Well, I've had no luck in getting anything like that. So I just tried that (though I'm sure I tried it before), and all that does is completely get rid of the dialog all-together. So now I have a file transfer in-progress and no way to see what it's doing or how to cancel it (short of opening up a terminal and killing the job).
Looking on the web, it seems lots of people are complaining about this "feature" with no actual solutions available. Even worse, the response from the KDE developers is pretty condescending.
Sadly, my work-around (one that actually works) is to install gnome and then replace nautilus with dolphin.
I might be dumb, but I've been working with Linux and unix-based systems for almost 20 years now; so I'm no newbie. But I am kind of at the point in life where I want things to "just work" so that I can focus on the stuff I'm really interested in.
And note, I didn't say KDE was dumb - I said it does dumb stuff. All said, KDE and Gnome are amazing projects, particularly when you consider the paradigm in which they're developed and how well they compare with commercial closed-source offerings. It's just irritating when every new release seems to break the things that worked so well in the previous release - particularly something as basic a progress dialog box.
User starts using personal device. User develops key business practice on device. User leaves. Now it's MY problem to support the practice. (in my case it's a handheld inventory system- which doesn't work with windows 7, doesn't work on new hand held devices)
How many times did the user ask for a solution from IT, and when he did, did he get a ridiculous quote that it will take years and cost millions?
That's been my personal experience - that even the simplest request comes back with such ludicrous numbers that I have no choice but to "roll my own" solution. It shouldn't take a year and $300k to come up with a way to import a set of identical excel sheets with a few thousand rows in them into a database table. Yet that was the quoted solution. So I made my own using VBA and a SQL server in about a week. Also, this is for a "temporary solution" that IT says they'll replace in a year anyway. On top of that, we're only getting "serviced" because we're a high profile group in the company. Most other people are told to buzz off - so they too roll their own.
Like most of us, your guy had a job to accomplish - he needed a handheld inventory system. Did he ask for help? And if he did, was he told "no", or given an absurd, budget-busting quote for what it would take to implement? If so, he did what he had to. If he didn't, is there already a culture of "don't bother asking, because we won't help"?
I've been on both sides of the fence. But I can say it's far more frustrating as a business user to be thwarted at every turn by IT than it is to be an IT person trying to support business users. With the right attitude and solid but flexible practices, an IT dept can reliably support what the users need and even leave most of them pretty happy. But with an IT dept that's mired in bureaucracy and really doesn't care what happens, a business user is really left no choice but to go it on their own - which ultimately leaves a mess for IT to figure out in the end. In either role, I prefer being a part of the solution.
> I have a land line and am considering a dumb cell just due to costs. You might also look into something like Skype. I just started using it myself because I don't have a land-line and my cellphone's coverage at my house is a bit erratic. For $3.00/month, I can use my computer and FIOS connection to make out-going phone calls. It's works great for conference calling. For more money, I could have a Skype phone number other landlines could call me on. But I don't want that. I don't know if there are other good VOIP to POTS services.
Just FYI, you can get decent cell plans via pre-paid for $35 to $45; maybe even cheaper if you don't want data and texts.
> Ever go to a restaurant and look around at what people are doing? Sadly, a large % of them have their smart phones out
Different people have different expectations when they go to do dinner, I suppose.
But here's a recent example from my life. I was just out to dinner but one of my friends couldn't make it because she was sick. During the course of dinner we were talking about a movie and none of us could remember the actor we were thinking of. One of us pulled out our phone and looked it up. That was handy and added to the conversation. As dinner was wrapping up, I was able to text my sick friend to ask what she wanted us to bring to her from the restaurant. Maybe if you had looked at me at those times, you might have thought I was engrossed in my phone instead of the dinner and companionship at the table - but that wouldn't have been the case.
But like you say, different strokes for different folks. Much better they're texting away quietly than talking loudly. I was just in a place that had a sign, "no cell phones, there's a phone booth in the back if you want to talk on your cell phone". Odd way for that "technology" to come back.
I'll second that. The Optimus V is a solid little phone. I tried a newer one with a slide-out keyboard (my old one had that), but actually liked the Optimus V better.
