And that invalidates the previous claim about how a polygraph works.
If it measures the responses to telling a lie, then it should be able to work no matter what the lie is.
Therefore, it does NOT accurately measure the responses of telling a lie.
You guys just do not get it, at all, because you have never had any kind of security clearance interview (poly or not) The line of questioning is everything, the machine is just a tool to detect signs of stress the examiner can't already see. The machine doesn't pass/fail you, the examiner does.
How do you tell if someone is lying? Ask them the same questions different ways, at random points in the interview. Focus on subjects they are nervous about. It can be that fucking simple. If you're all really geeks here on/., reverse engineer this, you know, the actual fucking problem poly's are used to solve: How would you tell if somebody is lying to you? If you really cannot imagine a methodology that works better than 50% of the time, punch yourself in the face right now and get off/. If you CAN, and you don't understand how a machine that can indicate signs of stress not visible to the eye is useful in that methodology, why haven't you punched yourself in the face yet?
This thread has gone full-throttle-retarded. Think people, think. Stop arguing about the presupposed purpose of this machine, and think about the problem. Then go back to what the machine actually IS. Nod your heads and move on.
Why would you take _my_ word for it? Don't. Think about it your damned self. Internet solved.
but why should I need to utilize two computers at once to enjoy functionality that only requires a single computer?
Welcome to the world of proprietary platforms.
Right, because open platforms all interoperate and don't compete with each other at all. Go try a hybrid Gnome/KDE desktop environment on OpenNetSolarisBSDixURD for a few weeks and prove me wrong. Want to play open platform bingo with me?
Competition is good, proprietary or not.
PS My own hands have sand castle building functionality. I suck at it.
I always wonder about tape backup.....it seems everyone I know who uses it has had it fail. Hard drives fail too, it's true, but the anecdotal evidence I have says if you are using tape backup, you better have multiple backups.
A single backup set on tape is the same thing as a single backup set on disk; it's just a COPY. Keeping a single backup set on tape is pretty useless anyway, there are much cheaper ways of keeping a copy up to date if that's all you need. You can't really call them backups if you don't have multiple [point in time] copies, and hopefully with good luck or design, each set will be on different tapes.
Like BSD itself? It was forked how many times? Anyway the problem with BSD is not forking. It is closed proprietary forking like what Transgaming does.
I don't think he said a BSD license PREVENTS forking. Nor does the GPL prevent forking into other GPL projects. Is there a staggering amount of non-free BSD improvements locked up somewhere?.. also, what's wrong with what Transgaming does? They contributed back to WINE, and in bigger ways then they would if it were a GPL project from the beginning. They would not be where they are today if they didn't have some protection of their investment. I wonder how symbiotic their relationship with WINE is now?
What exactly does the GPL protect free software against? Jealousy? Irrational fear of forks? You see the same crap when someone decides to sell another's open source project and offer paid support for it. Bunch of jealousy.
The only real pragmatic benefit I see is using it to protect your own investment in an open project from other commercial interests until the time comes that you fork it yourself to commercialize it. Not exactly ideologically pure mind you.. and the fear of losing something that doesn't go anywhere prevails. I think freet*rds are completely aware that their work (for the ones that don't entirely consume free shit) and ideas are worth money, but they are afraid of success?
Tape speed isn't slow, LTO4 will do 240MB/s with 2:1 compressible content, your source probably can't keep up with that for most types of backups.
... all while encrypting it using digitally signed firmware =D
Fibre tape drives also add a new dimension, that disks with today's software really can't compete with. Sharing arbitrary amounts of storage between N hosts of random OS type, without mapping/masking/zoning new LUNs each time you add capacity or having to use clustered filesystems. Like you basically said, most backup sources are going to be struggling to satiate a LTO4 drive, but each new drive is also a new spindle with access to your entire volume of data. You can't just add new spindles to the same pool of harddrive storage, it doesn't scale up. With tape, drives could be added, some shared X ways, some shared Y ways to scale bandwidth any way I want, and I manage the capacity entirely independently.
So fragmentation will ALWAYS be an android issue until they say "here is our reference hardware platform(s) -- you must use of these three sets of features when building hardware." Coincidentally this is exactly what MS is doing with Windows Phone 7 -- three hardware platforms, that's it. You still have to design your app three times, but at least you know that if you design for one hardware platform, ANY device within that platform by ANY manufacturer on ANY carrier will have the same exact limitations and abilities.
