If you wrote the notes with a livescribe pen or something (which is fairly plain looking unless you really pay attention to it), because of the camera, there's a perfect backup copy of the notes in the camera. There are also clipboard/pen combos that do this.
So even without something as conspicuous as a notebook, you can have a digital copy of the notes without the teacher ever knowing. And lets not get into the old fashioned scanner or photocopier, but that requires conscious effort to make the notes.
and what percentage of the other 2/3 simply don't know what they are missing? It's like asking the population of 1930s America if they wanted highways - many probably wouldn't have seen the need for it. Many didn't have one in their area (PA turnpike and a few others around). Eisenhower, as a young officer, took part of a cross country convoy, to assess national roads, around the early 1920s IIRC, and it took them nearly 50 days to get coast to coast, that with seeing the German Autobahn in action up close is what lead him to spearhead the interstate system as President.
Infrastructure is almost always good and pays off, like the Hoover Dam + others Depression era projects are still serving us well today. But it's really tough for people with little experience with it to imagine the uses for it. They've been confined to stuff like dial-up for so long, that the concept of the internet as a medium for only text emails, sprinkled with a few static pictures and the like is hard to break for good reason.
I heard that companies such as Microsoft are using this time to dump their bottom 5-10%, rather than dumping their bottom 5-10% because of the economy - although I am not sure of the validity of that reasoning.
The way I see it, innocence protects somewhat from all but the most detailed descriptions in a book. A movie most of the times describes in almost perfect detail anything it depicts.
As I see it, games should have exactly the same laws (for those kind of things) as movies.
Yes, but SSDs are slow at random writes - to the point that it negates the benefits of random reads leaving you with a system about the same speed as harddrives. Technology like MFT fixes that (supposedly). Now, the only problem is that MFT can't be used on boot devices because they run their own program/driver for the device - so the drives have to be secondary.
Now, if Apple (as it controls the OS), were to license it exclusively (OEM), it could surely make integrated it seamlessly and have a nice edge on other makers while pretty much putting the desire for a ramdisk to bed.
Without RAM, this costs $380 which is probably more than double the RAM itself if you don't use anything to extravagant. I know other companies offered these in the past, with the similiar high price, always to act as a harddrive with a battery for backup. It was always easy in linux to make a portion of your memory act as a ramdisk, however many motherboards often didnt enough ram slots to make it appealing to split memory up like that.
I wonder if a company like Apple can instead, on its laptops for instance, just move to SSD for its laptops since they are becoming seemingly cheap, exclusively (for OEMs) license a technology like MFT, and get a real speed edge on other makers. I think it would make more sense than a ramdisk where the bandwidth of ram vs the hard drive channel seems overkill.
In the 1800s, Congress spent some time arguing the Constitutionality of proposed laws. The Supreme Court wasn't supposed to be the only barrier judging Constitutionality. You also had vetos from the executive branch being more than just political tools - in the hands of Constructionist such as Grover Cleveland. Now, almost no one in Congress cares - our government is viewed, not as limited, but unlimited and without bounds (if worded properly).
It's not that people were better back then, but a change in mentality towards government in general.
That's why rogue nuclear weapons became a concern, as cash was king. There were many things Russia was doing to raise money - you could vacation there and for a few measly thousands of $$$, ride in their tanks, shoot many of their weapons, and what not. An adventurer's paradise.
But, now, as Russia is flush with cash through oil/gas from pipelines to Europe and the rest of the world, I suppose those small time endeavors just aren't as attractive anymore. It's not even subsidizing it's oil to Ukraine any more after this year, as it used to give deep discounts to all it's countries behind the iron curtain.
Microsoft is simply delivery more of what they originally promised with Vista, with the crap cut out. It's hardly anything to scream about. Same security (worse with the UAC slider tab, do they never learn?), just a bit leaner. It makes me think they are the same old company - Windows Me vs Win 2k anyone?
Although, compared to several years ago, I do find at more and more websites people fanboying for Microsoft. Which I find perplexing - with Linux I can understand as it's as much a movement than anything - but why shill for a corporation that doesn't give a shit about you?
Fresh water has and is contributing to the continued salinization of our oceans. Originally as water is a solvent and streams/rivers dissolved rock on its way to the ocean and left it there with evaporation, now with all the salt on the roads in the winter plus 6 billion people urinating all over the place.
