That's not the point. My experience with them is. To me the difference is as ambiguous as the fact that I bought my car from a privately owned Nissan dealership, and not Nissan themselves.
They seem fine to me. Send me email reminders at 90/60/30 days that the registration is about to expire. Have had no other communication (in or out) with them.
He understood the capacity of internet, email, and spam, far before most others did. This guy was sending 30 million messages a day, in the mid-to-late 1990's (~80% of all spam at the time)! Not only that, but he was actually turning a HUGE profit, not the pittance these schmucks make today.
He goes into business for himself, doing things he enjoys. We should all be so lucky.
every programmer associated with that project should be brought on stage, tarred and feathered, and then shot in the genitals. i mean come on, how hard is it to make a dedicated machine that only has one function? to count! this takes all the ingenuity and processing power of pong. and techies wonder why non-techies think they are so horribly over-paid?
You are missing the point. AAC file is a incomplete copy. Burning that incomplete copy to CD you don't lose any quality (as you said), but then ripping that incomplete copy from the CD and encoding it as a mp3 file brings in a 2nd layer of lossiness. You end up with a "fuzzy file" as a friend of mine says (sounds fuzzy on his $50 headphones).
if you can cop out at the end, meaningfully even, what's the point of living a good religious life? honestly, i don't understand. also, how do you know you will get into heaven? have you been there? have you met someone who has?
as you can tell, i need proof. a book written over a 100yr period by several people, that has been revised (edited for clarity even) several times, is not it. for me.
the bible was written to be as vague as possible, including many re-writes (thank you king james). it is designed as a tool to promote fear, respect, and authority figures. if jesus is the shepherd, and the people are supposed to follow his teachings, then i guess the guys that wrote the bible want the people to be sheep. my point is, the bible is a story designed to instill fear into the masses, so that those in control, can remain so.
classic example of the duplicity of christians:
my father had a terminal form of lung/liver cancer in 1996. when people started visiting for the last time, many offered prayers (met by "no thank you"), and then people trying to persuade my father that he could repent for his sins and still go to heaven. in a nutshell, you can live the worst life imaginable (which he did not do), repent at the end, and go to heaven. yet this makes sense to christians. of course, when muslims do it, it doesn't make sense to the christians. get a grip. if it works for your religion, it works for everyones. one is no more special than the other. there is no "one true religion" in matter of fact.
i don't need a book, and a bunch of pedophile gay rapists telling me how to lead my life. i can figure it out for myself. i know right from wrong, and i know the consequences of straying. it's something called intelligence. supposedly, that is what separates humans from the other animals on this planet. lately, i think it (religion, and all the killing it has spawned) is what puts us in a lower order.
Perhaps there's no plainer example of Torvalds' equanimity than his unflappable attitude toward Richard Stallman, the intellectual forefather of the free software movement. A former computer scientist at MIT's Artificial Intelligence Lab, Stallman has been arguing as far back as 1984 that proprietary software is practically a crime against humanity. That's the year he launched a project called GNU with the aim of creating a free operating system that would displace Unix. (GNU is a recursive name that stands for GNU's Not Unix.) He obstinately rejects the term open source despite its now near universal use, preferring free software, the name he coined. And although Torvalds released the kernel of his operating system well before GNU produced a reliable one of its own, Stallman insists Torvalds' work should properly be called GNU/Linux, because early contributors adapted GNU components for Linux - never mind that the Linux core is non-GNU and now approaches 6 million lines of code. (Stallman declined to be interviewed unless this article used his nomenclature throughout.) Torvalds diplomatically declines to say anything about GNU and Stallman: "That's not a debate I want to get involved in."
Stallman is an ass. A very bright guy, but a self-centered egomaniac. He's been riding on the coat-tails of other's accomplishments for too long now. What has GNU done for me lately? What has Stallman done of importance since his MIT days?
