"That sort of thing is well worth the occasional interrupted class/meeting/movie/whatever".
Maybe I should have taken this as a bit of hyperbole in the character of the rest of your "Verizon moment", but I'm sorry, I can't agree that I'm wrong to say that the expectation of being able to enjoy a movie/class/play, etc. (particularly if I'm paying for it) along with other people of like mind without extraneous interruption outweighs the needs of some individual to produce an interruption to receive some personal communication unrelated to the shared event.
Your particular example nobody will have any issue with, because as you yourself point out, one's wife doesn't give birth every other week. If the only incidences of interruption caused by cellphone communication were due to important messages about births, deaths, fires, or national emergencies, this would not be a problem for anybody. The fact of the matter, as anybody who as been exposed to this in a movie can attest and why this topic strikes a chord, is that the conversation is invariably something like:
"Oh, hi. Hey, I'm at the movieplex right now, can I call you back in an hour? Seeya!"
If you personally were sitting right next to me in a movie theater when you got that call about your wife, I'd be happy to shake your hand. But I have no interest in "emotionally involving" myself in the life of some teenager informing a buddy he's going to be at the Taco Bell in a half-hour.
"So your "right" not to be interrupted or annoyed at a theater, restaurant, meeting, etc., is more important than a significant event in someone else's life?"
My individual right, no. Me and the 50 others in a movie theatre, *absolutely*.
Even your idea of 'shared sacrifice' in the case of really important messages won't fly because what of those members of society that have $6 for a movie but not $40/month for a cellphone contract? I don't accept the idea that because they lack the money to have the opportunity to, in turn, interrupt some event you are involved with in the future means that their presence is thus somehow less important than your presence in a public space. I'm not saying that you, personally, have such a belief, but the idea that its ok because everybody will eventually get such an important call themselves forgets about the people that are part of our society that will always be too poor to afford a cellphone, and that strikes me as a selfish way of thinking.
I actually don't agree with the jamming idea, for precisely the situation you had, a truly important call. My suggestion as I put it in another thread is that the solution is for we, the members of the society, to communicate what should or should not be appropriate by telling individuals when we find usage inappropriate.
Your argument, like most of them made in support of cellphone usage, I find inherently selfish.
To condense it, in order to actualize the individual's existence, any amount of impact on society as a whole is justifiable. It's deployed regularly by those defending SUVs. It's America in the 21st Century, and I can't help but think it adds more grit to the steady erosion of community feeling in this country and others to which we have exported our mores.
I don't think society can function indefinitely with an ever-growing sense of individual entitlement and "every man for himself" attitude.
Part of the solution is good old community pressure. If everyone would lower the verbal boom on boors, it would serve as a useful corrective in society.
If some biker dude with "Killer" tattooed on his arm applied it to someone's scrawny neck when they "forget" to deactivate their cellphone during a showing of "Love, Actually", I would suspect their memory would dramatically improve the next time they were in a theater. "Direct Connect" technology at its best.
This is all an example of the disconnected culture we have been developing and that wireless devices foster, but do not create. People feel uncomfortable talking to others face-to-face. [irony] What would probably work better than a jammer for these incidents is some way of allowing people with a cellphone to locate a nearby cellphone and page it to bitch out that person for using the cellphone in the theatre or wherever. [/irony]
Yes, I would have to agree, XP is hardly new, when I started working at Motorola in 1986, we paired engineers on the same project in double cubes. What's new with Extreme Programming is that it has an Xtreme!!!! moniker!!!! Sells some of books, maybe keeps some consultants employed, s'all good.
XP is less methodology than religion. Any time you can use a set of rituals or terminology to bind a group together, you can get results. It would be the same results in paired offices, in a big dark room with rows of desks, in Microsoft individual offices, whatever.
I was confused about this at first, until someone pointed out that this is for downhillers. Those guys are not reliant on pedaling, and more weight is better if you are on gravity drive. They also often wear hard plastic motocross body armor, too. Weight is not a big consideration.
To me, this is not cycling. To qualify, at some point you must pedal UP a hill to be cycling.
Now, as to your choice of overpriced drivetrain, I have one word for you - SUNTOUR, BABY!!Yes my commuter sled (Lotus) still soldiers on after 18 years with the original Suntour 12-speed setup. Had to change the chain, tho.
You are correct on the method of manufacture, but the aluminum layer is still subject to oxidation. If the polycarbonate layer is cracked, split, perforated, or otherwise damaged or defective, moisture can reach the surface and corrode it.
As a reliability engineer, I can tell you that the long-term longevity of manufactured materials is driven (a) by process characteristics (i.e. is there a manufacturing flaw) and (b) thermodynamics. Diffusion processes and chemical reaction rates are all driven by temperature.