I wonder if it ever have a bad effect though, considering that we use the ocean as our toilet and food source at the same time.
That explains why you're a slashdot subscriber, as denoted by the asterisk by your username. You've posted about 150 comments, you obviously don't hate the place.
Oh wait, there's no asterisk by your username.
Google indicates my post count is about 1,700 comments although it's probably be higher. I think signed up before subscriptions (~1999) but am not entirely sure. Alway's been using no scipt and adblock since they've been available, not specifically for this site. I'm just not up-to-date on the site's features/developments actually, so I don't know what the subscription is supposed to buy me, sorry. Looking at the subscriptions page, it has a page count rather than a time length....
Conversely, I do buy flash games or donate to certain flash projects and support a few websites.
It's not that I harbor an illusion that people are altruistic and projects will get as much funding as with advertising (PBS's constant pleading is testament to this and little better than intrusive adverts), but there is a correct way and an incorrect way to do things. Modern mainstream advertising stopped riding the coattails of the content that brings the audience and just actively subverts it - Television's new intrusive techniques was an example although I'm not entirely sure if that is also some type of way to prevent people from recording a perfect example of a movie they want rather than getting it on DVD. Another example would be those magazines that were once useful but then became so overrun by ads they easily outnumbered the content - and a magazine is bought and paid for. It's also brings to mind the law of declining returns - all those ads are fighting among themselves to be noticed - which is probably why Geico does the shtick it does.
As for Internet advertising - if the website stuck to a simple advert jpeg/gif or even flash file coming from its own servers and inserted them as static content to the page, along with a link to the sponsor - it would be less of a problem and hard to block anyway coming in.
You're absolutely correct. This actually applies to lesser degrees to terrestial radio and satellite radio. Except that terrestial radio plays only the top 10/40 at any given time, which for pop is fine since it's always new crap every so often, but for anythng remotely older or niche - it becomes a repetitive cycle to an audience who has heard it for years already and since they will undoubtedly hear it again have little incentive to go and buy it anyway. Sattelite is a bit better as far as exposing the audience to something new, however it can't beat the Buy it now option of Pandora (Itunes, Amazon).
Again, it's the industry greed that drove up the royalty fees, but it always seems the advertiser ends up ruining medium they try to convey their message in.
Another service to stop using. I'd rather pay/subscribe than listen to ads (not that the same promise didn't stop ads on cable tv). Not even regular radio interrupts songs in the middle, although a lot of obnoxiously talk into the beginning or cut off the end with their chatter. And replacing Satellite Radio with an iPhone/data_contract + Pandora seemed like a decent idea a while back.
What is it with advertising becoming so pervasive the last 50+ years that it actually ruins the medium it trojan horses itself in to the audience? On TV, the channels seem to enjoy ruining their shows with invasive in-show advertising for other crappy shows on the same channel. I cancelled my premium subscription when those sets of channels insisted on ruining all their shows, like a subtitled movie by covering the subtitles at the worst points with in-show ads. I know this is a reaction to TIVOing, but really, even with a DVR I usually just recorded something and forgot to skip ads half the time. I'd buy the DVD of that subtitled movie mentioned, but then I am forced to watch previews to "coming soon" movies that are long since gone from the theaters. Pirates are better off.
Since I was a teenager, I stopped buying branded shirts, as I refused to pay to be a walking billboard for some corp. It's weird how that became popular. And it's strange that the internet is one of the few mostly ad-free places left if the user chooses (adblock, noscript, etc) yet I bought more based on word-of-mouth there than any actual advertisement in the real world. Just seems like a giant waste of $$$ to be honest.
Hell, look at Geico commercials, at least they at least try to be entertaining. Maybe more advertising to follow the same route, becoming patrons of specific songs/etc (like in the middle ages) and actually add to the mediums rather than sabotaging them.
Did you have something in particular in mind? I ask because a lot of "limit the government" types have curious ideas about what the constitution authorizes and forbids.
It really depends if you what view of the commerce and general welfare clauses, as well as the enumerated powers being exhaustive.
"Curious" isn't the view. They limited-government types are interested in a limited government. Too often, when society changed to the point that some people view government powers need expansion, necessitating a Constitutional amendment, they opt instead to ignore/reinterpret the founding document. This has two effect: that part of the document is neutered by the rerouting and the document becomes more distant to current realities instead of being amended in a sufficient manner - so that once it's proposed to follow it, the old interpretation seems "quaint" and out-of-touch.