Microsoft does that for desktops too, and probably any device that runs a Windows OS for that matter. In order to get the little Windows badge, the computer has to have certain minimum specs. It doesn't seem like much, but if they didn't have any kind of certification program, things could be much, much worse in Windows land. Windows Media Center PCs all had to have TV tuners and DVD/CD burners for example, and I'm sure there were more requirements besides the obvious.
Google will probably have to do the same to stay ahead of Apple, or any combined HW/SW maker, or at least to stem fragmentation.
Another way to look at this, and something I think many are overlooking here is _future_ features. Android can't effectively lead in features if they have to wait for the phone manufacturers to one by one adopt the latest proven iPhone features. They'll have to do what Microsoft does and sweet talk the hardware manufacturers into somewhat simultaneously supporting a new feature and that's not even easy for Microsoft to do. Otherwise, Android phones might once in a while sport bleeding edge features, but not in a consistent way, and Google wouldn't be able to take advantage of them until the feature was widespread and supported by multiple manufacturers.
This same stuff plays out between OS X and Windows, Macs and PCs all the time. Apple can say "from now on, all devices will have X, build rich software around X", even "all new device wont have Y", wheres Microsoft and Google have to work harder to pull off projects like Microsoft's Media Center PCs or get rid of floppy drives, or 16-bit BIOS for example. A more recent example is HP's push into touch screen desktops. Apple could probably sit on its ass for few years at this rate, say "let there be touchscreen Macs" and leave the Windows touch screen PC (wherever they end up then) in the dust, playing catch up!
I would clarify that fragmentation affects iPhones, Android phones, PCs and Macs but the difference is Apple can control it.
Adobe CS5 was to debut with advanced tools that would allow the porting of flash apps to the iPhone. If flash itself was the problem then such a clause would not have been added.
Funny, you say advanced porting tools in your first sentence, then flash itself in the second. I think Apple is really more concerned about losing control of the iPhone/iPad development environment. I don't think they even particularly care to exercise their own control, just keep it away from outsiders. I mean, if they wished to really lock it down, they could pick one language, one IDE, and stop pursuing HTML5, right? Just my own opinions, and Apple is very hard to read.
If the company is preforming actions that Apple felt was wrong then they take their money elsewhere, not turn away and hope things just get better.
Causing a giant round of layoffs at the factory would do fucking wonders for the suicide rate wouldn't it? Aren't you posting here today because Apple _did_ something about it, however small?
Sigh, badmouth Apple on Slashdot and get modded down, no matter how accurate your post may be.... MacOS is hardly an improvement over Windows -- in fact it may well be a downgrade.... It would make perfect sense if they were moving to Linux only -- an operating system that is free in both senses of the word, but allowing continued use of MacOS but not Windows seems a bit hypocritical.
Just a thought, maybe Google and Mac using/.ers are on to something and _you're_ the one that's off base. Don't worry, nobody really uses Windows or Macs, Apple and Microsoft pay thousands of shills to make it look that way. Or maybe everyone who uses a Mac is a flaming rtard, that's it. People having equal experience with Mac/Windows/Linux/Solaris are evil incarnate and not to be trusted. Best to trust people who say things you like.
I understand a little more about how PIN locks work now, but am I correct in saying that the peer at the other end of the USB never actually sends the PIN over? As in the PC never authenticates with the phone, but the user unlocks the phone, then the phone speaks freely to whatever has physical access as long as it is turned on? I mean, idealy, something like bluetooth pairing would happen even to enable the physical USB connection, but I don't think this currently happens.
I know violating the assumption that a powered off PIN locked phone is secure is _bad_ and all, but AFAIK, a powered on PIN locked phone is not really secure after it is unlocked? My big question is what percentage of time is that? Does a PIN locked phone re-lock after a few minutes, or prompt for the PIN to enable each connection? Thats the part I think I'm missing, because otherwise it's hard to see that much security was lost.. but people are getting so upset over this, so there must be something.
Even if plugged into a mac or PC running iTunes, the data should be equally accessible.