(Assuming you're in the US), definitely look into something that is not Sprint, Verizon, or AT&T. The smaller carriers often have much better deals and access the same networks. Straight-talk has Androids and you can get unlimited everything for $45/month. $35/month gets you 1000 minutes, 1000 texts, and a bunch of data. Virgin Mobile ha similar phones and plans. I've used both for many years now.
You can get a decent smart-phone like the LG Optimus V for about $99. They both can bill to a credit card, so it's not like you have to go to a store to buy a "top-up" card.
I'm no expert, but I think the difference is between a "feature phone" and a "smart phone". A feature phone has certain pre-programmed capabilities built into it, which may include ability to use email or get on the web, etc. However it's not very extendable. My last phone was like this. It's very much an appliance with a fixed set of capabilities.
A "smart phone" is more flexible because it has an easy method for adding new programs/apps/capabilities. For example, on my current phone, I just downloaded an app to practice learning Japanese writing. I also have an app that scans barcodes and looks them up on the internet.
So I think what makes it a "smart phone" is that it has the ability to be easily extended to do things it didn't do when it left the factory. It's more like a general purpose computer than just a phone.
> I just think that about 95% of the people who have them don't need really need them.
Well, you're going to have to define "need". I mean, as long as you have enough oxygen, sufficient heat, food, and water, is everything else a luxury? Maybe, but I don't think that's a useful measure.
Do you need a table saw to rip-cut the lumber you're using to make a book shelf? No... with enough practice, you can do pretty good rip-cuts with a hand-saw. But before you get very good at it, you're going to waste a lot of lumber and it's going to take you quite a bit longer to make your cuts. A table-saw is just a tool that makes things easier and better for some people.
A "smart phone" is just a tool, and for a lot of people, it makes things easier and better. When I finally got one, I was surprised at how much I liked using the GPS. I would never have bought a specific GPS device. Its web ability is great. I've discovered I'm no longer calling friends asking them to find the address for some place, or try to look up prices and reviews on something I'm considering buying. I'm never calling a friend any more asking, "are you near your computer?" Sure I could print maps before I leave (but that presumes my plans won't change), carry a laptop and go to a wifi-hotspot to check things out without calling a friend. But really, a "smart-phone" helps me do the things I want to do easier and better than I was doing them before.
On top of that, you can get a smart-phone for a lot less than you probably think. I got an Android from Virgin Mobile for $99. I only pay $45/month for more phone minutes I can use and the data and sms are unlimited. You can get that down to $35/month if you only need 300 minutes/month. Straight-talk has even more affordable plans at $45/month for unlimited everything.
I "need" a phone (smart or otherwise) because it's how I talk to my parents and call into work conferences. But I don't have a land-line, so this $45/month I'm paying is my total bill for all phones in my household. When I last had a land-line, I think it cost close to that much.
I suppose I could go for slightly cheaper options, like a "dumb-phone", but then I'd be giving up a tool that I find particularly useful, and I wouldn't be paying that much less.
Thanks for the tip, but I've tried that, and it's just not as useful to me. The pop-up changes size as the length of the filenames change, making it kind of hop around a lot. I'd rather just have the old dialog boxes with progress bars that I can move wherever I want them on the screen.
For me and my work-flow, those older boxes work better than anything else I've seen.
I generally like the tools that come with kde... dolphin, the way its panel works, etc. However the latest versions do very annoying things. One in particular is that when copying large files (or many files) you no longer get a little window that shows the progress and gives you a "cancel" button. Instead the information is stuck in some little notification icon. This makes it difficult to monitor the progress of multiple coping/moving operations and I can't find a way to cancel the whole operation (it only cancels the current file it's working on). This one problem is enough of an annoyance that I've taken to installing gnome, then replacing the major tools with the versions from kde.
As for the memory/performance issue, the argument that kde is bloated and slow is not invalidated just because more memory and processing power is generally available. The truth is, given an amount of processing power and memory, other managers are more efficient, faster, or snappier. Some people like that. Plus, if you're not plugged in, all that extra memory usage and processing power costs battery-time, even if you're not in the 3rd world.
