Ironically, many of Microsoft's tools have trouble dealing with the space in the filename, including the blasted Run window.
Just because there is a way to make it work doesn't means there isn't a problem with it. All unix shells can handle spaces in filenames, but the methods to do so are not always intuitive and it's easy to mess up things like shell scripts. Even the "proper" solutions have problems.
And I can't stand "Program Files", what a mess that has been.
To be fair, you only really hear about CEOs when they're massive fuckups, or Steve Jobs. If you do your job and make money for your company, then it's not really news.
While all of that is true and reasonable, just try to convince the MPAA that you "video over the internet" scheme doesn't need DRM. Just try it. I dare you.
That is probably the only time I've ever heard Microsoft's system logging compared favorably with anything. In my many years of administering systems, I have yet to ever get a useful piece of information out of any of those logs. It's like there's a requirement somewhere that only useless messages are allowed to be logged, and anything that might help an administrator (like an error message when something crashes for instance!) must never appear. Even if the error is something stupid like a permissions issue, you don't get a Linux like "Permission denied on c:/blah/blah/blah", at most you'll get a "An error occurred" or other worthless message.
For some time now there has been resources online to look at the error rates in a JPEG to guess which parts have been photoshopped into a picture. I use it all the time when I suspect something has been photoshopped. It's not a perfect tool,and someone who is expecting it can defeat this particular analysis, but online it has proven to be quite valuable in spotting fakes.
TFA's link appears to be slashdotted, so I can't tell if they're using a similar technique or not.
You're really talking about Visual Basic there, not Powerpoint. Visual Basic is a pretty apt comparison actually. I'd argue that the learning curve on VB is quite a bit steeper than the one for Hypercard, but obviously it is a far more modern language at this point.
Of course there are modern version of Hypercard (I think they call themselves Runtime Revolution now), but they're relatively expensive niche products that few people will ever discover.
That's true if all you're using Hypercard for is to display pictures and hit "next", maybe with a little sound/animation if you're feeling ambitious, however Hypercard was capable of so much more. Even a tiny bit of Hypertalk knowledge would let you blow Powerpoint out of the water. It may have looked like a stack of slides, but Hypercard was a full on development environment.
Re:Supercard was available after Hypercard cancell
on
Why Was Hypercard Killed?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Supercard was expensive, it's not the sort of thing a parent would buy on a whim. The beauty of Hypercard is that it came with the OS so kids could discover the joy of coding on their own. The language was designed so a person reading the source could start to figure it out quickly. It was the perfect gateway language.
Unfortunately, Hypercard gave way to Hypercard Player, which then became a specialized commercial product, and at that point Hypercard as phenomenon was dead.
It has always been the case that AMD/ATI has generally had the better hardware (although it does shift whenever new chips drop), but nVidia has the better drivers. People will occasionally tell you that "yeah, that was true in the past, but ATI drivers are pretty good now", but then some new game comes out and they're crap again.
The problem with high frequency wireless networking is that more and more stuff becomes opaque as you increase the frequency. For Terahertz networks you're pretty much going to require a clear line of sight between you and the receiver. The directionality thing will be a big problem too, I'm sure some of us can remember setting up IR networks a few years ago (when laptops still had IR ports on them). Unless you're talking about fixed installations, Line of Sight is a big hurdle to adoption.
In short: there are serious problems with this gear that will limit its applicability. There is a market for fixed line of sight networks like this, emergency response situations where people set up temporary tents but need to communicate for instance. You stick a pole in the ground at each tent, tape an antenna on the top, and point them at one another. That's a pretty esoteric use case however. Generally if you have fixed installations, it makes sense to just dig a trench (or using the existing infrastructure!) to run a wired network instead, that way it won't go down in the rain or fog or when a bird tries to perch on your antenna pole.
I'm pretty sure if I were building a server class box with no video, I would configure the POST to not stop if no video were detected. Plenty of server class machines have the option to output their boot messages to a serial port if need be, there's no compelling reason to require video on a rack box.
That's only true of the streaming service. For the DVD service the MPAA can't touch them because they just buy retail discs in bulk and mail them to you. That was the real beauty of Netflix: They weren't in bed with the studios and could instead focus on what the customer wanted. However the streaming service changed that, and it's a cancer that is killing Netflix. Unless they can somehow manage to get fair treatment from the MPAA (after killing off their lucrative DVD sales market) the streaming service is doomed and could drag the whole company down with it.
It's true that the consumer would benefit greatly from an open market like that, but do you know who doesn't particularly like the idea of being a commodity? Every cell phone company. That's why it's not going to happen.
So shortly after all of the major carriers dropped the even slightly reasonable SMS plans, people started using the hacky but free alternatives? What a shocker. This seems like a classic example of what happens when you price yourself right out of the market.