I have not observed any hardware failures due to me running SETI (been using it since 1999). Granted, it is not running on my iBook, but that is to save battery life. My desktop machine at work has been running it 24-7 for almost 1.5 years now, and the machine (AMD Athlon 1.33GHz) runs great. At home, the cost of running multiple computers 24-7, some of which have SETI going, was roughly $20 per month. But this does include a file server, 4 laptops charging on occasion, a desktop machine, and a window insert air conditioner (during the middle of this past summer). I would say 1/2 of that is the AC.
$60 per year for the electricity. Average of nearly $0 for hardware.
Firebird is still horribly slow to scroll up and down when compared to IE. Very annoying when using up/down arrows (or left clicking the slider area) to navigate long web pages (such as/. discussions) where you want to go up or down many (10+) pages. You think this would have been worked on. Load time is faster, why isn't scrolling?
Nobody in the traditional business world considers the GPL to be a real license, nor do they consider it to be watertight. It's easy to misinterpret the GPL as socialist in nature. Big whig business types are in their 40's/50's/60's and they grew up believing communism was the biggest evil there is.... any wonder why they might resist the ideals of the GPL?
<phb> why should they? if everone uses it, they must like it, right?
seriously speaking, IE is given out for free, has 90+% usage in the market, why spend the money to do _anything_ at all to it. tabs, css; who cares? </phb>
although i do think "innovate" is a wildly overused word. i cringe everytime i hear/see it nowadays.
if i was to design a flash based newspaper website (NYT lets say) where you read it like a regular paper (click on article, and it fills window, with navigation aids to go back to previous view, the rest of the article (from page 2 to page 17 for example), or to the next/previous page; have i just made some great innovation? no. even if doesn't exist when i come up with it, it is just an adaptation from meatspace interaction to online interaction. it's not new.
i do think the biggest abuser of the word is apple computer (expose and FUS to name to recent occurances)...
Those that write great documentation tend to get let go by their employer during cutbacks. "We don't really need Mr. Doe, he has documented his setup for us. Mr. Smith over from accounting could do it, for 1/2 the salary."
1. In general. Yes, this is Airbus, and yes, this is the general accepted terminology for what fly by wire is.
2. SC is not going to be doing a ground up redesign of Spaceship 1. There is only one reason for that; it is a race. They want to win. Shortcuts have been taken, and will continue to be taken. No, aero parts won't be pop riveted on (I am not as stupid as you want to assume), but these new parts will exert stress' on the airframe, as well as the outer skin of this vehicle. Obviously the engineers that designed this vehicle did not take into account certain testing procedures (shortcut by them, or by mgmt in not telling them what was to be done, or not mgmt knowing what was to be done when they {engineers} were in the design phase).
It is expensive to do this right. A plan is required. A plan includes more than just a goal and a general idea of how to achieve said goal. There are many different ways to achieve low orbit "space" flight. Just in launch techniques (rocket off the ground, tow, piggy-back, etc) you can do things many different ways. It's not just design a ship, figure out how to launch it and then test it. You have to know where you are, where you want to go, and how and when it should be done. Not to mention contingency plans for failures at any given point.
This being a race and all... I am certain that this has not been done. This is what scares the hell out of me wrt civilian space flight. Wild west seat of the pants just doesn't cut it. But I am sure you knew that;-)
I take it you do not know what "fly-by-wire" is. In a nutshell, the computers take the pilots input, interpret it based on the given conditions, and apply those inputs as the computer thinks the pilot intended. This is supposed to compensate for unintended minute movements pilots transmit through the controls in flight, especially in high stress situations (first real applications being military of course). "Fly-by-wire" does not imply auto-pilot as you seem to suggest (manually controlled).
As to aero parts missing, I was referring to the add-ons the program needs to get the nose back down. BS stuff that is kludged on later very rarely is as robust as the rest of the design (ask any programmer on/. about that one).
