Setting aside for a minute the fact that data storage is already a multidimensional representation on any modern computer..
The most efficient way to manipulate that data is in a 2D matrix. That's because we can see all of it at once -- at least, as much as can fit on the display and/or our arc of vision. If we lived in 4 spatial dimensions, it would make sense to represent data in 3 dimensions, because we could see all 3 of them at once (assuming we had 4D sensory input.. whatever that might be). Creating a 3D representation of data might look cool, but it's just not efficient to work with for any amount of data beyond 2-3 items. See: Win-Tab in Vista, Stacks in OSX. It's not that we need better ideas for how to represent data in 3D, rather it's a physical limit that we need to accept and stop trying to do it "because we can."
If you still don't buy that, imagine living in 2 dimensions (which is probably easier than imagining 4). We exist only on a plane, and objects can be represented only on the axises around us; nothing above or below, and we could only see the 180 degree arc from left to right. It would make no sense to represent data as more than a 1D line. Sure, we could send a line to the front or back, but working with a set of data would be most efficiently accomplished along that line.
It's always more efficient to work with a set of data in 1 less dimension than you exist in. (Unless you live in 1D.. then I guess you're screwed.) There's a reason we don't use a 3D writing system. There's a reason we don't stack monitors one behind the next. Store it in 3 dimensions, fine, as a book, or as a stack of 2D windows, but use it in 2 dimensions. A 3D desktop is form over function in the worst sense.
Oh.. yyyeah. We're real sorry about that "mistake", guys. Never meant to make a shitload of money through roaming charges. It's of the utmost importance that we prevent our customers' money from falling into our hands, and we'll do anything necessary to prevent it.
That's for things laying around in your car when you get pulled over (or maybe on your front lawn). No warrant is required for something like that, period.
As to searches, any evidence obtained during a legal search can be used as evidence, or as the basis for additional and/or alternative charges. Just because they were looking for drugs doesn't mean they have to ignore the bodies they find under your floorboards, or vice versa.
I think it's safe to assume he's in the US, considering that this site is not really very international at all, and that he's talking about the US Federal Subscriber Line Charge.
That said, maybe he's planning to move specifically to stop getting ripped off. Crazier things have happened.
I thought the entire response was almost as infantile as the original letter (which reads more like a hoax/troll than a legitimate claim.. "Nothing is free," "I tried it in college," "Think of the children.")
Whether or not it was a troll, the best response is a calm, rational one. I realize there's a lot of pent-up frustration among people who were more knowledgeable than their instructors growing up, but the adult thing to do is to help fix the problem, not to take it out on some naive teacher. Calling her a brainwashed shill for the NEA and Microsoft, while framing it as "soft strokes to your hair in comparison to what you are about to experience," is counterproductive, not to mention creepy. It perpetuates an adversarial climate, rather than one of cooperation and engagement, and won't win many friends.
"My son learned more from Linux than he ever did from Windows," is neither demonstrable, nor particularly relevant. The goal here should be to explain that there is always something to be learned, regardless of the situation, and that quality of learning is more important than quantity. The most important thing a school can teach is not any specific subject matter, but rather how to learn -- something that is often overlooked in the curricula, but that's a subject for another time.
Remember, you're not just representing yourself in this letter; you're acting as an ambassador for (in this case) Linux. A better response would have:
1) Considered the audience. Is she a keyboarding instructor? A librarian? A computer science teacher? There's no point arguing for the presence of Linux in, say, a typing class, except perhaps from a cost savings perspective. Even then, it may not be something the teacher has any control over.
2) State the claim: Linux is, in fact, a free operating system, and it has enormous teaching potential.
3) Expanded the idea: By exposing the inner workings of the software, Linux allows the curious user to investigate the specific method of action behind the everyday functions of a computer that we take for granted. Just as biology and chemistry use dissection and experiments to give students hands-on experience, the professional computer science instructor* can use Linux to give students that same hands-on experience and in-depth understanding in the world of computing. Like the Cartesian and polar coordinate systems, Linux and Windows each have their merits and limitations, and one can be more appropriate for tackling a given problem than the other.
4) Conclusion: I'm glad to hear about students that are excited to learn, and I urge you to reconsider the role that Linux has to play in the education of young minds. I believe students are best served by exposure to a variety of subject matter, and Linux is a powerful and cost-effective tool at the disposal of teachers.
5) References: Links to FAQs about Linux from prominent proponents, including IBM, links to Linux in the classroom, etc.
* A hidden complement which also prompts the reader to engage on a more professional level.
Personally, I don't use Linux at all in my day-to-day activities, nor do I wish to. But there's no denying that it can be a great part of an education, and there's no way to know what great things our replacements might dream up from the experience, even if Linux itself isn't a part of them. I was taught programming in LOGO, BASIC, and Pascal, and I haven't used any of those languages since, but they gave me a pretty good start. (Aside from the complete and utter lack of OO. Damn you, procedural programming!!)
