Take as a simple example the VHS/Video2000/Hi8/BetaMAX comparisons.
What won out: VHS, crappiest quality, enormous tapes, but the cheapest. It didn't matter that any of the others was a better quality, only the price mattered.
It's a shame they didn't tell the 'laymen' customers the price on these sets, or you might actually have gotten an extra (for most people important) variable in the equation.
Anyone else seem to find it funny that an article containing so many scientific buzzwords has so many spelling and grammatical errors in it?
Even aside from the fact that some of the things mentioned in this article could have been pulled straight out of Star Trek and have little or not relation to actual scientific principles..
It's not so much the supposition that people are 'causing' global warming, since there are a LOT of things 'causing' global warming (cows eating grass and farting methane, as a random example). The point I think is most important is that the human way of life currently includes belching out rather large quantities of gasses into the air that are thought to contribute to global warming.
Humans aren't the only ones doing it, for sure, and never will be the only ones (certain landslides on the ocean bottom free up large pockets of methane as well), but they're definitely part of it.
Now the question becomes more political than scientific: I think we can take it as a given humans contribute to global warming. The question is not whether we should stop or slow down, the question is why we shouldn't.
Is there any reason we can't cute down on greenhouse gas emmisions? Whether we're responsible for 30% or 5% really doesn't matter. It's just beancounting. The fact as far as I can see it is we're at least partially reponsible, and if we can reduce that part, we'd at least have less negative impact on the environment.
(To another post in this thread: I have no clue which side I belong to, to be honest. But I'd guess the global warming side:)
Splut.
ps. (Yes. This post is repetative in certain place, but I've noticed a penchant for/. readers to single out one improperly spelled or grammatically incorrectly pur phrasing, and try to discredit your post, without bothering about the content) pps. No. I'm not a native english speaker/writer, either.
Extrapolating the common reaction to this sort of 'dangers to national security', I'll be looking for a news article about how cellphones should be banned..
(Cynical, yes. Too close to the truth? Unfortunately)
ps. Since in the future we can filter content, would we also be able to filter out absolutely horrible 2s and 3s to books and/or movies? Now that would be nice..
I think what people fail to see in this argument, is that it really doesn't matter how the characters are oriented. It's all a matter of how they're displayed.
If you have: AABBBCCCDDD in your memory, since that's the order in which the characters have been typed, the only thing you have to do is make your display routines in such a way that you write them 'on screen' from right to left.
For all the code involved in line checking, block operations, search and replace, etc, etc, it really doesn't matter how it looks on the screen, only how it's actually internally stored.
So the basic design of these Microsoft programs was faulty in that you can't define an orientation for the data you've used as input.
Mad.
Re:When did smart people...
on
Systemantics
·
· Score: 2, Funny
But it's a bullshit buzzword from 1977! That's a year where most of the current bullshitbuzzworders weren't even born yet! Or if they were, they were still sucking their mom's teats (or wish they could. Hmmmm.)
I personally think this must be one of the nicest Xmas presents in a while. And hopefully this one won't go awry and actually produce the results everyone in the community hopes for.
Anyone else thinking about 'London, The Beagle has landed'..
Actually, where I live (Netherlands) I don't think they even sell TVs anymore that can't handle PAL and NTSC just as easy (and a fairly large percentage also does SECAM in both versions)
The only thing you'll notice is that the quality of NTSC movies will be a lot lower than you're used to with PAL movies.
Running Region 1 NTSC DVDs here is easy enough. The last DVD player I saw had these instructions with it to make it region-free: Push eject button. While door is open, press play. The DVD player is now regionfree.
It's all very nice to advertise with unlimited bandwidth, or free porn, or free beer, but in the end, they're all oxymorons, since people simply want to make money.
The whole problem I see is that an ISP that provides a 1Mb downlink, shouldn't be surprised if that is used for 86400Mb per day. Although it seems rather reasonable that no one can ever view that much content, or for that matter will be able to store it.
As for accepted use policies, they all state the same between the lines: If we think you're using up too much %'s of our backbone bandwidth, you're not using it acceptably.
Bob wrote: Even then, a gig in a block the size of a sugar cube (plus supporting electronics). Already this takes up more space-per-gig than a DVD. What's the advantage?
Well.. For one thing what would you say about the fact that this technology doesn't use any moving parts? If you just plop some electrodes on it and can read the thing, then you're rid of ridiculous high spinning speeds, laser readers that need to move back and forth at insane speeds, etc.
Anyone else notice the money slot on the front of this thing? I'm quite sure this has been developed as a kiddy ride, and is about half a meter big or so. You put your money in the slot, and off you go!