I am surprised that a poster with such a low ID number would resort to using logic to analyse a linked to article. I commend thee. </sarcasm>
And it happens to be that you are nearly 100% correct.
I was intrigued by the lack of understanding with respect to drag and gear door (seams I presume). Wasn't this sufficiently studied in the 1950's? *sigh* Geeks just love to learn it again for the first time I suppose...;-)
One would hope that these new aero aids that are going to be implemented to keep the nose from coming up on its own will not be 100% necessary. What if they break, and the aircraft is in a overly loaded state? Your average space jockey (not that those exist yet) is not going to be as responsive, or understanding, as last month's test pilot was. This sounds like a dangerous path to go down. Any modern fly by wire aircraft should revert to level flight assuming most of the aero parts are intact, and the pilot is giving zero input (hands and feet off condition - as if passed out). Doesn't sound like this pig can do that. Bad design decision. Makes me think of all the other short cuts that were possibly taken.
I have been a linux user since 1999, and I just got a iBook, so I am on the *nix bandwagon. But for the average user (I am that, not a poweruser, not a total noob), things can be a pain to deal with sometimes. I don't want to scour the 'net looking for tips on how to do something, or go to rpmfind to get something (Mandrake user I am). I want the computer to remain what it is; a tool. When I first started using linux (before win2k or OS X) I felt like the tool. Now, not so much. With windows, I feel like I know what I am doing, just because so much of what is going on is transparent. For linux to be anything more than a great server OS, and a novel desktop OS, it needs to be more like MacOS or Windows. That is my only real point; people _need_ convenience.
My thoughts exactly. While I was reading his arguments, I was thinking "Y'know, half of these reasons are *why* more people don't use Linux...".
Ditto.
His argument boiled down to; linux is more secure because it is harder to deal with. By harder, I mean more steps (save, chmod, etc).
There are plenty of linux servers out there right now that have been 0wn3d by nefarious types, to do their bidding. spamhaus.inc doesn't just 0wn windows servers to do their bidding. But that is not a convenient argument, so I guess we shouldn't go there.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not the point. My experience with them is. To me the difference is as ambiguous as the fact that I bought my car from a privately owned Nissan dealership, and not Nissan themselves.
They seem fine to me. Send me email reminders at 90/60/30 days that the registration is about to expire. Have had no other communication (in or out) with them.
000domains.com
He understood the capacity of internet, email, and spam, far before most others did. This guy was sending 30 million messages a day, in the mid-to-late 1990's (~80% of all spam at the time)! Not only that, but he was actually turning a HUGE profit, not the pittance these schmucks make today.
He goes into business for himself, doing things he enjoys. We should all be so lucky.
it was a Mac project for several years before MS bought them out to get a good XBOX game.
every programmer associated with that project should be brought on stage, tarred and feathered, and then shot in the genitals. i mean come on, how hard is it to make a dedicated machine that only has one function? to count! this takes all the ingenuity and processing power of pong. and techies wonder why non-techies think they are so horribly over-paid?
You are missing the point. AAC file is a incomplete copy. Burning that incomplete copy to CD you don't lose any quality (as you said), but then ripping that incomplete copy from the CD and encoding it as a mp3 file brings in a 2nd layer of lossiness. You end up with a "fuzzy file" as a friend of mine says (sounds fuzzy on his $50 headphones).
AAC is not lossless. If it wasn't then a CD worth of songs would be 650 megs. Think about it.