I wonder if it should be really called a theory at all, but rather a hypothesis. I thought a key part of the definition of a scientific theory is that it explains all known observations.
It sounds to me like he has a hypothesis; and one that doesn't actually explain all the known observations.
> To be fair, tipping can't be based on a percentage one time and then on some set amount another time.
What my parents taught me was that if you use a coupon like this that dramatically reduces the cost of the meal,or have part of your meal comped, you calculate your tip based on the pre-coupon cost.
It looks to me, from reading the decision, that the application was based on the claim that the water is treating a human disease.
The Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 defines reduction of disease risk claims as claims which state that the consumption of a food âoesignificantly reduces a risk factor in the development of a human diseaseâ. Thus, for reduction of disease risk claims, the beneficial physiological effect results from the reduction of a risk factor for the development of a human disease.
And while the applicant states that dehydration is a human disease, it looks as though the panel does not agree, rather that dehydration is merely a condition of water depletion.
It looks like the applicants need to get their claim approved, "that water treats or prevents a human disease" added to Article 14. Then they might be allowed to put the claim on their labeling.
> Or, more likely, a board stocked by the lobbyists from various soft drink companies. Of course, you do realize that most bottled water companies are owned by or are divisions of the major soft-drink companies?
Seems fair to me that if they want to make medical claims about the benefits of their bottled water, then they should be likewise required to state the contraindications and warnings, such as "significant amounts of water can lead to hypernatremia and death"
It's also worth checking the local library to see what they have. Mine has thousands of audiobooks (mostly on CD/mp3-cd) at the main branch and many many more through other branches in the system, plus free access to libraries on worldcat.
I only ever have to buy the audiobooks I want to keep for myself.
If you're on a budget, the library may be a better option than audible.com, especially with the DRM that doesn't allow use on anything but Windows (and probably Mac).
Don't you see a big difference between selective breeding and mixing the genetic material of organisms that could never otherwise mate?
It seems to me that selectively breeding dogs to end up with poodle-like creatures is a very different thing from taking bioluminescent genes from a protozoa and putting them in a dog to make it glow in the dark. No amount of selective breeding will result in a dog that glows in the dark.
I use KDE 4.6.2 (Kubuntu 11.04) and it's mostly what I like, but it has some annoyances. I particularly don't like how when you're moving or copying files that it puts the status information in some widget on the task bar. I'd really prefer to have a separate status window for each process like it used to have.
I actually kind of like the interface on gnome3 that comes with Fedora but I can't get the graphics to work right on my system. I have a laptop that is usually closed and hooked up to an external monitor. Gnome always wants to put the menus and controls on the laptop's window and I can't get it to switch those to the external monitor.
I see the last few days that it's been nagging me to upgrade my system, but I'm afraid of what functionality they'll take away.
I'm kind of at a point in my life where I want things to "just work" and somewhat consistently over time too.
I thought I was going the safe-route when getting an Intel i-7 with the integrated video when I bought a laptop recently. But I've been pretty disappointed with how Linux supports the setup. For the longest time I could only get software render for OpenGL which meant only the most basic games played well at all.
Even now, with a kernel that has "Mesa DRI Intel(R) Sandybridge Mobile GEM 20100330 DEVELOPMENT" support, it still does not perform as well with games like Oolite and Neverball as my 5 year old Centrino-Duo laptop. My understanding is the support will eventually get better.
But knowing what I know now, I would not get a laptop with the video integrated into the process like the i-series do. I've read that even the intel-based laptops with a standalone video-card do not work well because you can't force them to always use the non-integrated video.
Given that, I'd almost prefer to have an AMD processor with no integrated video support.
> That is why you do not use "security through obscurity". Well, if you define "security through obscurity" to such an absurd point, then of course there's no value to obscurity.
However, obscurity is an important part of any security system, but only an idiot would rely on obscurity as the only source of security, and only someone being obtuse would assume that that's what others mean.