What do other phones do? Connect a blackberry to a PC with blackberry desktop for example.. Does iTunes ask for the PIN each time it syncs an PIN locked iPhone? I must be missing something.
Does this trick allow use of the SIM card without entering its PIN? Could someone who has both phones elaborate? I don't ever remember having to enter a PIN to pair a blackberry other than the random one for pairing bluetooth devices which is responsible only for encrypting the wireless transmission.
I know "access data locally without authenticating" sounds scary, but I'm not exactly sure what the precedence is for phones authenticating with peers (bluetooth pairing is authorization, not authentication)
You talk of failed systems, but do you believe that the current dominant political and economic systems are not doomed to failure as well? As history indeed shows, all systems of governance have failed and been replaced by more efficient ones, so what makes you say the current western system is the best that humanity will ever discover? Our descendants 500 years from now will look upon the present western notion of superiority as just as ridiculous as that of the ancient Chinese and Roman rulers.
Hold your god damned horses, where T.F. did _anyone_ say today's western system is the best that humanity will ever discover? Railing against our own ways is American as apple pie, and as far as I know, outsiders have never been excluded from criticizing it.
Also, how can anyone seriously downplay the ancient Chinese and Roman empires? You've built up a mighty strawman, smoked part of it, and tried to blow said smoke up our asses in one post. Nice.
Maybe the "west" is just as damned good as you think they think they are. To paint the picture that we're throwing stones from a glass house is bull shit.
though it arguably leans slightly closer to "open" than OSX does. If only for lack of time and manpower, Palm didn't do very much to the stock linux layer(whereas, while it is a certified UNIX and all that, OSX is a bit of a culture shock coming from Linux or one of the classic BSDs) and the WebOS UI layer is largely rendered in HTML+CSS+javascript in a webkit-based system.
Anyone who has ever used any two certified UNIX systems could have told you not to expect broad similarities just because of that fact. You're not suggesting something is even slightly less open just because it is different are you? Maybe the web 2.0 UI was supposed to be your (forking a sentence makes it hard to read) main point?;)
Do you prefer mouse driven context menus, or pervasive keyboard shortcuts + modifier keys for nearly every menu option? I guess I like both, but Windows nor OS X seem to grasp both of them equally well. Both have their ups and downs, but it's amusing when the one button mouse comes up without mentioning the difference in keyboard shortcuts.
Ok, I GET it.. a search bar for my TV, and targeted ads on my TV. Is there much else to say about this thing?
It will be interesting how other set tob box suppliers respond, particularly the cable cos who are already in the advertising business. I don't think anyone can ignore what happened to TIVO...
Rapid decline? Big companies aren't using desktop computers for their cube farms? Fortune 500 companies are replacing everyones computer with a laptop?
Really, business class computers are your sign that PC desktops are not on the way out? I guess hard phone lines and filing cabinets are still hot by that measure too. Laptops have invaded businesses of all sizes, as have smart phones.
Go ask a Dell shareholder how awesome desktop sales are doing, and ask about all the factory expansions.
It seems to me that after starting off with a promising few centuries, the USA has suddenly decided that the guiding principle of its society should be maintenance of the status quo, rather than progress.
Yah, the standard of living here in the US is _reeeeeally_ behind the curve, bandits made off with my horses last week. We should be improving.. stuff, and doing interesting things. There probably isn't a point of diminishing returns, and people have infinite potential, so some day our younglings will make those Romulan kids in the latest Star Trek movie look like nimrods, and we'll all have Jedi-like abilities. We'll just slowly advance human intellectual capacity towards infinity by overextending ourselves with extremely inefficient education.
Hey, if we really want to get ahead we can also do away with the Army and Marine Corps and just send all of our troops to 10-year cyborg-ninja camps. Overeducation to the extreeeeeme, man! Nobody would fuck with us, then we can spend infinity more resources on overeducating civilians to do more better things, like building start destroyers. Our standard of living isn't good enough until I can just imagine a pop-tart and have a toasty sweet pastry appear in my hands by will alone.
So uhh.. in summary, NO, you can't just overeducate people then simply... use them more. You ever seen the Great Pyramid? Well if you can learn anything from 1000s of years old dead people it's that you need to build on a strong foundation, bottom up. Stop growing the bottom; no more up.