If you want your CDs or CD-Rs to last forever, store them below 5 degrees Kelvin or so. You can immerse them safely in liquid helium, it's inert. Make sure it doesn't go superfluid on you, and climb out of the Dewar and away from your 'Britney Unplugged' sessions.
1) There are 3 orbiters still on flight status. By your logic, that's 300 flights. Note that NASA put up ISS, Hubble, Solar Max, a bunch of comm satellites, several Spacelab missions, fixed Hubble, retrieved several dead satellites - all in a little more than a 100 flights. Geez, with 300, the sky's the limit (no pun intended).
The Shuttle, by NASA's own estimates, would have a loss of orbiter accident every 100-120 missions. This is based solely on reliability engineering calculations. People have this idea that the Shuttle is some kind of big bottle rocket or Testors model, just with really big engines. It is an enormously complex piece of engineering. For all this complexity, both mission losses were caused by bureaucratic ineptitude, not engineering issues.
2) Everyone who flies on the Shuttle IS a volunteer. You think NASA pushes its astronauts into the Shuttle cabin at gunpoint? You want them to sign an affidavit on the tower every flight, or what?
3) Most supplies to ISS are delivered by Progress supply ships, Shuttle brings up components and crew for the most part.
4) Putting any amount of mass into the same orbit as the ISS wouldn't warrant any kind of prize unless it docks with it. That, unfortunately, is the hard part. Unless of course your objective is to DESTROY the ISS, in which case you would need a lot less than 1000 kilos, probably 10 kilos of hex nuts dispersed would take out the solar panels pretty effectively.
I'm not a big fan of bureaucracy, which once developed has only one mission - perpetuate itself. However, if we have, as a society, an interest in developing a presence off the planet, a big organization is the only way to do it. And if you think corporate America is the way to go, well, read the history of the Challenger disaster - it was Morton Thiokol management that gave NASA the green light to launch at low temperatures.
Regurgitating news from some other website/news source != reporting. "Previously published" I might buy.
I find/. useful as an aggregator and as a community, but the one thing it does not provide in any way shape or form is journalism. It's disrespectful to the people who put the sweat and shoe leather into PRODUCING content, not merely commenting upon it.
It's amazing the stuff that gets by editors. I also laughed when I saw this, but what Watts and the SEI are pushing is a methodology called "Team Software Process" or TSP, not TPS.
Is this true? If so, it makes setting the password useful just for keeping out casual interlopers, it's of no use in protecting data in a stolen laptop.
I guess gpg/pgp is the way to go, huh? Actually, I've been using the encrypted disk image idea. I put my sensitive data into one
ATTENTION: All bash bigots please report to Linux, where people care how manly your.bashrc is.
Isn't it BETTER that you have to know a studly weird kludge-around to get tcsh to do it? This, to me, shows geek cred. Any moron can redirect stderr independently of stdout in bash.
I'm a csh guy from 4.2bsd days, and I have yet to be corrupted by ksh, much less bash. The clincher is, as pointed out by someone else, lack of simple completion in Korn-derived shells.
As long as chsh is available, I don't actually know why this is an issue either way. I'll just change it back to tcsh, or get fink to install tcsh, whatever I have to do.
Hope that you aren't British. Or we'll have to wonder why you are keeping your CDs in the loo.
Re:That's it. I'm done with Slashdot.
on
Decipher
·
· Score: 1
Laziness like responding to a piece of drivel like this while you are supposed to be at work/school, on the other hand, is just dandy;)
Well, speaking on behalf of/. , (since it's unlikely anyone else will read your post) - Chad, we will miss you. We think back on the, oh, nearly five weeks you've contributed to our little tribal village and feel a little nostalgia. As much nostalgia as you can accumulate in five weeks. Which could be a lot, I suppose, if you were in Outward Bound, or a moon landing, or riding a flaming zeppelin to a hideous death in New Jersey. I suppose.
Anyway, do feel free to "scoot through". We'll leave the fish on for ya.
Slashdot Mirror
Here is my problem with your original posting.
"That sort of thing is well worth the occasional interrupted class/meeting/movie/whatever".
Maybe I should have taken this as a bit of hyperbole in the character of the rest of your "Verizon moment", but I'm sorry, I can't agree that I'm wrong to say that the expectation of being able to enjoy a movie/class/play, etc. (particularly if I'm paying for it) along with other people of like mind without extraneous interruption outweighs the needs of some individual to produce an interruption to receive some personal communication unrelated to the shared event.