Soldiers use "security through obscurity" by wearing camouflage. It's by no means their only means of security. I helps prevent observers from seeing them, but it doesn't prevent a motion sensor from detecting them. Does that mean the use of camouflage is invalid? Of course not. But they use it for the intended purpose, obscuring them from observation (an important part of their security), but they must rely on other methods for securing against other threats.
You also have to take into consideration the threats you are securing against. I can use many obscurity methods to hide the fact that I'm running a spy network out of my house this week. And all those methods may suffice to prevent the casual police officer or even citizen from finding me out. Of course, that won't protect me from a double-agent who already knows where my house is, nor will it protect me from deliberate surveillance once I'm already a suspect. I have to use other methods against that. However just because those things are possible, it doesn't mean I should give up the idea of obscurity and just hang out a sign that says, "spies meeting here". There is still value in the obscurity. However it's only part of the security puzzle.
Of course if you want to narrowly define it into absurdity by a scheme where you put a key to your door under a flower pot, tell everyone you have gold in your house and then say you put a key under your flower pot, then of course, that's stupid. But who would think otherwise?
I complain about Gnome because it's the one that doesn't work.
I don't have any problems with Kubuntu or Fedora's KDE spin. I use xrandr to get the setup the way I want, but doing that under gnome locks the whole system up tight. I suppose it could be a hardware issue but then I would think that would also impact KDE as well.
The sad thing is, I actually find the Gnome 3 interface appealing in a lot of ways, even though it's pretty different from what I'm used to. It's really innovative and I think it could do interesting things with my workflow. But that I can't get it working right with an external monitor is really frustrating.
I wonder how it works with a laptop whose lid is closed an external monitor is attached? With both Fedora and Ubuntu, I find the most recent version still uses the laptop's monitor to show all the controls and panels. I can mirror the display but then my 24 in monitor is running in 1024 x 768. Trying to disable the built-in monitor just locks everything up.
I'd use an older "stable" version, but they don't support the built-in video card of the Intel i7 very well (software render only).
I'd much rather they focus on working with my hardware than working with my chat programs.
One thing to watch for with newer laptops and Linux is the support for the built-in video on the Intel i-5 and i-7 chips. I recently got a Toshiba laptop with an Intel i-7 processor and installed Linux. Everything's pretty good on it (virtualization is fantastic!) except the video support. For average daily use it's fine, but something's not quite right with the xorg/mesa drivers for this "on the chip" video and even the most basic games are very choppy.
I love to play Oolite but sadly it plays far better on my 4-year old Intel Core Duo computer. On my new computer, it gets really slow rendering the scenes when there's very many objects on the screen. I checked with glxinfo and the driver is supposedly doing direct-render rather than software render but it's not very good.
So, if you want to do more than web and basic office stuff, and you want to use Linux, make sure the video will be well-supported. I don't know if this means going with AMD and a standalone video card, or just a laptop with a standalone video card. However, some reading seemed to indicate that even with the Intel built-in video coupled with a standalone card, there wasn't a way to always force it to use the non-built-in card.
I know you're joking, but does Whiskey continue to "age" once it's bottled?
My understanding is that with Cognac, anyway, once it's taken from a cask and put in a bottle, then the aging is done. It's 15 year old Cognac, because it spent 15 years in a cask, and having it for 5 more years in a bottle doesn't make it 20 year old Cognac. Does it work the same way with Whiskey?
I started reading Feynman's QED (Quantum ElectroDynamics) and whoever wrote the forward had an interesting explanation. He said the book was excellent because it thoroughly taught QED but didn't require knowledge of advanced mathematics. He likened the methods in the book to learning how to multiply A x B by taking a bunch of pennies and making A piles with B pennies each, pushing them all into a single pile and counting them out. You'll be able to do it and even understand what is going on. On the other hand you won't be able to work with QED with anything like the efficiency of someone who has 12 years of advanced education in the subject.
I understand that QED is not Relativity, but I suspect a similar approach can be taken, if the material is written correctly.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I've had no luck in getting anything like that. So I just tried that (though I'm sure I tried it before), and all that does is completely get rid of the dialog all-together. So now I have a file transfer in-progress and no way to see what it's doing or how to cancel it (short of opening up a terminal and killing the job).
