TFA says that you can save up to 30% on your car insurance because of reduced vandalism. Then it goes on to speculate about how people would be willing to give up privacy for a cost saving of 30% in their cost of living.
With that sort of logic fail, we can safely conclude that Scott Adams has been killed and replaced by a PHB cloned to look like him.
No no, it's so you can be charged for running up your internet connection bill at home by streaming video to the ipad to watch at 1024x576. At least the xoom, with a 1280x800 screen, can do 1280x720.
So wait... On one hand you semi-jokingly complain about the over charges they would no doubt apply for the amount of data it would take to stream at 1024x576, and then proceed to bash the iPad implying it's screen is too small by stating an even Larger video stream to a not-ipad as a good feature?!?
Man, Apple haters will go to any lengths
Try again. When people look at video streaming packages, they forget that their internet billing can also rise since they can exceed their cap. So that was my first point. My second was that if you're going to watch a movie, the ipad isn't the best option available in the current generation of tablets - far from it.
As for your point, do you have any proof that the video stream is smaller for the ipad? It doesn't look like it, since it will only work over wifi. It's more likely that the iPad wil downres the video for display on the device's screen. After all, 1024x576 is a real oddball video format.
And its illegal to use OTA for public display of sporting events. I realize sports aren't big to slashdot users, but if you've ever watched any major sporting event like a NFL or MLB game, or a big race... the first thing you hear and see is a 'no rebroadcasting without permission'.
No, it's not. First, showing it isn't rebroadcasting.
Places are prohibited from charging admission to watch the Super Bowl, and the law prevents them from showing the game on a TV bigger than 55 inches.
That rule has been done away with now b/c of all the flack they got from coming down on church parties. It's been legal for the past 2-3 years.
[citation needed]
After all, I was kind enough to provide links in my original comment, and I'd love to learn that I'm wrong, and that someone actually did something middling reasonable:-)
And its illegal to use OTA for public display of sporting events. I realize sports aren't big to slashdot users, but if you've ever watched any major sporting event like a NFL or MLB game, or a big race... the first thing you hear and see is a 'no rebroadcasting without permission'.
No, it's not. First, showing it isn't rebroadcasting.
No no, it's so you can be charged for running up your internet connection bill at home by streaming video to the ipad to watch at 1024x576. At least the xoom, with a 1280x800 screen, can do 1280x720.
Until it gets decent market share, there's no reason NOT to ignore it. Same as it's safe to ignore WP7 smartphones.
In other words, if it works, it works, but if it doesn't, don't kill yourself trying to fix it (especially since any new release is going to be patched fairly often at first - why fix something that your fix will break again later).
The R&D cost is a sunk cost, but it still has to be amortized over the number of launches. It wouldn't have been bad if the shuttle had met its' design specs (125 launches per vehicle, 8 vehicles in the fleet, with new ones added as the old ones are retired). Also, the $450 million that NASA claims is seriously outdated - the last flights involve a LOT of extra expenses because of aging parts that have to be re-qualified, etc. And NASA doesn't include many overhead expenses as line items directly attributed to the launch costs. So, $800 million is probably the lower bound now.
There's a cross-over point where supporting a particular browser or platform doesn't make sense - the additional work could be invested in other projects that would yield bigger returns per hour/dollar invested.
We couldn't build another Saturn V even if we wanted to, right?
Using our own 60s tech isn't even an option. And the Ares 1 was going to cost $40B to build, not counting the launch costs.
I'm glad we won the space race.
The only reason why not is political (as in NASA politics). Contrary to rumours, all the plans are intact, and many of the engineers are still around - they went on to work on the shuttle program.
Of course, having a launch vehicle that cost $100 million per launch and with more than 5x the payload makes the shuttle program look... stupid. Looking at payload to orbit, the shuttle program's total cost of 170 billion for 135 missions could have been replaced with 25 Saturn V launches. Even if the Saturn V were to cost 10x as much due to inflation, it would still have been only 1/7 the cost.