Your particular example nobody will have any issue with, because as you yourself point out, one's wife doesn't give birth every other week. If the only incidences of interruption caused by cellphone communication were due to important messages about births, deaths, fires, or national emergencies, this would not be a problem for anybody. The fact of the matter, as anybody who as been exposed to this in a movie can attest and why this topic strikes a chord, is that the conversation is invariably something like:
"Oh, hi. Hey, I'm at the movieplex right now, can I call you back in an hour? Seeya!"
If you personally were sitting right next to me in a movie theater when you got that call about your wife, I'd be happy to shake your hand. But I have no interest in "emotionally involving" myself in the life of some teenager informing a buddy he's going to be at the Taco Bell in a half-hour.
"So your "right" not to be interrupted or annoyed at a theater, restaurant, meeting, etc., is more important than a significant event in someone else's life?"
My individual right, no. Me and the 50 others in a movie theatre, *absolutely*.
Even your idea of 'shared sacrifice' in the case of really important messages won't fly because what of those members of society that have $6 for a movie but not $40/month for a cellphone contract? I don't accept the idea that because they lack the money to have the opportunity to, in turn, interrupt some event you are involved with in the future means that their presence is thus somehow less important than your presence in a public space. I'm not saying that you, personally, have such a belief, but the idea that its ok because everybody will eventually get such an important call themselves forgets about the people that are part of our society that will always be too poor to afford a cellphone, and that strikes me as a selfish way of thinking.
I actually don't agree with the jamming idea, for precisely the situation you had, a truly important call. My suggestion as I put it in another thread is that the solution is for we, the members of the society, to communicate what should or should not be appropriate by telling individuals when we find usage inappropriate.
Your argument, like most of them made in support of cellphone usage, I find inherently selfish.
To condense it, in order to actualize the individual's existence, any amount of impact on society as a whole is justifiable. It's deployed regularly by those defending SUVs. It's America in the 21st Century, and I can't help but think it adds more grit to the steady erosion of community feeling in this country and others to which we have exported our mores.
I don't think society can function indefinitely with an ever-growing sense of individual entitlement and "every man for himself" attitude.
Part of the solution is good old community pressure. If everyone would lower the verbal boom on boors, it would serve as a useful corrective in society.
If some biker dude with "Killer" tattooed on his arm applied it to someone's scrawny neck when they "forget" to deactivate their cellphone during a showing of "Love, Actually", I would suspect their memory would dramatically improve the next time they were in a theater. "Direct Connect" technology at its best.
This is all an example of the disconnected culture we have been developing and that wireless devices foster, but do not create. People feel uncomfortable talking to others face-to-face. [irony] What would probably work better than a jammer for these incidents is some way of allowing people with a cellphone to locate a nearby cellphone and page it to bitch out that person for using the cellphone in the theatre or wherever. [/irony]
That was a gender and genus-neutral 'sir' :-) In case you are, perhaps, a cat.
Yes, I would have to agree, XP is hardly new, when I started working at Motorola in 1986, we paired engineers on the same project in double cubes. What's new with Extreme Programming is that it has an Xtreme!!!! moniker!!!! Sells some of books, maybe keeps some consultants employed, s'all good.
XP is less methodology than religion. Any time you can use a set of rituals or terminology to bind a group together, you can get results. It would be the same results in paired offices, in a big dark room with rows of desks, in Microsoft individual offices, whatever.
THIS is a Satellite.
I was confused about this at first, until someone pointed out that this is for downhillers. Those guys are not reliant on pedaling, and more weight is better if you are on gravity drive. They also often wear hard plastic motocross body armor, too. Weight is not a big consideration.
To me, this is not cycling. To qualify, at some point you must pedal UP a hill to be cycling.
Now, as to your choice of overpriced drivetrain, I have one word for you - SUNTOUR, BABY!!Yes my commuter sled (Lotus) still soldiers on after 18 years with the original Suntour 12-speed setup. Had to change the chain, tho.
Yes, it matters...if it's ever linked into your /. thread or forum post!
:troll pops a Tums trying to digest that:
Yeah, I'm moving all of my data to Seagate 80K hard-sector 5 1/4" floppies. Those babies last forever!
You are correct on the method of manufacture, but the aluminum layer is still subject to oxidation. If the polycarbonate layer is cracked, split, perforated, or otherwise damaged or defective, moisture can reach the surface and corrode it.
As a reliability engineer, I can tell you that the long-term longevity of manufactured materials is driven (a) by process characteristics (i.e. is there a manufacturing flaw) and (b) thermodynamics. Diffusion processes and chemical reaction rates are all driven by temperature.