Looking on the web, it seems lots of people are complaining about this "feature" with no actual solutions available. Even worse, the response from the KDE developers is pretty condescending.
Sadly, my work-around (one that actually works) is to install gnome and then replace nautilus with dolphin.
I might be dumb, but I've been working with Linux and unix-based systems for almost 20 years now; so I'm no newbie. But I am kind of at the point in life where I want things to "just work" so that I can focus on the stuff I'm really interested in.
And note, I didn't say KDE was dumb - I said it does dumb stuff. All said, KDE and Gnome are amazing projects, particularly when you consider the paradigm in which they're developed and how well they compare with commercial closed-source offerings. It's just irritating when every new release seems to break the things that worked so well in the previous release - particularly something as basic a progress dialog box.
User starts using personal device.
User develops key business practice on device.
User leaves.
Now it's MY problem to support the practice. (in my case it's a handheld inventory system- which doesn't work with windows 7, doesn't work on new hand held devices)
How many times did the user ask for a solution from IT, and when he did, did he get a ridiculous quote that it will take years and cost millions?
That's been my personal experience - that even the simplest request comes back with such ludicrous numbers that I have no choice but to "roll my own" solution. It shouldn't take a year and $300k to come up with a way to import a set of identical excel sheets with a few thousand rows in them into a database table. Yet that was the quoted solution. So I made my own using VBA and a SQL server in about a week. Also, this is for a "temporary solution" that IT says they'll replace in a year anyway. On top of that, we're only getting "serviced" because we're a high profile group in the company. Most other people are told to buzz off - so they too roll their own.
Like most of us, your guy had a job to accomplish - he needed a handheld inventory system. Did he ask for help? And if he did, was he told "no", or given an absurd, budget-busting quote for what it would take to implement? If so, he did what he had to. If he didn't, is there already a culture of "don't bother asking, because we won't help"?
I've been on both sides of the fence. But I can say it's far more frustrating as a business user to be thwarted at every turn by IT than it is to be an IT person trying to support business users. With the right attitude and solid but flexible practices, an IT dept can reliably support what the users need and even leave most of them pretty happy. But with an IT dept that's mired in bureaucracy and really doesn't care what happens, a business user is really left no choice but to go it on their own - which ultimately leaves a mess for IT to figure out in the end. In either role, I prefer being a part of the solution.
> I have a land line and am considering a dumb cell just due to costs.
You might also look into something like Skype. I just started using it myself because I don't have a land-line and my cellphone's coverage at my house is a bit erratic. For $3.00/month, I can use my computer and FIOS connection to make out-going phone calls. It's works great for conference calling. For more money, I could have a Skype phone number other landlines could call me on. But I don't want that. I don't know if there are other good VOIP to POTS services.
Just FYI, you can get decent cell plans via pre-paid for $35 to $45; maybe even cheaper if you don't want data and texts.
> Ever go to a restaurant and look around at what people are doing? Sadly, a large % of them have their smart phones out
Different people have different expectations when they go to do dinner, I suppose.
But here's a recent example from my life. I was just out to dinner but one of my friends couldn't make it because she was sick. During the course of dinner we were talking about a movie and none of us could remember the actor we were thinking of. One of us pulled out our phone and looked it up. That was handy and added to the conversation. As dinner was wrapping up, I was able to text my sick friend to ask what she wanted us to bring to her from the restaurant. Maybe if you had looked at me at those times, you might have thought I was engrossed in my phone instead of the dinner and companionship at the table - but that wouldn't have been the case.
But like you say, different strokes for different folks. Much better they're texting away quietly than talking loudly. I was just in a place that had a sign, "no cell phones, there's a phone booth in the back if you want to talk on your cell phone". Odd way for that "technology" to come back.
I'll second that. The Optimus V is a solid little phone. I tried a newer one with a slide-out keyboard (my old one had that), but actually liked the Optimus V better.
(Assuming you're in the US), definitely look into something that is not Sprint, Verizon, or AT&T. The smaller carriers often have much better deals and access the same networks. Straight-talk has Androids and you can get unlimited everything for $45/month. $35/month gets you 1000 minutes, 1000 texts, and a bunch of data. Virgin Mobile ha similar phones and plans. I've used both for many years now.