Total launches of the Falcon Heavy to date: 0
First proposed test launch: 2013
Making equipment space (and moon!) rated is not a trivial problem. It's not quite as bad as it was in the 60s because we at least know something about the moon, but of course we know basically nothing about mining on the moon.
Technology isn't magic. It requires people to do lots of hard work to make stuff happen. You can't just put a dome over the cockpit of a backhoe and expect it to work on the moon, real engineering will need to occur, tough engineering, with studies and design tradeoffs and everything. By the way, that backhoe I mentioned earlier, the mass production model that sells many thousand copies each year? It's $130k dollars. You're planning to make something space rated for only 8x the cost? That just doesn't happen. And that's just one of the many many moving parts you'll need to deal with to get this whole thing up and running. Oh, and if you're curious, the launch cost to get something like that backhoe into low Earth orbit (we're not even close to talking about the moon here): 24 million dollars. Maybe 12 million if SpaceX can deliver on their promises.
Cripes, you go to all of the trouble to find the place with the loosest/most poorly enforced regulatory structure, and then suddenly the government pulls a bait and switch and starts caring about the massive toll all of it is having on the population. It's a real pain to go and find some new place where they don't care about their citizens. The modern world is a libertarian nightmare.
Columbus wasn't proposing doing his expedition in a rowboat. The scale of what these guys are trying to do is several orders of magnitude out of their current (and foreseeable) capabilities. If he somehow had unlimited funds and drive, then yeah, I could get behind this. But he's begging people for a paltry million dollars, which won't even cover a fraction of his fuel costs, much less anything else.
One minor hurdle will be designing and building a launch system capable of putting enough mass on the moon to actually start mining. The though that it could be done in 8 years is frankly laughable, even if these guys did have money and a workable plan.
If they were maybe shooting for 2120 I could take them slightly more seriously. Even the Apollo program needed 9 years, and they were just putting a couple of guys on the moon for a brief landing. They weren't trying to build infrastructure.
The economics don't even make sense. Who are they going to sell it to? Themselves? There aren't any plans for manned missions beyond earth orbit (G. W. Bush's Mars fantasies not withstanding) so there isn't even a customer for this. It's total lunacy (pun intended).
2020? These guys are either nuts or lying, maybe both. If they're not just total crackpots, then this is probably just trolling for VC dollars like that stupid flying car thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Ironically, many of Microsoft's tools have trouble dealing with the space in the filename, including the blasted Run window.
Just because there is a way to make it work doesn't means there isn't a problem with it. All unix shells can handle spaces in filenames, but the methods to do so are not always intuitive and it's easy to mess up things like shell scripts. Even the "proper" solutions have problems.
And I can't stand "Program Files", what a mess that has been.
To be fair, you only really hear about CEOs when they're massive fuckups, or Steve Jobs. If you do your job and make money for your company, then it's not really news.
While all of that is true and reasonable, just try to convince the MPAA that you "video over the internet" scheme doesn't need DRM. Just try it. I dare you.
You were putting useful information in the system log? I'm pretty sure that's against the rules.
That is probably the only time I've ever heard Microsoft's system logging compared favorably with anything. In my many years of administering systems, I have yet to ever get a useful piece of information out of any of those logs. It's like there's a requirement somewhere that only useless messages are allowed to be logged, and anything that might help an administrator (like an error message when something crashes for instance!) must never appear. Even if the error is something stupid like a permissions issue, you don't get a Linux like "Permission denied on c:/blah/blah/blah", at most you'll get a "An error occurred" or other worthless message.
For some time now there has been resources online to look at the error rates in a JPEG to guess which parts have been photoshopped into a picture. I use it all the time when I suspect something has been photoshopped. It's not a perfect tool,and someone who is expecting it can defeat this particular analysis, but online it has proven to be quite valuable in spotting fakes.
TFA's link appears to be slashdotted, so I can't tell if they're using a similar technique or not.
You're really talking about Visual Basic there, not Powerpoint. Visual Basic is a pretty apt comparison actually. I'd argue that the learning curve on VB is quite a bit steeper than the one for Hypercard, but obviously it is a far more modern language at this point.
Of course there are modern version of Hypercard (I think they call themselves Runtime Revolution now), but they're relatively expensive niche products that few people will ever discover.
That's true if all you're using Hypercard for is to display pictures and hit "next", maybe with a little sound/animation if you're feeling ambitious, however Hypercard was capable of so much more. Even a tiny bit of Hypertalk knowledge would let you blow Powerpoint out of the water. It may have looked like a stack of slides, but Hypercard was a full on development environment.
Supercard was expensive, it's not the sort of thing a parent would buy on a whim. The beauty of Hypercard is that it came with the OS so kids could discover the joy of coding on their own. The language was designed so a person reading the source could start to figure it out quickly. It was the perfect gateway language.
Unfortunately, Hypercard gave way to Hypercard Player, which then became a specialized commercial product, and at that point Hypercard as phenomenon was dead.