Simple math - even back in 2004, the shuttle program had already cost $145 billion. So even if all the subsequent flights had been free, it would still have beenover $1 billion per mission.
Part of this is due to the shuttle never achieving any of its design goals. It was supposed to have a rapid turn-around time (2 weeks), and a usable service life of between 100 and 125 flights per shuttle. The turn-around time obviously was never met, and obviously, the shuttles (Atlantis, Challenger, Columbia, Discovery, Endeavour - I'm leaving out the Enterprise test vehicle, which never made it into space), didn't even average 25% of the original number of missions per vehicle. It was because of these failures that fleet production was stopped at 4, rather than 8, and never did achieve 50 launches per year - it didn't even average 50 launches per decade.
launching 12 to 14 chairs... Steve Ballmer likes that!
Re:Is it Twelvember yet?
on
Happy Pi Day
·
· Score: 1
For fuck's sake, can we all please stop insisting that a particular arbitrary way to represent dates is better? It's pretty asinine how this gets brought up so much.
It gets brought up so much because a certain country is still living in the past. You know, the one that threw off the yoke of British dominance, but still insists on using pounds and feet and miles.
More relevant, we haven't put *on* the yoke of dominance by Brussels bureaucrats.
ANSI X3-30-1985 specifies the yyyymmdd format. Last I heard, the "A" in ANSI stood for "American". It's been referenced in subsequent standards
ANSI.X3.30-1985
Date conforms to the date formats described in ANSI X3.30-1985. For the A.D. era to December 31, 9999, YYYYMMDD is used; for example 19960831 (the same as FGDC?). It also defines other formats for B.C. dates and A.D. after 9999
Re:Is it Twelvember yet?
on
Happy Pi Day
·
· Score: 1
It gets brought up so much because a certain country is still living in the past. You know, the one that threw off the yoke of British dominance, but still insists on using pounds and feet and miles.
Britain still uses spellings that were introduced during Norman dominance. Let me know when they throw off the yoke of "colour."
As for measurements, "a pint is a pound the world 'round," is valid with US units, but not Imperial units; the two systems are not identical.
I'm not in Britain. Kanuckistan has no problem with mingling english and french - we call it franglais, and its use world-wide goes back centuries:-)
And the US still writes it as "knife" (from the french word "canif", for a pocket knife). You just don't pronounce the "k", and made the "i" hard.
- though that doesn't explain "knot":-)
Part of it is because, for the french, it's normal to say "the 14th of March, 2011" instead of "March 14th, 2011", so dd-mm-yyyy is both acceptable and unambiguous. However, for ages, the RoC (Rest of Canada) used mm-dd-yyyy, similar to the US, as did the english in Quebec.
Interestingly enough, my old dBase IV manual lists the following formats for the SET DATE command (notice the separators) - the ONLY place using month day year was the US:
AMERICAN (or MDY) mm/dd/y
ANSI yy.mm.dd
BRITISH or FRENCH (or DMY) dd/mm/yy
GERMAN dd.mm.yy
ITALIAN dd-mm-yy
JAPAN (or YMD) yy/mm/dd
USA mm-dd-yy
Capitalization of the word "english" in such contexts is a stupid convention enforced by spell-checking nazis. It's not the name/label of a specific physical object - a person, place, or thing. It could be referring to either one of many spoken or written dialects, or an ethnic or geographic origin. We only capitalize it because "that's the way we've always done it", which is a pretty lousy excuse.
We don't say "This is an Orange Orange", even though we're referring to both a specific object and a specific colour.
We don't write "The Sun was high in the sky" even though we only call one specific star "the sun". Ditto with the moon.
The use of capitalization in such cases looks dumb because it IS dumb. So why make the distinction with english, french, or whatever (interestingly, my spell-checker doesn't flag the use of lower case for "french", just "english").
