oh, about 6 minutes;)
But seriously, there are some good handheld/ebedded type processors that are 1000x faster than the TI-83. The TI-83's guts havn't been upgraded in the last 15 years, (not counting the silver edition). In the plus edition, they just added a little more ram so now you have a (still pathetic) 24K of ram and ?100K of archive space. woohoo. You can fit 100x that on a single flash eeprom chip.
Just reading the topic once over, it looked like it had something to do with George Bush and Iraq.;) Then I realized the grammar didn't make sense. "World Ends; Public Draft"
I'm suprised that TI-83s are still so popular, considering they use ~12 year old technology. They're painfully slow for running simple math programs. Especially with statistics simulations. It takes the calculator several minutes to generate 100 samples of 50 random numbers from 1 to 10, which is something my $70 Athlon XP 2000+ could do in a fraction of a second. It's ridiculous how they're still using 20 year old processor technology. Even the Mac Classic puts the TI-83 to shame in terms of IPS and FLOPS.
No, advertizing is all about making people think they need/want things that they don't really need, and making them think brand Y is better than brand X without any logical reason. It has nothing to do with communication and everything to do with psychological conditioning.
The fact of the matter is that there is no correlation whatsoever between the actual quality of a product and the amount it is advertized or the extremeness of the advertizing claims made about it. Since there is no correlation, advertizing serves no comunicatory purpose. It is simply background noise trying to bang nonsense into people's heads.
"small proportion of
Internet users who seek pornographic material online" my ass. Porn was the first industry to make a profit on the Net and is still the most profitable net industry. I would bet 95%+ of all male college students have viewed pornography online within the past two weeks.
It is not a medium of information exchange. It is an extremely unproductive and wasteful brainwashing contest. It inflates the prices of goods while providing no useful service to the consumer, because there is no correlation whatsoever between the quality of a product and how much it is advertized.
Advertizing is a wasteful middleman whose costs should be minimized in the interest of the common good, but the self interest of the companies leads to this ridiculously inefficient system.
Also, it's not like you can just always choose to buy the generic products that aren't advertized, because they don't exist in restaraunts or in most small stores.
They put too much emphasis on advertizing it to death and not enough emphasis on developing a quality product. Advertizing is the scourge of the free market. It doubles or triples the price of many goods while contributing nothing to their value.
"Odd that Microsoft is simultaneously trying to stop spam sent to Hotmail users, and to make sure that it can send unsolicited commercial email without penalties"
That's called capitalism: unscrupulous self-interest.
Right, if all goes according to theory, this should be helping everyone in the long run, right? *cough* Those conservative theorists had their head in the clouds and overlooked the fact that unmitigated self-interest leads to market superfluities, like money wasted on advertizing. (By wasted I mean it does nothing but drain resources and produces nothing except to brainwash consumers into purchasing inferior product A instead of inferior product B.)
"Looks like AMD is finally making some headway into supplying 1st tier business computer makers which the announcement that Sun will...
They mean "with the announcement" not "which the announcement"
It is official; some noname journalist confirms: *Apple is dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *Apple community when IDC confirmed that *Apple market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of any computer. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *Apple has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *Apple is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *Apple's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *Apple faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *Apple because *Apple is dying. Things are looking very bad for *Apple. As many of us are already aware, *Apple continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood (and when hasnt it?)
Apple is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time Apple developers Some_Engineer#1 and Some_Engineer#2 only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: Apple is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
Apple leader Theo^H^H^H^HJobs states that there are 7000 users of Apple. How many users of Apple are there? Let's see. The number of Apple versus Wannabee posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 Apple users. Apple posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of Apple posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of Apple. A recent article put Apple at about 80 percent of the *Apple market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 Apple users. This is consistent with the number of Apple Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of nobody, abysmal sales and so on, Apple is going out of business and is being taken over by YetAnotherClone who sell another troubled OS. Now Apple is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *Apple has steadily declined in market share. *Apple is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *Apple is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *Apple continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *Apple is dead.
Fact: *BSD^H^H^HApple is dying
(baltantly ripped of the trolls;-)
This is proof that the RIAA's alleged lack of profitability is their own fault for being ridiculously inefficient in their expenditures. A record can easily be produced and promoted for 1/10 to 1/100 of what they spend. Instead of working efficiently, they just give the artists the financial shaft in order to maintain profitability, and it's no suprise that we end up with CRAP since the corporations are the only ones making much money, not the artists, so there's no motivation to produce anything decent. The RIAA is a destructive monopoly, and in economics terms, a "market failure". Contrary to the opinion of conservative laymen, unrestricted monopolies never represent the most efficient way of doing things.
Now they won't be able to screw you over by selling unreturnable products that are defective in the sense that the customer doesn't know ahead of time that he won't be able to play them on his computer, car stereo, or whatnot. I'm suprised someone hasn't already sued the pants off of the recording industry for that bullshit.