You can get a decent smart-phone like the LG Optimus V for about $99. They both can bill to a credit card, so it's not like you have to go to a store to buy a "top-up" card.
I'm no expert, but I think the difference is between a "feature phone" and a "smart phone". A feature phone has certain pre-programmed capabilities built into it, which may include ability to use email or get on the web, etc. However it's not very extendable. My last phone was like this. It's very much an appliance with a fixed set of capabilities.
A "smart phone" is more flexible because it has an easy method for adding new programs/apps/capabilities. For example, on my current phone, I just downloaded an app to practice learning Japanese writing. I also have an app that scans barcodes and looks them up on the internet.
So I think what makes it a "smart phone" is that it has the ability to be easily extended to do things it didn't do when it left the factory. It's more like a general purpose computer than just a phone.
> I just think that about 95% of the people who have them don't need really need them.
Well, you're going to have to define "need". I mean, as long as you have enough oxygen, sufficient heat, food, and water, is everything else a luxury? Maybe, but I don't think that's a useful measure.
Do you need a table saw to rip-cut the lumber you're using to make a book shelf? No... with enough practice, you can do pretty good rip-cuts with a hand-saw. But before you get very good at it, you're going to waste a lot of lumber and it's going to take you quite a bit longer to make your cuts. A table-saw is just a tool that makes things easier and better for some people.
A "smart phone" is just a tool, and for a lot of people, it makes things easier and better. When I finally got one, I was surprised at how much I liked using the GPS. I would never have bought a specific GPS device. Its web ability is great. I've discovered I'm no longer calling friends asking them to find the address for some place, or try to look up prices and reviews on something I'm considering buying. I'm never calling a friend any more asking, "are you near your computer?" Sure I could print maps before I leave (but that presumes my plans won't change), carry a laptop and go to a wifi-hotspot to check things out without calling a friend. But really, a "smart-phone" helps me do the things I want to do easier and better than I was doing them before.
On top of that, you can get a smart-phone for a lot less than you probably think. I got an Android from Virgin Mobile for $99. I only pay $45/month for more phone minutes I can use and the data and sms are unlimited. You can get that down to $35/month if you only need 300 minutes/month. Straight-talk has even more affordable plans at $45/month for unlimited everything.
I "need" a phone (smart or otherwise) because it's how I talk to my parents and call into work conferences. But I don't have a land-line, so this $45/month I'm paying is my total bill for all phones in my household. When I last had a land-line, I think it cost close to that much.
I suppose I could go for slightly cheaper options, like a "dumb-phone", but then I'd be giving up a tool that I find particularly useful, and I wouldn't be paying that much less.
Thanks for the tip, but I've tried that, and it's just not as useful to me. The pop-up changes size as the length of the filenames change, making it kind of hop around a lot. I'd rather just have the old dialog boxes with progress bars that I can move wherever I want them on the screen.
For me and my work-flow, those older boxes work better than anything else I've seen.
> there is no reason to speak poorly of KDE.
There is if it just does dumb stuff.
I generally like the tools that come with kde... dolphin, the way its panel works, etc. However the latest versions do very annoying things. One in particular is that when copying large files (or many files) you no longer get a little window that shows the progress and gives you a "cancel" button. Instead the information is stuck in some little notification icon. This makes it difficult to monitor the progress of multiple coping/moving operations and I can't find a way to cancel the whole operation (it only cancels the current file it's working on). This one problem is enough of an annoyance that I've taken to installing gnome, then replacing the major tools with the versions from kde.
As for the memory/performance issue, the argument that kde is bloated and slow is not invalidated just because more memory and processing power is generally available. The truth is, given an amount of processing power and memory, other managers are more efficient, faster, or snappier. Some people like that. Plus, if you're not plugged in, all that extra memory usage and processing power costs battery-time, even if you're not in the 3rd world.
> and the biggest things we've lost are agility, performance and stability.
What's left that's of any value? Are they saving lots of money?
