculation on my part, but it seems to me that the reason that consoles have historically had 5-6 year life-spans was because newer models were released when the next level of processing power became available. Now single processors have plateaued and additional performance is now, and for the foreseeable future, coming from parallel processing, it appears that the PS3 has leap-frogged the competition (at least a little) by going with the Cell architecture and, as such, will be much longer lived than the 360 and, especially, the Wii.
This is not to say that there's a compelling reason to get a PS3 right now, but in a couple of years when the PS3 comes into it's own, its competitors will have to release a new generation console just to catch up power-wise with the PS3 (which will already have a large market and the developers will know better how to program for it).
In the short-term, I think the PS3 has been fumbled some, but in the long-term, I think Sony's strategy for the PS3 was spot on. Of course, only time will tell.
I would be very surprised to find out that people still replace their machines every 2 or 3 years. In the 90s, people upgraded every year or two because they needed more performance. We're past that era. A six year old computer nowadays will only be replaced if it suffers some sort of hardware failure.
1. It's just like the manpage says "ooffice -headless" Headless mode is used all the time for use in servers.
/usr/lib/openoffice/program/soffice.bin X11 error: Can't open display:
:-( The only workaround is to start multiple processes, which is possible.
You'd think so, wouldn't you. Here's the results of adding -headless when there's no X server running:
localhost(1007)$ ooffice2 -headless -p Logger.doc
Set DISPLAY environment variable, use -display option
or check permissions of your X-Server
(See "man X" resp. "man xhost" for details)
4. This will be fixed eventually, but the API is not multi-thread safe.
You can only start multiple processes if each is owned by a different user. If you try to start two instances by the same user, the second ooffice2 invocation detects the first and attaches to it. This is the behavior that frustrates me so much (although perhaps I didn't explain it well in the original post).
I mostly use openoffice to generate PDFs from formats that I don't have better tools for (like doc and ppt). I call openoffice on the commandline thusly: ooffice2 -p foo.ppt and, since I've set the default printer to be a PDF converter in the same directory, it creates a PDF in the current directory for me.
Here are my complaints:
1. openoffice won't start, even in this filter mode, unless it has an X display that it's allowed to use. This is retarded since as a filter, it should never even start the GUI. To get around this, I have to start X and then call openoffice with the display option set (-display localhost:0).
This means I can't use openoffice as a filter on headless machines that don't have X installed unless I'm allowed to set the display to some remote X server. Completely retarded.
2. openoffice won't let me specify the name of the output file that I want. Instead, it guesses the name based on the first text it finds in the file, and I have to look for the most recently created pdf in the current directory and rename it to something sensible.
3. openoffice always exits with a status of 0, even when it had problems. If there's a problem (unknown file format, for example), it should exit with a non-zero status so that I can detect the problem immediately.
4. openoffice won't allow you to run multiple instances concurrently. If you start four filters, only the last one started will generate a result. The rest will quietly not do anything (and, of course, won't set status to a value that would tell you anything went wrong). As a result, you have to serialize all your calls to openoffice.
If anyone knows how to deal with these issues, I'd love to hear the solution.