AAC
if you can cop out at the end, meaningfully even, what's the point of living a good religious life? honestly, i don't understand. also, how do you know you will get into heaven? have you been there? have you met someone who has?
as you can tell, i need proof. a book written over a 100yr period by several people, that has been revised (edited for clarity even) several times, is not it. for me.
please do not use the "faith" analogy either.
soon = announced by Apple today.
www.macrumors.com for a update of the intro...
the bible was written to be as vague as possible, including many re-writes (thank you king james). it is designed as a tool to promote fear, respect, and authority figures. if jesus is the shepherd, and the people are supposed to follow his teachings, then i guess the guys that wrote the bible want the people to be sheep. my point is, the bible is a story designed to instill fear into the masses, so that those in control, can remain so.
classic example of the duplicity of christians:
my father had a terminal form of lung/liver cancer in 1996. when people started visiting for the last time, many offered prayers (met by "no thank you"), and then people trying to persuade my father that he could repent for his sins and still go to heaven. in a nutshell, you can live the worst life imaginable (which he did not do), repent at the end, and go to heaven. yet this makes sense to christians. of course, when muslims do it, it doesn't make sense to the christians. get a grip. if it works for your religion, it works for everyones. one is no more special than the other. there is no "one true religion" in matter of fact.
i don't need a book, and a bunch of pedophile gay rapists telling me how to lead my life. i can figure it out for myself. i know right from wrong, and i know the consequences of straying. it's something called intelligence. supposedly, that is what separates humans from the other animals on this planet. lately, i think it (religion, and all the killing it has spawned) is what puts us in a lower order.
Eugenia is not a native English speaking person. As far as ESL goes, she is fairly good.
That does not excuse the simpleton review she provides this time, but at least she layed off the usual BeOS did this/that better for the most part.
Shouldn't it work well with the basic install? That is the point, is it not?
Stallman is an ass. A very bright guy, but a self-centered egomaniac. He's been riding on the coat-tails of other's accomplishments for too long now. What has GNU done for me lately? What has Stallman done of importance since his MIT days?
I have not observed any hardware failures due to me running SETI (been using it since 1999). Granted, it is not running on my iBook, but that is to save battery life. My desktop machine at work has been running it 24-7 for almost 1.5 years now, and the machine (AMD Athlon 1.33GHz) runs great. At home, the cost of running multiple computers 24-7, some of which have SETI going, was roughly $20 per month. But this does include a file server, 4 laptops charging on occasion, a desktop machine, and a window insert air conditioner (during the middle of this past summer). I would say 1/2 of that is the AC.
$60 per year for the electricity. Average of nearly $0 for hardware.
Firebird is still horribly slow to scroll up and down when compared to IE. Very annoying when using up/down arrows (or left clicking the slider area) to navigate long web pages (such as /. discussions) where you want to go up or down many (10+) pages. You think this would have been worked on. Load time is faster, why isn't scrolling?
Apple won the deal based on delivery time. Dell/HP/IBM etc were all months from now. The school wanted on 2003 list of most powerfull computers.
Nobody in the traditional business world considers the GPL to be a real license, nor do they consider it to be watertight. It's easy to misinterpret the GPL as socialist in nature. Big whig business types are in their 40's/50's/60's and they grew up believing communism was the biggest evil there is.... any wonder why they might resist the ideals of the GPL?
I am going to reach 5,000 units complete today, and I have to start over?
*sigh*
I do like the fact that you don't have to worry about which version you are running, as it will be updated server side.
<phb>
why should they? if everone uses it, they must like it, right?
seriously speaking, IE is given out for free, has 90+% usage in the market, why spend the money to do _anything_ at all to it. tabs, css; who cares?
</phb>
although i do think "innovate" is a wildly overused word. i cringe everytime i hear/see it nowadays.
if i was to design a flash based newspaper website (NYT lets say) where you read it like a regular paper (click on article, and it fills window, with navigation aids to go back to previous view, the rest of the article (from page 2 to page 17 for example), or to the next/previous page; have i just made some great innovation? no. even if doesn't exist when i come up with it, it is just an adaptation from meatspace interaction to online interaction. it's not new.
i do think the biggest abuser of the word is apple computer (expose and FUS to name to recent occurances)...
Those that write great documentation tend to get let go by their employer during cutbacks. "We don't really need Mr. Doe, he has documented his setup for us. Mr. Smith over from accounting could do it, for 1/2 the salary."