I wonder if it should be really called a theory at all, but rather a hypothesis. I thought a key part of the definition of a scientific theory is that it explains all known observations.
It sounds to me like he has a hypothesis; and one that doesn't actually explain all the known observations.
> To be fair, tipping can't be based on a percentage one time and then on some set amount another time.
What my parents taught me was that if you use a coupon like this that dramatically reduces the cost of the meal,or have part of your meal comped, you calculate your tip based on the pre-coupon cost.
Tip what you want, I suppose.
It looks to me, from reading the decision, that the application was based on the claim that the water is treating a human disease.
The Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 defines reduction of disease risk claims as claims which state that the consumption of a food âoesignificantly reduces a risk factor in the development of a human diseaseâ. Thus, for reduction of disease risk claims, the beneficial physiological effect results from the reduction of a risk factor for the development of a human disease.
And while the applicant states that dehydration is a human disease, it looks as though the panel does not agree, rather that dehydration is merely a condition of water depletion.
Further, looking here http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/labellingnutrition/claims/community_register/authorised_health_claims_en.htm, it appears the EU has a list of authorized health claims for food. Since water is not in this list, a claim would not be allowed to be made for it.
It looks like the applicants need to get their claim approved, "that water treats or prevents a human disease" added to Article 14. Then they might be allowed to put the claim on their labeling.
> Or, more likely, a board stocked by the lobbyists from various soft drink companies.
Of course, you do realize that most bottled water companies are owned by or are divisions of the major soft-drink companies?
Seems fair to me that if they want to make medical claims about the benefits of their bottled water, then they should be likewise required to state the contraindications and warnings, such as "significant amounts of water can lead to hypernatremia and death"
It's also worth checking the local library to see what they have. Mine has thousands of audiobooks (mostly on CD/mp3-cd) at the main branch and many many more through other branches in the system, plus free access to libraries on worldcat.
I only ever have to buy the audiobooks I want to keep for myself.
If you're on a budget, the library may be a better option than audible.com, especially with the DRM that doesn't allow use on anything but Windows (and probably Mac).
Don't you see a big difference between selective breeding and mixing the genetic material of organisms that could never otherwise mate?
It seems to me that selectively breeding dogs to end up with poodle-like creatures is a very different thing from taking bioluminescent genes from a protozoa and putting them in a dog to make it glow in the dark. No amount of selective breeding will result in a dog that glows in the dark.
I use KDE 4.6.2 (Kubuntu 11.04) and it's mostly what I like, but it has some annoyances. I particularly don't like how when you're moving or copying files that it puts the status information in some widget on the task bar. I'd really prefer to have a separate status window for each process like it used to have.
I actually kind of like the interface on gnome3 that comes with Fedora but I can't get the graphics to work right on my system. I have a laptop that is usually closed and hooked up to an external monitor. Gnome always wants to put the menus and controls on the laptop's window and I can't get it to switch those to the external monitor.
I see the last few days that it's been nagging me to upgrade my system, but I'm afraid of what functionality they'll take away.
I'm kind of at a point in my life where I want things to "just work" and somewhat consistently over time too.
> Intel wireless and Intel video
I thought I was going the safe-route when getting an Intel i-7 with the integrated video when I bought a laptop recently. But I've been pretty disappointed with how Linux supports the setup. For the longest time I could only get software render for OpenGL which meant only the most basic games played well at all.
Even now, with a kernel that has "Mesa DRI Intel(R) Sandybridge Mobile GEM 20100330 DEVELOPMENT" support, it still does not perform as well with games like Oolite and Neverball as my 5 year old Centrino-Duo laptop. My understanding is the support will eventually get better.
But knowing what I know now, I would not get a laptop with the video integrated into the process like the i-series do. I've read that even the intel-based laptops with a standalone video-card do not work well because you can't force them to always use the non-integrated video.
Given that, I'd almost prefer to have an AMD processor with no integrated video support.
> That is why you do not use "security through obscurity".
Well, if you define "security through obscurity" to such an absurd point, then of course there's no value to obscurity.
However, obscurity is an important part of any security system, but only an idiot would rely on obscurity as the only source of security, and only someone being obtuse would assume that that's what others mean.