The lower you step off, the less velocity you have, and eventually your orbit will intersect with the surface of the planet.
Ah yes, my arch nemesis: the surface of the planet. The same thing that keeps me from achieving free fall with every step I take. "Woohoo, I'm in orrrrr.. [thud]. DAMNIT!"
Distance to geosynchronous orbit: ~26,199 mi Distance to moon: ~230,000 mi
Aside from the order of magnitude difference in length, the fact that the moon is not in geosynchronous orbit rules it out. Even if we could "tether it" in one spot relative to the surface of the earth, I don't think it would go over too well with the side of the earth it wasn't on. Not to mention the unknown ecological impact of no more tides.
Pendulums reach maximum velocity at the lowest point, not coincidentally where the atmosphere is thickest. Basically exactly the opposite of what you want, for values of "want" that don't include burning up.
Aside from that, swings/pendulums only work when the material holding the bob is relatively massless, otherwise you'd get massive oscillations that would rip the "ropes" free of their pivot, if you could even get it swinging at all.
But if we're submitting our votes for things that will never work, I vote for the extremely large Ferris wheel. Just imagine how awesome that will be when it rips free of its hub and rolls away.
PvP is more often fun it its own right, but it represents a much smaller portion of the player base than PvE, and even PvPers cannot (and usually do not try to) avoid PvE entirely, even after achieving the top levels. Cash is still required for repairs, food, etc.
As for the remainder, completing a task because it is fun is different that completing a task because there is a reward at the end. We typically make the distinction with the labels of work and play. We get paid for one, and we're willing to pay for the other. MMORPGs have managed to turn that model on its head. Even learning a new job is usually fun, at first, yet we continue after the initial pleasure subsides because we get the reward of a paycheck. Likewise, a raid is usually fun at first, but after the fun is gone, there is a pressure to continue, both because you need your raid-mates in order to achieve the next reward, or the next new raid (which might be fun). If you stop once you're done (assuming you're not the last), then you've let other players down. Genius.
Raid encounters aren't so much strategy as they are exercises in group coordination. Like the text adventures of yore, it's a matter of figuring out if you're supposed to "take analgesic" or "use analgesic with water." Once you've figured out the proper sequence/combination intended by the author, it's just a matter of getting everyone on the same page. Other activities that require coordinated group efforts: marching bands and dancing. They can be satisfying to participate in, and to watch, but neither are what we would typically consider to be games. And like dogs learning a trick, the drive is not to perform the act itself, but to receive the reward at the end. The drama in every high-end guild ultimately reveals this.. people are dissatisfied with their rewards, or the rules by which the rewards are distributed. No one is ever satisfied with the simple knowledge that they performed a successful "sit" or "roll over"; they want their doggy treats. WoW, like other activities, can be enjoyable ways to kill time, but when it gets to be more than that, keep in mind that all that work is for nothing more than a virtual doggy treat and that, at best, you've only succeeded in doing exactly what someone else intended you to do (and if you haven't; they'll get to you in the next patch).
Wireless, yes, but wired sound-powered phones already exist and are in use on every Navy ship. (Not to be confused with solar flashlights which need to be charged before they're needed).
You're right though.. wile these piezoelectronics may never be powerful enough to power a cellphone on their own, they can almost definitely increase efficiency and battery life. "Never" is a tough thing to predict though.. it's possible that simple phones might exist someday (and once again), with very low-power displays such as electronic paper, and low power electronics. The cell towers would either have to be extremely sensitive, or else be located even more densely than they already are. And if you're increasing tower density, you might as well work on using their signals for power as well, a la RFID.
I don't see them being very useful in emergency kits though, since you'd probably have a cell phone with you in every circumstance in which you have an emergency kit.. if you have one in your car, you can just keep an unactivated phone in there which can still dial 911, and hardwire the charger. If you're carrying a kit in a remote area, a low power device isn't likely to be strong enough to reach a tower anyway -- if you even had a signal. An emergency distress beacon would be much more useful in that case.
Right, *when they arrive*.. I've had messages to/from my SO arrive as much as 2 days later. Not sure how that happens exactly, but it's been "better" since we switched to the same carrier.
Slashdot Mirror
This is an even article. See? 1832238
Setting aside for a minute the fact that data storage is already a multidimensional representation on any modern computer..
The most efficient way to manipulate that data is in a 2D matrix. That's because we can see all of it at once -- at least, as much as can fit on the display and/or our arc of vision. If we lived in 4 spatial dimensions, it would make sense to represent data in 3 dimensions, because we could see all 3 of them at once (assuming we had 4D sensory input.. whatever that might be). Creating a 3D representation of data might look cool, but it's just not efficient to work with for any amount of data beyond 2-3 items. See: Win-Tab in Vista, Stacks in OSX. It's not that we need better ideas for how to represent data in 3D, rather it's a physical limit that we need to accept and stop trying to do it "because we can."