IMO, YMMV.
1. In general. Yes, this is Airbus, and yes, this is the general accepted terminology for what fly by wire is.
;-)
2. SC is not going to be doing a ground up redesign of Spaceship 1. There is only one reason for that; it is a race. They want to win. Shortcuts have been taken, and will continue to be taken. No, aero parts won't be pop riveted on (I am not as stupid as you want to assume), but these new parts will exert stress' on the airframe, as well as the outer skin of this vehicle. Obviously the engineers that designed this vehicle did not take into account certain testing procedures (shortcut by them, or by mgmt in not telling them what was to be done, or not mgmt knowing what was to be done when they {engineers} were in the design phase).
It is expensive to do this right. A plan is required. A plan includes more than just a goal and a general idea of how to achieve said goal. There are many different ways to achieve low orbit "space" flight. Just in launch techniques (rocket off the ground, tow, piggy-back, etc) you can do things many different ways. It's not just design a ship, figure out how to launch it and then test it. You have to know where you are, where you want to go, and how and when it should be done. Not to mention contingency plans for failures at any given point.
This being a race and all... I am certain that this has not been done. This is what scares the hell out of me wrt civilian space flight. Wild west seat of the pants just doesn't cut it. But I am sure you knew that
I take it you do not know what "fly-by-wire" is. In a nutshell, the computers take the pilots input, interpret it based on the given conditions, and apply those inputs as the computer thinks the pilot intended. This is supposed to compensate for unintended minute movements pilots transmit through the controls in flight, especially in high stress situations (first real applications being military of course). "Fly-by-wire" does not imply auto-pilot as you seem to suggest (manually controlled).
/. about that one).
As to aero parts missing, I was referring to the add-ons the program needs to get the nose back down. BS stuff that is kludged on later very rarely is as robust as the rest of the design (ask any programmer on
I am surprised that a poster with such a low ID number would resort to using logic to analyse a linked to article. I commend thee. </sarcasm>
;-)
And it happens to be that you are nearly 100% correct.
I was intrigued by the lack of understanding with respect to drag and gear door (seams I presume). Wasn't this sufficiently studied in the 1950's? *sigh* Geeks just love to learn it again for the first time I suppose...
One would hope that these new aero aids that are going to be implemented to keep the nose from coming up on its own will not be 100% necessary. What if they break, and the aircraft is in a overly loaded state? Your average space jockey (not that those exist yet) is not going to be as responsive, or understanding, as last month's test pilot was. This sounds like a dangerous path to go down. Any modern fly by wire aircraft should revert to level flight assuming most of the aero parts are intact, and the pilot is giving zero input (hands and feet off condition - as if passed out). Doesn't sound like this pig can do that. Bad design decision. Makes me think of all the other short cuts that were possibly taken.
I have been a linux user since 1999, and I just got a iBook, so I am on the *nix bandwagon. But for the average user (I am that, not a poweruser, not a total noob), things can be a pain to deal with sometimes. I don't want to scour the 'net looking for tips on how to do something, or go to rpmfind to get something (Mandrake user I am). I want the computer to remain what it is; a tool. When I first started using linux (before win2k or OS X) I felt like the tool. Now, not so much. With windows, I feel like I know what I am doing, just because so much of what is going on is transparent. For linux to be anything more than a great server OS, and a novel desktop OS, it needs to be more like MacOS or Windows. That is my only real point; people _need_ convenience.
My thoughts exactly. While I was reading his arguments, I was thinking "Y'know, half of these reasons are *why* more people don't use Linux...".
Ditto.
His argument boiled down to; linux is more secure because it is harder to deal with. By harder, I mean more steps (save, chmod, etc).
There are plenty of linux servers out there right now that have been 0wn3d by nefarious types, to do their bidding. spamhaus.inc doesn't just 0wn windows servers to do their bidding. But that is not a convenient argument, so I guess we shouldn't go there.