Also, the term "nazis" is now generic - it doesn't necessarily refer to members of a political party, just like someone can be a republican or democrat without being a US citizen. There's a difference between being a democrat and a Democrat, a liberal and a Liberal, etc.
Try using a large external monitor - you'll quickly add an external keyboard so that you can use the external monitor as your primary focus.
And wireless mice are quite popular for laptops.
Heck, mine even came with a remote control.
Re:Is it Twelvember yet?
on
Happy Pi Day
·
· Score: 1
For fuck's sake, can we all please stop insisting that a particular arbitrary way to represent dates is better? It's pretty asinine how this gets brought up so much.
It gets brought up so much because a certain country is still living in the past. You know, the one that threw off the yoke of British dominance, but still insists on using pounds and feet and miles.
So, is 01/02/03: January 2nd, 2003, February 1st, 2003, or February 3rd, 2001?
2001-02-03 is unambiguous, and always sorts properly.
If a fuel assembly were to overheat and deform within its fuel channel, the resulting change of geometry permits high heat transfer to the cool moderator, thus preventing the breach of the fuel channel, and the possibility of a meltdown. Furthermore, because of the use of natural uranium as fuel, this reactor cannot sustain a chain reaction if its original fuel channel geometry is altered in any significant manner.
Lives in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania It's complicated From Monroeville, Pennsylvania
Crystal Yamnitzky
Today haa been a fucked up day period
March 6 at 4:44pm via Android
Robert Driscoll is among the Friends.
Also, she probably created this account - the 3 friends currently in it are common with the above account. My guess is the police have gotten her barred from accessing the first account.
The idea of open-source projects committing to a fixed schedule of release just shows that Shuttleworth hasn't got a clue as to how linux, and open-source in general, works. Take the most core of the core components in a linux distro - the linux kernel
Unlike at traditional software companies, there are no deadlines. The Linux kernel is done when Torvalds decides it's ready.
Canonical would like everything to be synchronized because that helps their marketing. However, open source is a meritocracy. Good code gets picked up because people find it useful, not because of billion-dollar marketing campaigns for things like WP7..
Ubuntu is a good example of the slip in quality when you try to meet an artificial schedule. People are complaining about how every new release breaks something. Contrast that with the market leader - RedHat. Look how long they've been between release cycles. Canonical might want more rapid releases because they need the hype. RedHat doesn't. And unlike Canonical, RedHat is profitable.
Slashdot Mirror
Speaking of which, maybe they could market it as a voodoo doll, and try for some religious exemption (voodoo is classified as a religion).
With that sort of logic fail, we can safely conclude that Scott Adams has been killed and replaced by a PHB cloned to look like him.
No no, it's so you can be charged for running up your internet connection bill at home by streaming video to the ipad to watch at 1024x576. At least the xoom, with a 1280x800 screen, can do 1280x720.
So wait... On one hand you semi-jokingly complain about the over charges they would no doubt apply for the amount of data it would take to stream at 1024x576, and then proceed to bash the iPad implying it's screen is too small by stating an even Larger video stream to a not-ipad as a good feature?!?
Man, Apple haters will go to any lengths
Try again. When people look at video streaming packages, they forget that their internet billing can also rise since they can exceed their cap. So that was my first point. My second was that if you're going to watch a movie, the ipad isn't the best option available in the current generation of tablets - far from it.
As for your point, do you have any proof that the video stream is smaller for the ipad? It doesn't look like it, since it will only work over wifi. It's more likely that the iPad wil downres the video for display on the device's screen. After all, 1024x576 is a real oddball video format.
And its illegal to use OTA for public display of sporting events. I realize sports aren't big to slashdot users, but if you've ever watched any major sporting event like a NFL or MLB game, or a big race ... the first thing you hear and see is a 'no rebroadcasting without permission'.
No, it's not. First, showing it isn't rebroadcasting.
Second, the ban on public display is only for screen sizes of 55" and greater. Don't you remember the fuss about churches being told that 55" screens were too big for watching the superbowl ?