If you still don't buy that, imagine living in 2 dimensions (which is probably easier than imagining 4). We exist only on a plane, and objects can be represented only on the axises around us; nothing above or below, and we could only see the 180 degree arc from left to right. It would make no sense to represent data as more than a 1D line. Sure, we could send a line to the front or back, but working with a set of data would be most efficiently accomplished along that line.
It's always more efficient to work with a set of data in 1 less dimension than you exist in. (Unless you live in 1D.. then I guess you're screwed.) There's a reason we don't use a 3D writing system. There's a reason we don't stack monitors one behind the next. Store it in 3 dimensions, fine, as a book, or as a stack of 2D windows, but use it in 2 dimensions. A 3D desktop is form over function in the worst sense.
Oh.. yyyeah. We're real sorry about that "mistake", guys. Never meant to make a shitload of money through roaming charges. It's of the utmost importance that we prevent our customers' money from falling into our hands, and we'll do anything necessary to prevent it.
Love always,
T-Mobile
That's for things laying around in your car when you get pulled over (or maybe on your front lawn). No warrant is required for something like that, period.
As to searches, any evidence obtained during a legal search can be used as evidence, or as the basis for additional and/or alternative charges. Just because they were looking for drugs doesn't mean they have to ignore the bodies they find under your floorboards, or vice versa.
I think it's safe to assume he's in the US, considering that this site is not really very international at all, and that he's talking about the US Federal Subscriber Line Charge.
That said, maybe he's planning to move specifically to stop getting ripped off. Crazier things have happened.
I thought the entire response was almost as infantile as the original letter (which reads more like a hoax/troll than a legitimate claim.. "Nothing is free," "I tried it in college," "Think of the children.")
Whether or not it was a troll, the best response is a calm, rational one. I realize there's a lot of pent-up frustration among people who were more knowledgeable than their instructors growing up, but the adult thing to do is to help fix the problem, not to take it out on some naive teacher. Calling her a brainwashed shill for the NEA and Microsoft, while framing it as "soft strokes to your hair in comparison to what you are about to experience," is counterproductive, not to mention creepy. It perpetuates an adversarial climate, rather than one of cooperation and engagement, and won't win many friends.
"My son learned more from Linux than he ever did from Windows," is neither demonstrable, nor particularly relevant. The goal here should be to explain that there is always something to be learned, regardless of the situation, and that quality of learning is more important than quantity. The most important thing a school can teach is not any specific subject matter, but rather how to learn -- something that is often overlooked in the curricula, but that's a subject for another time.
Remember, you're not just representing yourself in this letter; you're acting as an ambassador for (in this case) Linux. A better response would have:
1) Considered the audience. Is she a keyboarding instructor? A librarian? A computer science teacher? There's no point arguing for the presence of Linux in, say, a typing class, except perhaps from a cost savings perspective. Even then, it may not be something the teacher has any control over.
2) State the claim: Linux is, in fact, a free operating system, and it has enormous teaching potential.
3) Expanded the idea: By exposing the inner workings of the software, Linux allows the curious user to investigate the specific method of action behind the everyday functions of a computer that we take for granted. Just as biology and chemistry use dissection and experiments to give students hands-on experience, the professional computer science instructor* can use Linux to give students that same hands-on experience and in-depth understanding in the world of computing. Like the Cartesian and polar coordinate systems, Linux and Windows each have their merits and limitations, and one can be more appropriate for tackling a given problem than the other.
4) Conclusion: I'm glad to hear about students that are excited to learn, and I urge you to reconsider the role that Linux has to play in the education of young minds. I believe students are best served by exposure to a variety of subject matter, and Linux is a powerful and cost-effective tool at the disposal of teachers.
5) References: Links to FAQs about Linux from prominent proponents, including IBM, links to Linux in the classroom, etc.
* A hidden complement which also prompts the reader to engage on a more professional level.
Personally, I don't use Linux at all in my day-to-day activities, nor do I wish to. But there's no denying that it can be a great part of an education, and there's no way to know what great things our replacements might dream up from the experience, even if Linux itself isn't a part of them. I was taught programming in LOGO, BASIC, and Pascal, and I haven't used any of those languages since, but they gave me a pretty good start. (Aside from the complete and utter lack of OO. Damn you, procedural programming!!)
Circling, maybe. But you can never go down, can never go down, can never go down the drain.
When viewed from Europe and Australia, the Milky Way has only nougat at the center. When viewed from the US, it has nougat and caramel. Discuss.
Won't someone think of the cylindrically lazy?
That's because in 1962 they believed that photographs could steal someone's smile.
