In another decade, only power, cable TV*, and fiber will still use poles on the side of the road as their primary transport. Phone and consumer-grade internet will universally use wireless.
God I hope not. Unless wireless providers have found a way to best physics, a hard line will always be the faster (higher bandwidth and lower latency) option and thus, for me, the preferred delivery channel.
Wait, what? Are you sure you're not referring to an STB update? What brand/model is your TV? I can't imagine that any manufacturer is paying broadcasters to send out updates, let alone that the FCC has approved that.
While I'm not about to argue that popularity == superiority, if there's some trend showing that companies using language X are generally more profitable than those using language Y, then language Y may well be the right tool for the job, and at least the superior choice.
You say that as if people are incapable of using intellect instead of just ignoring it and focusing on their feelings. I haven't met very many stupid people, but I've met lots of intellectually lazy people.
The colloquial meaning of "narcotics" is different than the formal medical or legal definitions. You might as well argue about the definitions of "hacker," "gay," "the shit," "decimate," or any of the other various words that have different informal meanings or formal definitions that have changed as a result of such usage.
I furnished a whole apartment from IKEA and 7 years on and 3rd renter (yes, I rent it) and it's still fine.
Pardon my skepticism, but our landlord says the same thing about our fridge that won't cool below 45, toilet that won't flush straight water without the assistance of a plunger, and the vinyl tiles that mysteriously came unglued 3 days after we moved in. I'll be surprised if any of those things will be "still fine" when it's time to get our deposit back though.
I agree, but it's all about context and what side of the issue your on as to whether it's viewed spiteful obstruction or taking a heroic principled stand.
But that aside, if we had an easier way to undo laws (or legislative decisions), I think people wouldn't be so concerned that laws are forever, good or bad. Perhaps a simple majority of citizens should be allowed to repeal any law at any (election) time. That would, I think, balance the interests of government and the public a bit better.
Slowing the wheels of government is great if you want to stop something from happening but it is a two edged sword. It also slows implementation of things one wants to happen.
Many people are content, even happy, to sacrifice what they want to ensure that people they disagree with don't get what they want. These people are often called "heroes," so it's no surprise that we see it everywhere.
Well, there's process, and all the parts of the government agreed that it was due even if it's not the same process that occurs in the criminal justice system. And while I concede that there's something fundamentally wrong with different "parts" of the same body determining whether its own actions are proper, that's true for all issues, and most people are probably in favor of detaining accused terrorists or sympathizers indefinitely, so it's hard to think of a better method aside from the fictional benevolent dictator.
The autobahn gets regular maintenance -- very regular maintenance -- and it's far more thorough than in the US. That's why it's such a good road. For example, crews scan every square meter and when cracks or fissures are found, they replace the entire section of asphalt rather than squirting some tar into the cracks like we do here. It's enormously expensive, and I'm sure the contractors here would give their left appendage-of-choice if they could perform and bill for the same work.
the shortcut keys for navigating in a text field are different to every other application that the user uses on the platform
I'm not saying the shortcuts for OS X are better or worse than any other, but I will say that standardization is a good thing, and OS X is the odd man out at this point. Apple have benefited greatly from standardization of hardware on the x86 and ARM architectures, and I think they'd benefit just as much by transitioning to the de facto shortcut standards. This is particularly true for people and shops that use a mixture of environments rather than OS X exclusively (which probably describes more Mac users than not) so that motor memory can take over instead of consciously remembering which shortcut maps to which platform.
And yes, you can change most shortcuts manually to get a close approximation, but not entirely.
I was under the impression that Apple does their own Java implementation because they don't want anyone else's grubby fingers in their OS or browser. As a result, and since Java isn't exactly Apple's top priority, they're usually at least one step behind in implementing the latest changes.
First of all, I think the word "Makerspace" is ridiculous. That said, there's nothing to gain by demeaning anyone who doesn't fit your profile of a "true" scientist. And whether or not people know how it works (though I'd argue that they often do) is frankly irrelevant. You don't need to know how paint works to create a masterpiece, or why black powder burns so rapidly to create a rocket motor. Besides, hands-on experience is the best kind.
Wow, man, logical failure all the way around. You're completely missing his argument(s), and then claiming the opposite. You're going off on tangents, and he's trying to steer you back to the confines of logical reasoning (in the formal sense, not the informal "things other than crazy-talk" sense). It seems that you may be unfamiliar with formal logic, but his arguments are so basic as to be irrefutable, and saying they're inapplicable doesn't magically make it so.
The motive for polygamy in Utah is economy. Servants are rare and costly; it is cheaper and more comfortable to marry them.
Meh. The same could be said of monogamy, especially up until the late 60s and early 70s. The "anti-polygamy/pro-monogamy" platform seems to be based as much in religious values as polygamy. The problem, in my view, with polygamist religious sects is that it's often not (or at some point ceases to be) consensual. But that's a problem with cults, not polygamy. As long as it's consensual, I say let people do what they want.
You realize the the government-spent money doesn't just disappear, right? It gets put back in the economic cash flow stream, where it generates both more economic activity and more taxes. Repeat ad nauseum. Technically, if the government spent money fast enough, it could have an essentially unlimited supply.
Slashdot Mirror
In another decade, only power, cable TV*, and fiber will still use poles on the side of the road as their primary transport. Phone and consumer-grade internet will universally use wireless.
God I hope not. Unless wireless providers have found a way to best physics, a hard line will always be the faster (higher bandwidth and lower latency) option and thus, for me, the preferred delivery channel.
Wait, what? Are you sure you're not referring to an STB update? What brand/model is your TV? I can't imagine that any manufacturer is paying broadcasters to send out updates, let alone that the FCC has approved that.