It seems a lot of you are completely missing the point here. EAL 4 is 'higher' than EAL2, that's entirely true. However:
EAL3+ all require the OS to be tested from *design*, and since there's never been an official design criterium, or design specification for any linux distro or kernel, it's quite simply impossible to even get EAL3 or more for a linux distro/kernel/whatever.
The reason Win2K could get EAL4, is because they were already working on that certification before it was even released. That's the whole point.
If I can use Linux on this thing, I want the 64bit for the 64bit sake, since I'm running into 2TB block device limits at the moment with a 32 bits kernel..
In that respect: 64 bits is better.
ps. I laughed my ass off about the flame answering bit.
Actually what I'm thinking about most with 'Windows Mobile' is the frustration a lot of mobile phone users get when being called *again* for something stupid, and finally decide to toss the damn thing out of the window.
If it runs PocketPC that behaviour gets added to by it crashing far too much (from experience)
Okay. Either I misread it the first time over, or the editor in charge already changed it (I hope the latter, otherwise eye sight problems might have been induced by severe monitor use)
But to reply on the matter at hand (no pun intended), any sort of work which forces you into the same type of repetitive movements or the same position for hours on end, has serious health repercussions. If this study 'proves' (for as far as you can do that in a statistical study) that computer keyboard use isn't the primary cause for CTS, then it's still a useless study. If it would have been a study to what *does* cause these kind of problems, it would be of a lot more use to the generic population of computer users.
I'll wait for this study to appear before drawing any conclusions. On the base of this article, any comment would be straining for significance. It doesn't describe the testing methods, it doesn't describe the age group, it doesn't describe the previous work, etc, etc.
On just this article, I don't think anyone can make any intelligent comments (and I'll include myself in that as well:)
Slashdot Mirror
Take as a simple example the VHS/Video2000/Hi8/BetaMAX comparisons.
What won out: VHS, crappiest quality, enormous tapes, but the cheapest. It didn't matter that any of the others was a better quality, only the price mattered.
It's a shame they didn't tell the 'laymen' customers the price on these sets, or you might actually have gotten an extra (for most people important) variable in the equation.
Splut.
Uhm. Did I miss something? How is a '5-digit UID' anything special?
Anyone else seem to find it funny that an article containing so many scientific buzzwords has so many spelling and grammatical errors in it?
Even aside from the fact that some of the things mentioned in this article could have been pulled straight out of Star Trek and have little or not relation to actual scientific principles..
Splut.
And after most motorcycle accidents, quite often also not donors of other organs either.
(Anyone want a squashed liver? Or a flattened lung? Anyone? Come on! It's 50% off!)
Actually, the second floor was a sauna. Cost effective, too.
It's not so much the supposition that people are 'causing' global warming, since there are a LOT of things 'causing' global warming (cows eating grass and farting methane, as a random example). The point I think is most important is that the human way of life currently includes belching out rather large quantities of gasses into the air that are thought to contribute to global warming.
:)
/. readers to single out one improperly spelled or grammatically incorrectly pur phrasing, and try to discredit your post, without bothering about the content)
Humans aren't the only ones doing it, for sure, and never will be the only ones (certain landslides on the ocean bottom free up large pockets of methane as well), but they're definitely part of it.
Now the question becomes more political than scientific: I think we can take it as a given humans contribute to global warming. The question is not whether we should stop or slow down, the question is why we shouldn't.
Is there any reason we can't cute down on greenhouse gas emmisions? Whether we're responsible for 30% or 5% really doesn't matter. It's just beancounting. The fact as far as I can see it is we're at least partially reponsible, and if we can reduce that part, we'd at least have less negative impact on the environment.
(To another post in this thread: I have no clue which side I belong to, to be honest. But I'd guess the global warming side
Splut.
ps. (Yes. This post is repetative in certain place, but I've noticed a penchant for
pps. No. I'm not a native english speaker/writer, either.
Extrapolating the common reaction to this sort of 'dangers to national security', I'll be looking for a news article about how cellphones should be banned..
(Cynical, yes. Too close to the truth? Unfortunately)
Splut.
Bit of a silly question if you don't provide a list of what you want to run, are currently running, and am planning on running in the future :)
If you need MSSQL, you're SoL, if it's just a fileserver, samba will work fine, etc.
Splut.
Definitely flamebait, I agree with the mods on this.
However, even as flamebait, people should at least get most of their facts correct.
AFAIK, Europe has had HDTV (As in PAL Plus) for around 8 years now, with rather a large amount of channels actually broadcasting it.
...
/.
At a guess that's the 5th time this appears on
The ever increasingly inaccurately named trilogy?
;)
(Of course referring to Douglas Adams
Mad.
ps. Since in the future we can filter content, would we also be able to filter out absolutely horrible 2s and 3s to books and/or movies? Now that would be nice..
I think what people fail to see in this argument, is that it really doesn't matter how the characters are oriented. It's all a matter of how they're displayed.