Soldiers use "security through obscurity" by wearing camouflage. It's by no means their only means of security. I helps prevent observers from seeing them, but it doesn't prevent a motion sensor from detecting them. Does that mean the use of camouflage is invalid? Of course not. But they use it for the intended purpose, obscuring them from observation (an important part of their security), but they must rely on other methods for securing against other threats.
You also have to take into consideration the threats you are securing against. I can use many obscurity methods to hide the fact that I'm running a spy network out of my house this week. And all those methods may suffice to prevent the casual police officer or even citizen from finding me out. Of course, that won't protect me from a double-agent who already knows where my house is, nor will it protect me from deliberate surveillance once I'm already a suspect. I have to use other methods against that. However just because those things are possible, it doesn't mean I should give up the idea of obscurity and just hang out a sign that says, "spies meeting here". There is still value in the obscurity. However it's only part of the security puzzle.
Of course if you want to narrowly define it into absurdity by a scheme where you put a key to your door under a flower pot, tell everyone you have gold in your house and then say you put a key under your flower pot, then of course, that's stupid. But who would think otherwise?
I complain about Gnome because it's the one that doesn't work.
I don't have any problems with Kubuntu or Fedora's KDE spin. I use xrandr to get the setup the way I want, but doing that under gnome locks the whole system up tight. I suppose it could be a hardware issue but then I would think that would also impact KDE as well.
The sad thing is, I actually find the Gnome 3 interface appealing in a lot of ways, even though it's pretty different from what I'm used to. It's really innovative and I think it could do interesting things with my workflow. But that I can't get it working right with an external monitor is really frustrating.
Maybe I'm the only one with this problem.
I wonder how it works with a laptop whose lid is closed an external monitor is attached? With both Fedora and Ubuntu, I find the most recent version still uses the laptop's monitor to show all the controls and panels. I can mirror the display but then my 24 in monitor is running in 1024 x 768. Trying to disable the built-in monitor just locks everything up.
I'd use an older "stable" version, but they don't support the built-in video card of the Intel i7 very well (software render only).
I'd much rather they focus on working with my hardware than working with my chat programs.
One thing to watch for with newer laptops and Linux is the support for the built-in video on the Intel i-5 and i-7 chips. I recently got a Toshiba laptop with an Intel i-7 processor and installed Linux. Everything's pretty good on it (virtualization is fantastic!) except the video support. For average daily use it's fine, but something's not quite right with the xorg/mesa drivers for this "on the chip" video and even the most basic games are very choppy.
I love to play Oolite but sadly it plays far better on my 4-year old Intel Core Duo computer. On my new computer, it gets really slow rendering the scenes when there's very many objects on the screen. I checked with glxinfo and the driver is supposedly doing direct-render rather than software render but it's not very good.
So, if you want to do more than web and basic office stuff, and you want to use Linux, make sure the video will be well-supported. I don't know if this means going with AMD and a standalone video card, or just a laptop with a standalone video card. However, some reading seemed to indicate that even with the Intel built-in video coupled with a standalone card, there wasn't a way to always force it to use the non-built-in card.
I know you're joking, but does Whiskey continue to "age" once it's bottled?
My understanding is that with Cognac, anyway, once it's taken from a cask and put in a bottle, then the aging is done. It's 15 year old Cognac, because it spent 15 years in a cask, and having it for 5 more years in a bottle doesn't make it 20 year old Cognac. Does it work the same way with Whiskey?
I started reading Feynman's QED (Quantum ElectroDynamics) and whoever wrote the forward had an interesting explanation. He said the book was excellent because it thoroughly taught QED but didn't require knowledge of advanced mathematics. He likened the methods in the book to learning how to multiply A x B by taking a bunch of pennies and making A piles with B pennies each, pushing them all into a single pile and counting them out. You'll be able to do it and even understand what is going on. On the other hand you won't be able to work with QED with anything like the efficiency of someone who has 12 years of advanced education in the subject.
I understand that QED is not Relativity, but I suspect a similar approach can be taken, if the material is written correctly.