While I'm not about to argue that popularity == superiority, if there's some trend showing that companies using language X are generally more profitable than those using language Y, then language Y may well be the right tool for the job, and at least the superior choice.
While C certainly has it's flaws, maintainability isn't inherently one of them.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/narcotics
You say that as if people are incapable of using intellect instead of just ignoring it and focusing on their feelings. I haven't met very many stupid people, but I've met lots of intellectually lazy people.
The colloquial meaning of "narcotics" is different than the formal medical or legal definitions. You might as well argue about the definitions of "hacker," "gay," "the shit," "decimate," or any of the other various words that have different informal meanings or formal definitions that have changed as a result of such usage.
I furnished a whole apartment from IKEA and 7 years on and 3rd renter (yes, I rent it) and it's still fine.
Pardon my skepticism, but our landlord says the same thing about our fridge that won't cool below 45, toilet that won't flush straight water without the assistance of a plunger, and the vinyl tiles that mysteriously came unglued 3 days after we moved in. I'll be surprised if any of those things will be "still fine" when it's time to get our deposit back though.
I figured it was the successor to Windows RG.
I can't believe I used your in place of you're. Consider me suitably self-chastised.
I agree, but it's all about context and what side of the issue your on as to whether it's viewed spiteful obstruction or taking a heroic principled stand.
But that aside, if we had an easier way to undo laws (or legislative decisions), I think people wouldn't be so concerned that laws are forever, good or bad. Perhaps a simple majority of citizens should be allowed to repeal any law at any (election) time. That would, I think, balance the interests of government and the public a bit better.
Slowing the wheels of government is great if you want to stop something from happening but it is a two edged sword. It also slows implementation of things one wants to happen.
Many people are content, even happy, to sacrifice what they want to ensure that people they disagree with don't get what they want. These people are often called "heroes," so it's no surprise that we see it everywhere.
Indeed, that's exactly how I do my jury voting. The whole "trial" part is such a tedious delay.
Well, there's process, and all the parts of the government agreed that it was due even if it's not the same process that occurs in the criminal justice system. And while I concede that there's something fundamentally wrong with different "parts" of the same body determining whether its own actions are proper, that's true for all issues, and most people are probably in favor of detaining accused terrorists or sympathizers indefinitely, so it's hard to think of a better method aside from the fictional benevolent dictator.
I wasn't about to pay three times the price so I can have unecessary colour in my textbook!
Yet you're willing to pay extra for the time, bandwidth, and storage to put an unnecessary u in color. ;P
Non. Sense.
The autobahn gets regular maintenance -- very regular maintenance -- and it's far more thorough than in the US. That's why it's such a good road. For example, crews scan every square meter and when cracks or fissures are found, they replace the entire section of asphalt rather than squirting some tar into the cracks like we do here. It's enormously expensive, and I'm sure the contractors here would give their left appendage-of-choice if they could perform and bill for the same work.
You could almost say the Germans are being software patent Na...
Sorry, unintentional ellipses and double-spaced newline. As I was saying, it seems like the Germans are being quite the software patent naggers.
Not every sentence, requires a comma.
the shortcut keys for navigating in a text field are different to every other application that the user uses on the platform
I'm not saying the shortcuts for OS X are better or worse than any other, but I will say that standardization is a good thing, and OS X is the odd man out at this point. Apple have benefited greatly from standardization of hardware on the x86 and ARM architectures, and I think they'd benefit just as much by transitioning to the de facto shortcut standards. This is particularly true for people and shops that use a mixture of environments rather than OS X exclusively (which probably describes more Mac users than not) so that motor memory can take over instead of consciously remembering which shortcut maps to which platform.
And yes, you can change most shortcuts manually to get a close approximation, but not entirely.
I was under the impression that Apple does their own Java implementation because they don't want anyone else's grubby fingers in their OS or browser. As a result, and since Java isn't exactly Apple's top priority, they're usually at least one step behind in implementing the latest changes.
These are the more pressing questions I didn't see answered in the article:
Will these crab-based computers play tentacle-based porn?
Will these computers be sold by weight or by volume?
Is there anything Japan *won't* do with seafood?
First of all, I think the word "Makerspace" is ridiculous. That said, there's nothing to gain by demeaning anyone who doesn't fit your profile of a "true" scientist. And whether or not people know how it works (though I'd argue that they often do) is frankly irrelevant. You don't need to know how paint works to create a masterpiece, or why black powder burns so rapidly to create a rocket motor. Besides, hands-on experience is the best kind.
Wow, man, logical failure all the way around. You're completely missing his argument(s), and then claiming the opposite. You're going off on tangents, and he's trying to steer you back to the confines of logical reasoning (in the formal sense, not the informal "things other than crazy-talk" sense). It seems that you may be unfamiliar with formal logic, but his arguments are so basic as to be irrefutable, and saying they're inapplicable doesn't magically make it so.
The motive for polygamy in Utah is economy. Servants are rare and costly; it is cheaper and more comfortable to marry them.
Meh. The same could be said of monogamy, especially up until the late 60s and early 70s. The "anti-polygamy/pro-monogamy" platform seems to be based as much in religious values as polygamy. The problem, in my view, with polygamist religious sects is that it's often not (or at some point ceases to be) consensual. But that's a problem with cults, not polygamy. As long as it's consensual, I say let people do what they want.
You realize the the government-spent money doesn't just disappear, right? It gets put back in the economic cash flow stream, where it generates both more economic activity and more taxes. Repeat ad nauseum. Technically, if the government spent money fast enough, it could have an essentially unlimited supply.