Of course maintaining the status quo doesn't work when the rest of the world is forging ahead. In practice it translates into falling behind. If basic needs are being met (which they are), then surplus capacity should be directed. This guy's argument is that capacity should be reduced for the sake of preserving the existing wealth distribution as it is.s.
The answer is not to pile more stuff on top, easy as it seems.
Damn, it frustrates me every time people don't take the time to read and analyze a post before replying...
My answer it yes, once every 25 years on average; I will do just that but I test the procedure often enough.
I have nothing against journaling FS. I merely stated that it doesn't bring much to my table. I also stated that IMHO, in your case, it brings you a false sense of confidence.
Yah, there is a disconnect somewhere. The people who "don't take the time to read and analyze" your posts are wondering why, when the only commonly known good reason to disable journaling is to get a little extra performance, you haven't said something along the lines of "I needed the extra performance", or gave another reasonable explanation. At least that's my take. I mean, it's not one of those things you turn on when you think you need it.. you leave it on until you have a very good reason to turn it off. I suppose people might get defensive over this out of fear they might go to the next job to find FS journaling all disabled... just because.
'Usability'? As far as I can tell, Ubuntu doesn't give a damn about usability, or they wouldn't have broken wireless on *both* the last two releases
That's a whole different scope of usability, a general QA problem. I think it's unfair to say they don't give a damn about usability because their release process sucks. It's fair to criticize them for not fixing more core problems before usability ones though.
Car examples: Wheels falling off my car is well beyond being a usability issue. Placement of the turn signals is a usability concern.
From the summary I gathered the problem was with the mechanical switch that disconnects external power when the generators are brought online, not a lack of capacity. Still requires testing, but it isn't going to be done often because isn't this the result when the power doesn't transition smoothly?
Slashdot Mirror
And that invalidates the previous claim about how a polygraph works.
If it measures the responses to telling a lie, then it should be able to work no matter what the lie is.
Therefore, it does NOT accurately measure the responses of telling a lie.
You guys just do not get it, at all, because you have never had any kind of security clearance interview (poly or not)
The line of questioning is everything, the machine is just a tool to detect signs of stress the examiner can't already see. The machine doesn't pass/fail you, the examiner does.
How do you tell if someone is lying? Ask them the same questions different ways, at random points in the interview. Focus on subjects they are nervous about. It can be that fucking simple. /., reverse engineer this, you know, the actual fucking problem poly's are used to solve: How would you tell if somebody is lying to you? If you really cannot imagine a methodology that works better than 50% of the time, punch yourself in the face right now and get off /. If you CAN, and you don't understand how a machine that can indicate signs of stress not visible to the eye is useful in that methodology, why haven't you punched yourself in the face yet?
If you're all really geeks here on
This thread has gone full-throttle-retarded. Think people, think. Stop arguing about the presupposed purpose of this machine, and think about the problem. Then go back to what the machine actually IS. Nod your heads and move on.
Why would you take _my_ word for it? Don't. Think about it your damned self. Internet solved.
but why should I need to utilize two computers at once to enjoy functionality that only requires a single computer?
Welcome to the world of proprietary platforms.
Right, because open platforms all interoperate and don't compete with each other at all.
Go try a hybrid Gnome/KDE desktop environment on OpenNetSolarisBSDixURD for a few weeks and prove me wrong. Want to play open platform bingo with me?
Competition is good, proprietary or not.
PS
My own hands have sand castle building functionality. I suck at it.
Otherwise, people have the tendency to retroactively "not say something", and make one of their responders look like an over-reacting fool.
Don't Slashdot's default threading and moderation settings do this already?
I have to quote everything I reply to because you never know what context readers or meta mods will take this in.
Go browse /. with default settings sometime, it's scary and disconnected :\
I always wonder about tape backup.....it seems everyone I know who uses it has had it fail. Hard drives fail too, it's true, but the anecdotal evidence I have says if you are using tape backup, you better have multiple backups.
A single backup set on tape is the same thing as a single backup set on disk; it's just a COPY. Keeping a single backup set on tape is pretty useless anyway, there are much cheaper ways of keeping a copy up to date if that's all you need. You can't really call them backups if you don't have multiple [point in time] copies, and hopefully with good luck or design, each set will be on different tapes.