The whole point is that it is a sacrificial shield: It is more heavily armoured than the rest of the ship and can withstand the impact of grains of debris travelling at a reletive velocity of 20,000 mph to the ship (which is rare because ALL sattelites orbit in a prograde direction around the earth since it would take too much fuel to counteract and override the velocity they start with when launched due to the rotation of the earth. The only debris you really have to worry about is stuff from sattelites that were in polar or other nonequatorial orbits, and those are a minority.
Sorry, but I call BS.
1. Being a nerd doesn't mean you are smart. I knew plenty of dumbass nerds.
Really? I don't. Maybe we're using different definitions. A nerd is someone, usually male, who is somewhat deficient in social skills, and is interested in and/or proficient at science, math, engineering, computers, and similar things. Those are precisely the kind of subjects that require superior intelligence, and are of interest to those who posess it. Any dim fool can BS about "coming of age" in an English essay. Few people can honestly say they were bored to death by the ease with which they cruised through AP Physics and the time wasted beating easy concepts to death in math class. These are the cream of the intelligence crop, the nerds.
2. Being smart doesn't mean you are a nerd. I knew straight A students who were all around athletes and in the "cool" crowd.
Grades have nothing to do with intelligence, especially when the work is so ridiculously easy and pointless, as in high school. Your grades are determined by your motivation to do pointless work. I know a lot of people in the category you describe, and none of them are very smart. Sure, they're generally a bit above the average joe, but they're still somewhat dim by my book and nowhere near as intelligent as the kind of nerds who cruise through AP calculus without the slightest bit of work.
3. Being a nerd (or smart) doesn't mean you can't be athletic. See #2 From my experience, virtually all of the star athletes were of average intelligence or worse, which is to say, stupid. Sure there are plenty of nerds who join the cross country team and a few who are benchwarmers on the football team, but very few who are very athletic and above average social status. I can think of one example where a brilliant nerd was also a good football player, but he was an arrogant, unpopular pariah, and I can think of one nerd hockey player who is of average popularity, which is at least better than the status of most other nerds.
This system will completely eliminate the problem of small debris at a low cost: Use an electrostatically charged sacrificial beacon to attract all the particles with neutral and opposite charges, while repelling everything else.
Slashdot Mirror
I can see that the prewar Arms Race has already begun!
oh, about 6 minutes ;)
But seriously, there are some good handheld/ebedded type processors that are 1000x faster than the TI-83. The TI-83's guts havn't been upgraded in the last 15 years, (not counting the silver edition). In the plus edition, they just added a little more ram so now you have a (still pathetic) 24K of ram and ?100K of archive space. woohoo. You can fit 100x that on a single flash eeprom chip.
Just reading the topic once over, it looked like it had something to do with George Bush and Iraq. ;) Then I realized the grammar didn't make sense. "World Ends; Public Draft"
I'm suprised that TI-83s are still so popular, considering they use ~12 year old technology. They're painfully slow for running simple math programs. Especially with statistics simulations. It takes the calculator several minutes to generate 100 samples of 50 random numbers from 1 to 10, which is something my $70 Athlon XP 2000+ could do in a fraction of a second. It's ridiculous how they're still using 20 year old processor technology. Even the Mac Classic puts the TI-83 to shame in terms of IPS and FLOPS.
He seems to have turned his attention from Astrophysics to producing gangsta rap
...Someone makes a Quake 2 mod & map re-enacting Helm's Deep?
No, advertizing is all about making people think they need/want things that they don't really need, and making them think brand Y is better than brand X without any logical reason. It has nothing to do with communication and everything to do with psychological conditioning.
The fact of the matter is that there is no correlation whatsoever between the actual quality of a product and the amount it is advertized or the extremeness of the advertizing claims made about it. Since there is no correlation, advertizing serves no comunicatory purpose. It is simply background noise trying to bang nonsense into people's heads.
that's called a conservative estimate. It's probably more like 98% in any given week. But some of them are too busy fucking sorority girls.
"small proportion of Internet users who seek pornographic material online" my ass. Porn was the first industry to make a profit on the Net and is still the most profitable net industry. I would bet 95%+ of all male college students have viewed pornography online within the past two weeks.
Once again someone gets modded up for asking the stupid and obvious questions without even being able to spell.
It is not a medium of information exchange. It is an extremely unproductive and wasteful brainwashing contest. It inflates the prices of goods while providing no useful service to the consumer, because there is no correlation whatsoever between the quality of a product and how much it is advertized. Advertizing is a wasteful middleman whose costs should be minimized in the interest of the common good, but the self interest of the companies leads to this ridiculously inefficient system. Also, it's not like you can just always choose to buy the generic products that aren't advertized, because they don't exist in restaraunts or in most small stores.
They put too much emphasis on advertizing it to death and not enough emphasis on developing a quality product. Advertizing is the scourge of the free market. It doubles or triples the price of many goods while contributing nothing to their value.