If you want your CDs or CD-Rs to last forever, store them below 5 degrees Kelvin or so. You can immerse them safely in liquid helium, it's inert. Make sure it doesn't go superfluid on you, and climb out of the Dewar and away from your 'Britney Unplugged' sessions.
'Member when McDs used to hail the number of burgers sold? Maybe this is a nostalgic tie-in....
Michael Vick plays for the Falcons now. Perhaps the catchphrase should be:
"Virginia Tech: Where Overrated Supercomputers and Quarterbacks are Made.
Arrrrrr, matey!
Seriously. The Rapidograph (long may it reign) was the discerning engineer's mechpencil, but a force-20 babe repeller.
What pen says "cool, rugged, yet sensitive to *her* needs"?
1) There are 3 orbiters still on flight status. By your logic, that's 300 flights. Note that NASA put up ISS, Hubble, Solar Max, a bunch of comm satellites, several Spacelab missions, fixed Hubble, retrieved several dead satellites - all in a little more than a 100 flights. Geez, with 300, the sky's the limit (no pun intended).
The Shuttle, by NASA's own estimates, would have a loss of orbiter accident every 100-120 missions. This is based solely on reliability engineering calculations. People have this idea that the Shuttle is some kind of big bottle rocket or Testors model, just with really big engines. It is an enormously complex piece of engineering. For all this complexity, both mission losses were caused by bureaucratic ineptitude, not engineering issues.
2) Everyone who flies on the Shuttle IS a volunteer. You think NASA pushes its astronauts into the Shuttle cabin at gunpoint? You want them to sign an affidavit on the tower every flight, or what?
3) Most supplies to ISS are delivered by Progress supply ships, Shuttle brings up components and crew for the most part.
4) Putting any amount of mass into the same orbit as the ISS wouldn't warrant any kind of prize unless it docks with it. That, unfortunately, is the hard part. Unless of course your objective is to DESTROY the ISS, in which case you would need a lot less than 1000 kilos, probably 10 kilos of hex nuts dispersed would take out the solar panels pretty effectively.
I'm not a big fan of bureaucracy, which once developed has only one mission - perpetuate itself. However, if we have, as a society, an interest in developing a presence off the planet, a big organization is the only way to do it. And if you think corporate America is the way to go, well, read the history of the Challenger disaster - it was Morton Thiokol management that gave NASA the green light to launch at low temperatures.
Ok, that's it...you guys have been asking for it...
4 .html
http://homepage.mac.com/fbrunner/files/PhotoAlbum
LO...oh, you're the fourth post with this same weak joke.
Regurgitating news from some other website/news source != reporting. "Previously published" I might buy.
/. useful as an aggregator and as a community, but the one thing it does not provide in any way shape or form is journalism. It's disrespectful to the people who put the sweat and shoe leather into PRODUCING content, not merely commenting upon it.
I find
It's amazing the stuff that gets by editors. I also laughed when I saw this, but what Watts and the SEI are pushing is a methodology called "Team Software Process" or TSP, not TPS.
Is this true? If so, it makes setting the password useful just for keeping out casual interlopers, it's of no use in protecting data in a stolen laptop.
s
I guess gpg/pgp is the way to go, huh? Actually, I've been using the encrypted disk image idea. I put my sensitive data into one
Here's a good tutorial:
http://osxfaq.com/Tutorials/disk-images/index.w
ATTENTION: All bash bigots please report to Linux, where people care how manly your .bashrc is.
;-)
Isn't it BETTER that you have to know a studly weird kludge-around to get tcsh to do it? This, to me, shows geek cred. Any moron can redirect stderr independently of stdout in bash.
I'm a csh guy from 4.2bsd days, and I have yet to be corrupted by ksh, much less bash. The clincher is, as pointed out by someone else, lack of simple completion in Korn-derived shells.
As long as chsh is available, I don't actually know why this is an issue either way. I'll just change it back to tcsh, or get fink to install tcsh, whatever I have to do.
tcsh - the shell for the rest of us
Hope that you aren't British. Or we'll have to wonder why you are keeping your CDs in the loo.
Laziness like responding to a piece of drivel like this while you are supposed to be at work/school, on the other hand, is just dandy ;)
/. , (since it's unlikely anyone else will read your post) - Chad, we will miss you. We think back on the, oh, nearly five weeks you've contributed to our little tribal village and feel a little nostalgia. As much nostalgia as you can accumulate in five weeks. Which could be a lot, I suppose, if you were in Outward Bound, or a moon landing, or riding a flaming zeppelin to a hideous death in New Jersey. I suppose.
Well, speaking on behalf of
Anyway, do feel free to "scoot through". We'll leave the fish on for ya.
That's just the sound of Buffalo. Which sucks. Brooklyn, WHAT?!