If your tape drives aren't on your SAN you're doing it wrong :)
Like BSD itself? It was forked how many times?
Anyway the problem with BSD is not forking. It is closed proprietary forking like what Transgaming does.
I don't think he said a BSD license PREVENTS forking. Nor does the GPL prevent forking into other GPL projects. .. also, what's wrong with what Transgaming does? They contributed back to WINE, and in bigger ways then they would if it were a GPL project from the beginning. They would not be where they are today if they didn't have some protection of their investment. I wonder how symbiotic their relationship with WINE is now?
Is there a staggering amount of non-free BSD improvements locked up somewhere?
What exactly does the GPL protect free software against? Jealousy? Irrational fear of forks? You see the same crap when someone decides to sell another's open source project and offer paid support for it. Bunch of jealousy.
The only real pragmatic benefit I see is using it to protect your own investment in an open project from other commercial interests until the time comes that you fork it yourself to commercialize it. Not exactly ideologically pure mind you.. and the fear of losing something that doesn't go anywhere prevails. I think freet*rds are completely aware that their work (for the ones that don't entirely consume free shit) and ideas are worth money, but they are afraid of success?
Tape speed isn't slow, LTO4 will do 240MB/s with 2:1 compressible content, your source probably can't keep up with that for most types of backups.
Fibre tape drives also add a new dimension, that disks with today's software really can't compete with. Sharing arbitrary amounts of storage between N hosts of random OS type, without mapping/masking/zoning new LUNs each time you add capacity or having to use clustered filesystems. Like you basically said, most backup sources are going to be struggling to satiate a LTO4 drive, but each new drive is also a new spindle with access to your entire volume of data. You can't just add new spindles to the same pool of harddrive storage, it doesn't scale up. With tape, drives could be added, some shared X ways, some shared Y ways to scale bandwidth any way I want, and I manage the capacity entirely independently.
So fragmentation will ALWAYS be an android issue until they say "here is our reference hardware platform(s) -- you must use of these three sets of features when building hardware." Coincidentally this is exactly what MS is doing with Windows Phone 7 -- three hardware platforms, that's it. You still have to design your app three times, but at least you know that if you design for one hardware platform, ANY device within that platform by ANY manufacturer on ANY carrier will have the same exact limitations and abilities.
Microsoft does that for desktops too, and probably any device that runs a Windows OS for that matter. In order to get the little Windows badge, the computer has to have certain minimum specs. It doesn't seem like much, but if they didn't have any kind of certification program, things could be much, much worse in Windows land. Windows Media Center PCs all had to have TV tuners and DVD/CD burners for example, and I'm sure there were more requirements besides the obvious.
Google will probably have to do the same to stay ahead of Apple, or any combined HW/SW maker, or at least to stem fragmentation.
Another way to look at this, and something I think many are overlooking here is _future_ features. Android can't effectively lead in features if they have to wait for the phone manufacturers to one by one adopt the latest proven iPhone features. They'll have to do what Microsoft does and sweet talk the hardware manufacturers into somewhat simultaneously supporting a new feature and that's not even easy for Microsoft to do. Otherwise, Android phones might once in a while sport bleeding edge features, but not in a consistent way, and Google wouldn't be able to take advantage of them until the feature was widespread and supported by multiple manufacturers.
This same stuff plays out between OS X and Windows, Macs and PCs all the time. Apple can say "from now on, all devices will have X, build rich software around X", even "all new device wont have Y", wheres Microsoft and Google have to work harder to pull off projects like Microsoft's Media Center PCs or get rid of floppy drives, or 16-bit BIOS for example. A more recent example is HP's push into touch screen desktops. Apple could probably sit on its ass for few years at this rate, say "let there be touchscreen Macs" and leave the Windows touch screen PC (wherever they end up then) in the dust, playing catch up!
I would clarify that fragmentation affects iPhones, Android phones, PCs and Macs but the difference is Apple can control it.
Interesting moderation.
Adobe CS5 was to debut with advanced tools that would allow the porting of flash apps to the iPhone. If flash itself was the problem then such a clause would not have been added.