"Odd that Microsoft is simultaneously trying to stop spam sent to Hotmail users, and to make sure that it can send unsolicited commercial email without penalties" That's called capitalism: unscrupulous self-interest. Right, if all goes according to theory, this should be helping everyone in the long run, right? *cough* Those conservative theorists had their head in the clouds and overlooked the fact that unmitigated self-interest leads to market superfluities, like money wasted on advertizing. (By wasted I mean it does nothing but drain resources and produces nothing except to brainwash consumers into purchasing inferior product A instead of inferior product B.)
"Looks like AMD is finally making some headway into supplying 1st tier business computer makers which the announcement that Sun will... They mean "with the announcement" not "which the announcement"
It is official; some noname journalist confirms: *Apple is dying One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *Apple community when IDC confirmed that *Apple market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of any computer. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *Apple has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *Apple is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test. You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *Apple's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *Apple faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *Apple because *Apple is dying. Things are looking very bad for *Apple. As many of us are already aware, *Apple continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood (and when hasnt it?) Apple is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time Apple developers Some_Engineer#1 and Some_Engineer#2 only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: Apple is dying. Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers. Apple leader Theo^H^H^H^HJobs states that there are 7000 users of Apple. How many users of Apple are there? Let's see. The number of Apple versus Wannabee posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 Apple users. Apple posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of Apple posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of Apple. A recent article put Apple at about 80 percent of the *Apple market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 Apple users. This is consistent with the number of Apple Usenet posts. Due to the troubles of nobody, abysmal sales and so on, Apple is going out of business and is being taken over by YetAnotherClone who sell another troubled OS. Now Apple is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house. All major surveys show that *Apple has steadily declined in market share. *Apple is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *Apple is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *Apple continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *Apple is dead. Fact: *BSD^H^H^HApple is dying (baltantly ripped of the trolls ;-)
Never drink & compile.
It's official; Netcraft confirms: Salon.com is dying. (Insert obvious here)
This is proof that the RIAA's alleged lack of profitability is their own fault for being ridiculously inefficient in their expenditures. A record can easily be produced and promoted for 1/10 to 1/100 of what they spend. Instead of working efficiently, they just give the artists the financial shaft in order to maintain profitability, and it's no suprise that we end up with CRAP since the corporations are the only ones making much money, not the artists, so there's no motivation to produce anything decent. The RIAA is a destructive monopoly, and in economics terms, a "market failure". Contrary to the opinion of conservative laymen, unrestricted monopolies never represent the most efficient way of doing things.
...Scientists at the Smithsonian have decided that GNU is the stupidest acronym in the history of mankind, and decided to make an exhibit about it...
Now they won't be able to screw you over by selling unreturnable products that are defective in the sense that the customer doesn't know ahead of time that he won't be able to play them on his computer, car stereo, or whatnot. I'm suprised someone hasn't already sued the pants off of the recording industry for that bullshit.
The whole point is that it is a sacrificial shield: It is more heavily armoured than the rest of the ship and can withstand the impact of grains of debris travelling at a reletive velocity of 20,000 mph to the ship (which is rare because ALL sattelites orbit in a prograde direction around the earth since it would take too much fuel to counteract and override the velocity they start with when launched due to the rotation of the earth. The only debris you really have to worry about is stuff from sattelites that were in polar or other nonequatorial orbits, and those are a minority.
Sorry, but I call BS. 1. Being a nerd doesn't mean you are smart. I knew plenty of dumbass nerds.
Really? I don't. Maybe we're using different definitions. A nerd is someone, usually male, who is somewhat deficient in social skills, and is interested in and/or proficient at science, math, engineering, computers, and similar things. Those are precisely the kind of subjects that require superior intelligence, and are of interest to those who posess it. Any dim fool can BS about "coming of age" in an English essay. Few people can honestly say they were bored to death by the ease with which they cruised through AP Physics and the time wasted beating easy concepts to death in math class. These are the cream of the intelligence crop, the nerds.
2. Being smart doesn't mean you are a nerd. I knew straight A students who were all around athletes and in the "cool" crowd. Grades have nothing to do with intelligence, especially when the work is so ridiculously easy and pointless, as in high school. Your grades are determined by your motivation to do pointless work. I know a lot of people in the category you describe, and none of them are very smart. Sure, they're generally a bit above the average joe, but they're still somewhat dim by my book and nowhere near as intelligent as the kind of nerds who cruise through AP calculus without the slightest bit of work. 3. Being a nerd (or smart) doesn't mean you can't be athletic. See #2 From my experience, virtually all of the star athletes were of average intelligence or worse, which is to say, stupid. Sure there are plenty of nerds who join the cross country team and a few who are benchwarmers on the football team, but very few who are very athletic and above average social status. I can think of one example where a brilliant nerd was also a good football player, but he was an arrogant, unpopular pariah, and I can think of one nerd hockey player who is of average popularity, which is at least better than the status of most other nerds.
This system will completely eliminate the problem of small debris at a low cost: Use an electrostatically charged sacrificial beacon to attract all the particles with neutral and opposite charges, while repelling everything else.
SUCK IT, all you Anonymous cow-herds.
Somebody tell me, where are the missing comments?
*chirp*
*chirp*