If you have:
AABBBCCCDDD in your memory, since that's the order in which the characters have been typed, the only thing you have to do is make your display routines in such a way that you write them 'on screen' from right to left.
For all the code involved in line checking, block operations, search and replace, etc, etc, it really doesn't matter how it looks on the screen, only how it's actually internally stored.
So the basic design of these Microsoft programs was faulty in that you can't define an orientation for the data you've used as input.
Mad.
But it's a bullshit buzzword from 1977! That's a year where most of the current bullshitbuzzworders weren't even born yet! Or if they were, they were still sucking their mom's teats (or wish they could. Hmmmm.)
See. Even the past isn't safe from buzzwordisms.
Mad.
I personally think this must be one of the nicest Xmas presents in a while. And hopefully this one won't go awry and actually produce the results everyone in the community hopes for.
Anyone else thinking about 'London, The Beagle has landed'..
Mad.
Actually, where I live (Netherlands) I don't think they even sell TVs anymore that can't handle PAL and NTSC just as easy (and a fairly large percentage also does SECAM in both versions)
:)
The only thing you'll notice is that the quality of NTSC movies will be a lot lower than you're used to with PAL movies.
Running Region 1 NTSC DVDs here is easy enough. The last DVD player I saw had these instructions with it to make it region-free: Push eject button. While door is open, press play. The DVD player is now regionfree.
I mean, seriously, where's the problem
Mad.
It's all very nice to advertise with unlimited bandwidth, or free porn, or free beer, but in the end, they're all oxymorons, since people simply want to make money.
The whole problem I see is that an ISP that provides a 1Mb downlink, shouldn't be surprised if that is used for 86400Mb per day. Although it seems rather reasonable that no one can ever view that much content, or for that matter will be able to store it.
As for accepted use policies, they all state the same between the lines: If we think you're using up too much %'s of our backbone bandwidth, you're not using it acceptably.
Mad.
US - US Sucks
Error: Too deep recursion in statement.
Mad.
Bob wrote:
Even then, a gig in a block the size of a sugar cube (plus supporting electronics). Already this takes up more space-per-gig than a DVD. What's the advantage?
Well.. For one thing what would you say about the fact that this technology doesn't use any moving parts? If you just plop some electrodes on it and can read the thing, then you're rid of ridiculous high spinning speeds, laser readers that need to move back and forth at insane speeds, etc.
Mad.
Anyone else notice the money slot on the front of this thing? I'm quite sure this has been developed as a kiddy ride, and is about half a meter big or so. You put your money in the slot, and off you go!
Mad
Odd. It seems I mentioned 'those things', ergo, 19K2 modems. So the whole ethernet idea didn't even come into the picture in my comment.
Ah well. I guess people can't always know what you mean.
Maybe I should try and port this thing to my old MSX as well, who knows, it might even work :)
As for old x86 systems, 19K2 modems didn't even properly work with those, so it's going to be fun to have internet with those things *smirk*
It seems a lot of you are completely missing the point here. EAL 4 is 'higher' than EAL2, that's entirely true. However:
EAL3+ all require the OS to be tested from *design*, and since there's never been an official design criterium, or design specification for any linux distro or kernel, it's quite simply impossible to even get EAL3 or more for a linux distro/kernel/whatever.
The reason Win2K could get EAL4, is because they were already working on that certification before it was even released. That's the whole point.
Mad.
If I can use Linux on this thing, I want the 64bit for the 64bit sake, since I'm running into 2TB block device limits at the moment with a 32 bits kernel..
In that respect: 64 bits is better.
ps. I laughed my ass off about the flame answering bit.
Actually what I'm thinking about most with 'Windows Mobile' is the frustration a lot of mobile phone users get when being called *again* for something stupid, and finally decide to toss the damn thing out of the window.
;)
If it runs PocketPC that behaviour gets added to by it crashing far too much (from experience)
Probably mod this is troll/flamebait
Okay. Either I misread it the first time over, or the editor in charge already changed it (I hope the latter, otherwise eye sight problems might have been induced by severe monitor use)
:)
But to reply on the matter at hand (no pun intended), any sort of work which forces you into the same type of repetitive movements or the same position for hours on end, has serious health repercussions. If this study 'proves' (for as far as you can do that in a statistical study) that computer keyboard use isn't the primary cause for CTS, then it's still a useless study. If it would have been a study to what *does* cause these kind of problems, it would be of a lot more use to the generic population of computer users.
I'll wait for this study to appear before drawing any conclusions. On the base of this article, any comment would be straining for significance. It doesn't describe the testing methods, it doesn't describe the age group, it doesn't describe the previous work, etc, etc.
On just this article, I don't think anyone can make any intelligent comments (and I'll include myself in that as well
Mad.