They should have just set the daytime speed limit to 670,616,629 miles per hour, or any which contributes to an accident.
The lower you step off, the less velocity you have, and eventually your orbit will intersect with the surface of the planet.
Ah yes, my arch nemesis: the surface of the planet. The same thing that keeps me from achieving free fall with every step I take. "Woohoo, I'm in orrrrr.. [thud]. DAMNIT!"
Distance to geosynchronous orbit: ~26,199 mi
Distance to moon: ~230,000 mi
Aside from the order of magnitude difference in length, the fact that the moon is not in geosynchronous orbit rules it out. Even if we could "tether it" in one spot relative to the surface of the earth, I don't think it would go over too well with the side of the earth it wasn't on. Not to mention the unknown ecological impact of no more tides.
Pendulums reach maximum velocity at the lowest point, not coincidentally where the atmosphere is thickest. Basically exactly the opposite of what you want, for values of "want" that don't include burning up.
Aside from that, swings/pendulums only work when the material holding the bob is relatively massless, otherwise you'd get massive oscillations that would rip the "ropes" free of their pivot, if you could even get it swinging at all.
But if we're submitting our votes for things that will never work, I vote for the extremely large Ferris wheel. Just imagine how awesome that will be when it rips free of its hub and rolls away.
Except, from the article you (almost) linked to:
Which brings us back to the problems with very tall elevators addressed in the article, and the lack of suitable materials with which to build them.
I like your idea, and I have forwarded it to 20 of my closest friends with instructions that they do the same.
PvP is more often fun it its own right, but it represents a much smaller portion of the player base than PvE, and even PvPers cannot (and usually do not try to) avoid PvE entirely, even after achieving the top levels. Cash is still required for repairs, food, etc.
As for the remainder, completing a task because it is fun is different that completing a task because there is a reward at the end. We typically make the distinction with the labels of work and play. We get paid for one, and we're willing to pay for the other. MMORPGs have managed to turn that model on its head. Even learning a new job is usually fun, at first, yet we continue after the initial pleasure subsides because we get the reward of a paycheck. Likewise, a raid is usually fun at first, but after the fun is gone, there is a pressure to continue, both because you need your raid-mates in order to achieve the next reward, or the next new raid (which might be fun). If you stop once you're done (assuming you're not the last), then you've let other players down. Genius.
Raid encounters aren't so much strategy as they are exercises in group coordination. Like the text adventures of yore, it's a matter of figuring out if you're supposed to "take analgesic" or "use analgesic with water." Once you've figured out the proper sequence/combination intended by the author, it's just a matter of getting everyone on the same page. Other activities that require coordinated group efforts: marching bands and dancing. They can be satisfying to participate in, and to watch, but neither are what we would typically consider to be games. And like dogs learning a trick, the drive is not to perform the act itself, but to receive the reward at the end. The drama in every high-end guild ultimately reveals this.. people are dissatisfied with their rewards, or the rules by which the rewards are distributed. No one is ever satisfied with the simple knowledge that they performed a successful "sit" or "roll over"; they want their doggy treats. WoW, like other activities, can be enjoyable ways to kill time, but when it gets to be more than that, keep in mind that all that work is for nothing more than a virtual doggy treat and that, at best, you've only succeeded in doing exactly what someone else intended you to do (and if you haven't; they'll get to you in the next patch).
Can mute people whisper?
That's not a bug, it's the new pinstripe feature.
Nothing to see here, move along.
Woah.. TMI
They probably thought it was redundant to mention, since the word "computer" basically means "Mac" in most developing nations. Hugely popular.
7AC7:1E55
Wireless, yes, but wired sound-powered phones already exist and are in use on every Navy ship. (Not to be confused with solar flashlights which need to be charged before they're needed).
You're right though.. wile these piezoelectronics may never be powerful enough to power a cellphone on their own, they can almost definitely increase efficiency and battery life. "Never" is a tough thing to predict though.. it's possible that simple phones might exist someday (and once again), with very low-power displays such as electronic paper, and low power electronics. The cell towers would either have to be extremely sensitive, or else be located even more densely than they already are. And if you're increasing tower density, you might as well work on using their signals for power as well, a la RFID.
I don't see them being very useful in emergency kits though, since you'd probably have a cell phone with you in every circumstance in which you have an emergency kit.. if you have one in your car, you can just keep an unactivated phone in there which can still dial 911, and hardwire the charger. If you're carrying a kit in a remote area, a low power device isn't likely to be strong enough to reach a tower anyway -- if you even had a signal. An emergency distress beacon would be much more useful in that case.
Right, *when they arrive*.. I've had messages to/from my SO arrive as much as 2 days later. Not sure how that happens exactly, but it's been "better" since we switched to the same carrier.
By the way, Weather.com will send you text alerts for free. http://www.weather.com/mobile/customtextmessaging.html