It has always been the case that AMD/ATI has generally had the better hardware (although it does shift whenever new chips drop), but nVidia has the better drivers. People will occasionally tell you that "yeah, that was true in the past, but ATI drivers are pretty good now", but then some new game comes out and they're crap again.
The problem with high frequency wireless networking is that more and more stuff becomes opaque as you increase the frequency. For Terahertz networks you're pretty much going to require a clear line of sight between you and the receiver. The directionality thing will be a big problem too, I'm sure some of us can remember setting up IR networks a few years ago (when laptops still had IR ports on them). Unless you're talking about fixed installations, Line of Sight is a big hurdle to adoption.
In short: there are serious problems with this gear that will limit its applicability. There is a market for fixed line of sight networks like this, emergency response situations where people set up temporary tents but need to communicate for instance. You stick a pole in the ground at each tent, tape an antenna on the top, and point them at one another. That's a pretty esoteric use case however. Generally if you have fixed installations, it makes sense to just dig a trench (or using the existing infrastructure!) to run a wired network instead, that way it won't go down in the rain or fog or when a bird tries to perch on your antenna pole.
It would take a lot of effort and money to disturb this sleeping dog. Why go to the trouble?
I'm pretty sure if I were building a server class box with no video, I would configure the POST to not stop if no video were detected. Plenty of server class machines have the option to output their boot messages to a serial port if need be, there's no compelling reason to require video on a rack box.
Netflix is the reason I have a Virtualbox VM running Windows XP on my machine.
That's only true of the streaming service. For the DVD service the MPAA can't touch them because they just buy retail discs in bulk and mail them to you. That was the real beauty of Netflix: They weren't in bed with the studios and could instead focus on what the customer wanted. However the streaming service changed that, and it's a cancer that is killing Netflix. Unless they can somehow manage to get fair treatment from the MPAA (after killing off their lucrative DVD sales market) the streaming service is doomed and could drag the whole company down with it.
It's true that the consumer would benefit greatly from an open market like that, but do you know who doesn't particularly like the idea of being a commodity? Every cell phone company. That's why it's not going to happen.
So shortly after all of the major carriers dropped the even slightly reasonable SMS plans, people started using the hacky but free alternatives? What a shocker. This seems like a classic example of what happens when you price yourself right out of the market.
If you want superlight insulation, you can already buy Aerogel in bulk quantities. It's not exactly cheap, but it's not completely outrageous either.
Total launches of the Falcon Heavy to date: 0
First proposed test launch: 2013
Making equipment space (and moon!) rated is not a trivial problem. It's not quite as bad as it was in the 60s because we at least know something about the moon, but of course we know basically nothing about mining on the moon.
Technology isn't magic. It requires people to do lots of hard work to make stuff happen. You can't just put a dome over the cockpit of a backhoe and expect it to work on the moon, real engineering will need to occur, tough engineering, with studies and design tradeoffs and everything. By the way, that backhoe I mentioned earlier, the mass production model that sells many thousand copies each year? It's $130k dollars. You're planning to make something space rated for only 8x the cost? That just doesn't happen. And that's just one of the many many moving parts you'll need to deal with to get this whole thing up and running. Oh, and if you're curious, the launch cost to get something like that backhoe into low Earth orbit (we're not even close to talking about the moon here): 24 million dollars. Maybe 12 million if SpaceX can deliver on their promises.
Cripes, you go to all of the trouble to find the place with the loosest/most poorly enforced regulatory structure, and then suddenly the government pulls a bait and switch and starts caring about the massive toll all of it is having on the population. It's a real pain to go and find some new place where they don't care about their citizens. The modern world is a libertarian nightmare.
Columbus wasn't proposing doing his expedition in a rowboat. The scale of what these guys are trying to do is several orders of magnitude out of their current (and foreseeable) capabilities. If he somehow had unlimited funds and drive, then yeah, I could get behind this. But he's begging people for a paltry million dollars, which won't even cover a fraction of his fuel costs, much less anything else.
What's wrong with wheels? The moon buggy used them and they worked fine.
One minor hurdle will be designing and building a launch system capable of putting enough mass on the moon to actually start mining. The though that it could be done in 8 years is frankly laughable, even if these guys did have money and a workable plan.
If they were maybe shooting for 2120 I could take them slightly more seriously. Even the Apollo program needed 9 years, and they were just putting a couple of guys on the moon for a brief landing. They weren't trying to build infrastructure.
The economics don't even make sense. Who are they going to sell it to? Themselves? There aren't any plans for manned missions beyond earth orbit (G. W. Bush's Mars fantasies not withstanding) so there isn't even a customer for this. It's total lunacy (pun intended).
2020? These guys are either nuts or lying, maybe both. If they're not just total crackpots, then this is probably just trolling for VC dollars like that stupid flying car thing.
It's funny because its true.