Funny, you say advanced porting tools in your first sentence, then flash itself in the second. I think Apple is really more concerned about losing control of the iPhone/iPad development environment. I don't think they even particularly care to exercise their own control, just keep it away from outsiders. I mean, if they wished to really lock it down, they could pick one language, one IDE, and stop pursuing HTML5, right? Just my own opinions, and Apple is very hard to read.
If the company is preforming actions that Apple felt was wrong then they take their money elsewhere, not turn away and hope things just get better.
Causing a giant round of layoffs at the factory would do fucking wonders for the suicide rate wouldn't it? Aren't you posting here today because Apple _did_ something about it, however small?
Sigh, badmouth Apple on Slashdot and get modded down, no matter how accurate your post may be. ... ...
MacOS is hardly an improvement over Windows -- in fact it may well be a downgrade.
It would make perfect sense if they were moving to Linux only -- an operating system that is free in both senses of the word, but allowing continued use of MacOS but not Windows seems a bit hypocritical.
Just a thought, maybe Google and Mac using /.ers are on to something and _you're_ the one that's off base. Don't worry, nobody really uses Windows or Macs, Apple and Microsoft pay thousands of shills to make it look that way. Or maybe everyone who uses a Mac is a flaming rtard, that's it. People having equal experience with Mac/Windows/Linux/Solaris are evil incarnate and not to be trusted. Best to trust people who say things you like.
Google is paying Slashdot handsome sums of cash in exchange for bad Apple press.
Oh I see, this is a troll, but the "this is a pro-Apple story in disguise" post is +5 insightful
Awesome groupthink guys.
Android is awesome, give me some points.
Idiot watching
I understand a little more about how PIN locks work now, but am I correct in saying that the peer at the other end of the USB never actually sends the PIN over? As in the PC never authenticates with the phone, but the user unlocks the phone, then the phone speaks freely to whatever has physical access as long as it is turned on? I mean, idealy, something like bluetooth pairing would happen even to enable the physical USB connection, but I don't think this currently happens.
I know violating the assumption that a powered off PIN locked phone is secure is _bad_ and all, but AFAIK, a powered on PIN locked phone is not really secure after it is unlocked? My big question is what percentage of time is that? Does a PIN locked phone re-lock after a few minutes, or prompt for the PIN to enable each connection? Thats the part I think I'm missing, because otherwise it's hard to see that much security was lost.. but people are getting so upset over this, so there must be something.
Even if plugged into a mac or PC running iTunes, the data should be equally accessible.
What do other phones do? Connect a blackberry to a PC with blackberry desktop for example..
Does iTunes ask for the PIN each time it syncs an PIN locked iPhone? I must be missing something.
Does this trick allow use of the SIM card without entering its PIN? Could someone who has both phones elaborate?
I don't ever remember having to enter a PIN to pair a blackberry other than the random one for pairing bluetooth devices which is responsible only for encrypting the wireless transmission.
I know "access data locally without authenticating" sounds scary, but I'm not exactly sure what the precedence is for phones authenticating with peers (bluetooth pairing is authorization, not authentication)
You talk of failed systems, but do you believe that the current dominant political and economic systems are not doomed to failure as well? As history indeed shows, all systems of governance have failed and been replaced by more efficient ones, so what makes you say the current western system is the best that humanity will ever discover? Our descendants 500 years from now will look upon the present western notion of superiority as just as ridiculous as that of the ancient Chinese and Roman rulers.
Hold your god damned horses, where T.F. did _anyone_ say today's western system is the best that humanity will ever discover? Railing against our own ways is American as apple pie, and as far as I know, outsiders have never been excluded from criticizing it.
Also, how can anyone seriously downplay the ancient Chinese and Roman empires? You've built up a mighty strawman, smoked part of it, and tried to blow said smoke up our asses in one post. Nice.
Maybe the "west" is just as damned good as you think they think they are. To paint the picture that we're throwing stones from a glass house is bull shit.
though it arguably leans slightly closer to "open" than OSX does. If only for lack of time and manpower, Palm didn't do very much to the stock linux layer(whereas, while it is a certified UNIX and all that, OSX is a bit of a culture shock coming from Linux or one of the classic BSDs) and the WebOS UI layer is largely rendered in HTML+CSS+javascript in a webkit-based system.