Places are prohibited from charging admission to watch the Super Bowl, and the law prevents them from showing the game on a TV bigger than 55 inches.
That rule has been done away with now b/c of all the flack they got from coming down on church parties. It's been legal for the past 2-3 years.
[citation needed]
After all, I was kind enough to provide links in my original comment, and I'd love to learn that I'm wrong, and that someone actually did something middling reasonable :-)
And its illegal to use OTA for public display of sporting events. I realize sports aren't big to slashdot users, but if you've ever watched any major sporting event like a NFL or MLB game, or a big race ... the first thing you hear and see is a 'no rebroadcasting without permission'.
No, it's not. First, showing it isn't rebroadcasting.
Second, the ban on public display is only for screen sizes of 55" and greater. Don't you remember the fuss about churches being told that 55" screens were too big for watching the superbowl ?
Places are prohibited from charging admission to watch the Super Bowl, and the law prevents them from showing the game on a TV bigger than 55 inches.
No no, it's so you can be charged for running up your internet connection bill at home by streaming video to the ipad to watch at 1024x576. At least the xoom, with a 1280x800 screen, can do 1280x720.
In other words, if it works, it works, but if it doesn't, don't kill yourself trying to fix it (especially since any new release is going to be patched fairly often at first - why fix something that your fix will break again later).
The R&D cost is a sunk cost, but it still has to be amortized over the number of launches. It wouldn't have been bad if the shuttle had met its' design specs (125 launches per vehicle, 8 vehicles in the fleet, with new ones added as the old ones are retired). Also, the $450 million that NASA claims is seriously outdated - the last flights involve a LOT of extra expenses because of aging parts that have to be re-qualified, etc. And NASA doesn't include many overhead expenses as line items directly attributed to the launch costs. So, $800 million is probably the lower bound now.
There's a cross-over point where supporting a particular browser or platform doesn't make sense - the additional work could be invested in other projects that would yield bigger returns per hour/dollar invested.
Even though that sounds like a small percentage (and it kind of is) web developers cannot afford to ignore 9% (1 of 11) visitors to their sites.
Why not? Firefox was basically ignored by most developers until it hit over 20%.
We couldn't build another Saturn V even if we wanted to, right?
Using our own 60s tech isn't even an option. And the Ares 1 was going to cost $40B to build, not counting the launch costs.
I'm glad we won the space race.
The only reason why not is political (as in NASA politics). Contrary to rumours, all the plans are intact, and many of the engineers are still around - they went on to work on the shuttle program.
Of course, having a launch vehicle that cost $100 million per launch and with more than 5x the payload makes the shuttle program look ... stupid. Looking at payload to orbit, the shuttle program's total cost of 170 billion for 135 missions could have been replaced with 25 Saturn V launches. Even if the Saturn V were to cost 10x as much due to inflation, it would still have been only 1/7 the cost.
Simple math - even back in 2004, the shuttle program had already cost $145 billion. So even if all the subsequent flights had been free, it would still have beenover $1 billion per mission.
Part of this is due to the shuttle never achieving any of its design goals. It was supposed to have a rapid turn-around time (2 weeks), and a usable service life of between 100 and 125 flights per shuttle. The turn-around time obviously was never met, and obviously, the shuttles (Atlantis, Challenger, Columbia, Discovery, Endeavour - I'm leaving out the Enterprise test vehicle, which never made it into space), didn't even average 25% of the original number of missions per vehicle. It was because of these failures that fleet production was stopped at 4, rather than 8, and never did achieve 50 launches per year - it didn't even average 50 launches per decade.
launching 12 to 14 chairs ... Steve Ballmer likes that!
For fuck's sake, can we all please stop insisting that a particular arbitrary way to represent dates is better? It's pretty asinine how this gets brought up so much.
It gets brought up so much because a certain country is still living in the past. You know, the one that threw off the yoke of British dominance, but still insists on using pounds and feet and miles.
More relevant, we haven't put *on* the yoke of dominance by Brussels bureaucrats.