Anyone who has ever used any two certified UNIX systems could have told you not to expect broad similarities just because of that fact. You're not suggesting something is even slightly less open just because it is different are you? Maybe the web 2.0 UI was supposed to be your (forking a sentence makes it hard to read) main point? ;)
Do you prefer mouse driven context menus, or pervasive keyboard shortcuts + modifier keys for nearly every menu option? I guess I like both, but Windows nor OS X seem to grasp both of them equally well. Both have their ups and downs, but it's amusing when the one button mouse comes up without mentioning the difference in keyboard shortcuts.
Ok, I GET it.. a search bar for my TV, and targeted ads on my TV. Is there much else to say about this thing?
It will be interesting how other set tob box suppliers respond, particularly the cable cos who are already in the advertising business. I don't think anyone can ignore what happened to TIVO...
Rapid decline? Big companies aren't using desktop computers for their cube farms? Fortune 500 companies are replacing everyones computer with a laptop?
Really, business class computers are your sign that PC desktops are not on the way out? I guess hard phone lines and filing cabinets are still hot by that measure too.
Laptops have invaded businesses of all sizes, as have smart phones.
Go ask a Dell shareholder how awesome desktop sales are doing, and ask about all the factory expansions.
It seems to me that after starting off with a promising few centuries, the USA has suddenly decided that the guiding principle of its society should be maintenance of the status quo, rather than progress.
Yah, the standard of living here in the US is _reeeeeally_ behind the curve, bandits made off with my horses last week. We should be improving.. stuff, and doing interesting things. There probably isn't a point of diminishing returns, and people have infinite potential, so some day our younglings will make those Romulan kids in the latest Star Trek movie look like nimrods, and we'll all have Jedi-like abilities. We'll just slowly advance human intellectual capacity towards infinity by overextending ourselves with extremely inefficient education.
Hey, if we really want to get ahead we can also do away with the Army and Marine Corps and just send all of our troops to 10-year cyborg-ninja camps. Overeducation to the extreeeeeme, man! Nobody would fuck with us, then we can spend infinity more resources on overeducating civilians to do more better things, like building start destroyers. Our standard of living isn't good enough until I can just imagine a pop-tart and have a toasty sweet pastry appear in my hands by will alone.
So uhh.. in summary, NO, you can't just overeducate people then simply... use them more. You ever seen the Great Pyramid? Well if you can learn anything from 1000s of years old dead people it's that you need to build on a strong foundation, bottom up. Stop growing the bottom; no more up.
Of course maintaining the status quo doesn't work when the rest of the world is forging ahead. In practice it translates into falling behind. If basic needs are being met (which they are), then surplus capacity should be directed. This guy's argument is that capacity should be reduced for the sake of preserving the existing wealth distribution as it is.s.
The answer is not to pile more stuff on top, easy as it seems.
Damn, it frustrates me every time people don't take the time to read and analyze a post before replying...
My answer it yes, once every 25 years on average; I will do just that but I test the procedure often enough.
I have nothing against journaling FS. I merely stated that it doesn't bring much to my table. I also stated that IMHO, in your case, it brings you a false sense of confidence.
Yah, there is a disconnect somewhere. The people who "don't take the time to read and analyze" your posts are wondering why, when the only commonly known good reason to disable journaling is to get a little extra performance, you haven't said something along the lines of "I needed the extra performance", or gave another reasonable explanation. At least that's my take. I mean, it's not one of those things you turn on when you think you need it.. you leave it on until you have a very good reason to turn it off. I suppose people might get defensive over this out of fear they might go to the next job to find FS journaling all disabled... just because.
'Usability'? As far as I can tell, Ubuntu doesn't give a damn about usability, or they wouldn't have broken wireless on *both* the last two releases
That's a whole different scope of usability, a general QA problem. I think it's unfair to say they don't give a damn about usability because their release process sucks. It's fair to criticize them for not fixing more core problems before usability ones though.
Car examples: Wheels falling off my car is well beyond being a usability issue. Placement of the turn signals is a usability concern.
From the summary I gathered the problem was with the mechanical switch that disconnects external power when the generators are brought online, not a lack of capacity. Still requires testing, but it isn't going to be done often because isn't this the result when the power doesn't transition smoothly?