ANSI X3-30-1985 specifies the yyyymmdd format. Last I heard, the "A" in ANSI stood for "American". It's been referenced in subsequent standards
It gets brought up so much because a certain country is still living in the past. You know, the one that threw off the yoke of British dominance, but still insists on using pounds and feet and miles.
Britain still uses spellings that were introduced during Norman dominance. Let me know when they throw off the yoke of "colour."
As for measurements, "a pint is a pound the world 'round," is valid with US units, but not Imperial units; the two systems are not identical.
I'm not in Britain. Kanuckistan has no problem with mingling english and french - we call it franglais, and its use world-wide goes back centuries :-)
from "Bon cop, bad cop" - A language lesson
And the US still writes it as "knife" (from the french word "canif", for a pocket knife). You just don't pronounce the "k", and made the "i" hard. - though that doesn't explain "knot" :-)
Interestingly enough, my old dBase IV manual lists the following formats for the SET DATE command (notice the separators) - the ONLY place using month day year was the US:
AMERICAN (or MDY) mm/dd/y
ANSI yy.mm.dd
BRITISH or FRENCH (or DMY) dd/mm/yy
GERMAN dd.mm.yy
ITALIAN dd-mm-yy
JAPAN (or YMD) yy/mm/dd
USA mm-dd-yy
No wonder we had a y2k problem.
We don't say "This is an Orange Orange", even though we're referring to both a specific object and a specific colour.
We don't write "The Sun was high in the sky" even though we only call one specific star "the sun". Ditto with the moon.
The use of capitalization in such cases looks dumb because it IS dumb. So why make the distinction with english, french, or whatever (interestingly, my spell-checker doesn't flag the use of lower case for "french", just "english").
Also, the term "nazis" is now generic - it doesn't necessarily refer to members of a political party, just like someone can be a republican or democrat without being a US citizen. There's a difference between being a democrat and a Democrat, a liberal and a Liberal, etc.
And wireless mice are quite popular for laptops.
Heck, mine even came with a remote control.
For fuck's sake, can we all please stop insisting that a particular arbitrary way to represent dates is better? It's pretty asinine how this gets brought up so much.
It gets brought up so much because a certain country is still living in the past. You know, the one that threw off the yoke of British dominance, but still insists on using pounds and feet and miles.
So, is 01/02/03: January 2nd, 2003, February 1st, 2003, or February 3rd, 2001?
2001-02-03 is unambiguous, and always sorts properly.
Only the US and Canadia do MM/DD/YYYY these days. DD/MM/YYYY if you have to, but YYYY-MM-DD ftw.
Sorry, but I'm in Kanuckistan, and haven't seen anyone use mmddyyyy for ... gee, not any time this century.
People avoid ambiguity by using mmm dd yyyy (Mar 14 2011) or dd mmm yyyy (14 Mar 2011).
If I have to use numbers only, I do use yyyy mm dd - it just makes sense.
All reactors have such problems.
As far as I understand it, there are three things to fix:
- Use a modern design, not one from the 1970s, so that a meltdown is avoided by physics and not engineering
You mean like the CANDU reactor? A design from the 1950s
Robert Driscoll is among the Friends.
Also, she probably created this account - the 3 friends currently in it are common with the above account. My guess is the police have gotten her barred from accessing the first account.
Canonical would like everything to be synchronized because that helps their marketing. However, open source is a meritocracy. Good code gets picked up because people find it useful, not because of billion-dollar marketing campaigns for things like WP7..
Ubuntu is a good example of the slip in quality when you try to meet an artificial schedule. People are complaining about how every new release breaks something. Contrast that with the market leader - RedHat. Look how long they've been between release cycles. Canonical might want more rapid releases because they need the hype. RedHat doesn't. And unlike Canonical, RedHat is profitable.
It's like "none" or "zero" - you can't define it by what it is, but only by what it isn't. "0 apples", for example, is the absence of apples.