I'm not sure about you, but I think government running a trillion dollar deficit, bailing out businesses/people left and right is hardly limited.
That's what will kill Microsoft (and why I believe Ubuntu has become one of the top distros). Everytime I hear about Microsoft management story, it seems to be an exercise in bureacracy.
But what will hurt Microsoft is the day Quicken or Photoshop have Wine 1.xx on their system requirements, next to XP/Vista/Etc. I'm too cynical to think they'll come out with native Linux version, but eventually they'll want to tap into the 10 million+ users of Ubuntu and other Linuxes, if nothing else but to stop their competition from taking hold.
At this point, there isn't much reason to not be OS agnostic for those type of programs.
When I was responding to my previous parent, I meant more that OS designed to become Microsoft Bob friendly instead of doing thing the right way. In this case, Windows allowing a USB stick being plugged in and having the programs greeting override window's own action dialog. Stupid crap like that.
Yahoo has pretty good email actually and its filtering features are more flexible than gmail's. Yahoo's folders make sense. There's a lot to commend Yahoo mail.
Furthermore, you can't reasonably expect millions of people with Yahoo mail addresses to suddenly switch to gmail simply because it's incrementally better in certain ways.
I recently switched my parents because they were complaining for some time they were getting too much spam (mostly their fault as they were signed on to stupid things, hopefully corrected that with advice that may have gone in one ear and out the other). But my motivation was simply the new gmail video chat - as they are the type that can't figure it out with an outside program - but hopefully something like that will finally allow me to keep in video contact with them.
But every time I look at Yahoo's mail, I feel I'm stuck in 2001. The most common sense thing: conversations as google tracks them, keeps inboxes so much more manageable. Tags are open-ended and great (when you designate them yourself, unlike current/. system which is low in value), but more than that: it always feels as it's evolving because it is.
Yahoo's new mail is so slow and I don't even know the point - maybe the new chat? The point isn't so much the millions of users Yahoo has, it's the stagnation that leads to eventual death and decline. Even a black hole with all it's mass dissipates slowly. And that's how I feel about a company in decline, getting less and less attention.
To this day I still have Yahoo stock quotes, news, and weather on my browser tool bar and I go there many times a day.
Often, I think Yahoo's mistake is this web portal mentality taken over from AOL. Looking at a hotmail or yahoo main page today (or a my yahoo page) was often an excercise in cluttered information overload and contrasted with Google's keep-it-simple approach. It turned into a portal with a search engine attached.
I like yahoo's finance, especially with no sign-in, the ticker still has stored what stocks I looked up. I'd hate to see Yahoo go, but they definitely need to focus on a core set of services to replace or update what became stale.
I think his point was more about Google having everything in a nice centralized spot, like if the police wanted to build a nice, big profile about you and see you have a gmail email address - they would head to Google with a warrant and get a buffet of information.
It's definitely something to think about, and completely innocent people get symbolically hung by too much info in the hands of the authorities: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
No doubt. But keeping Yahoo alive and independent of Microsoft was and still is in Google's best interests, whether you call it a 'rescuing' or not. Microsoft wants Yahoo's search because their own sucks and they know it....
Google should love the idea of Microsoft buying Yahoo. One more albatross around Microsoft's neck, a lot more straws to grasp at while it flails around searching for direction, and a bunch of cash taken out of Microsoft's coffer = less resources.
And face it: yahoo is becoming a failure in many areas. Its search, while second best, still sucks. It's webmail stagnates since the early 2000s and the "new" yahoo mail is atrocious. Etc, etc, etc. Nothing better than to hobble MS than with a soon-to-be hasbeen. Just like Compaq and HP merger screwed both companies for years, this will be much worse.
As a consumer, I would like Yahoo to keep going, to innovate and update, to keep Google on its toes. But as Google, nothing would be better than to let Microsoft have at it.
Perhaps retards shouldn't be allowed to be on computers. Sorry, if you're a computer user and don't get the concept of a file nor what running a programs means - elementary concepts really - perhaps you should just stay away. There is no other piece of equipment on this world where utter ignorance on behalf of the operator is so actively accepted.
Slashdot Mirror
If you wrote the notes with a livescribe pen or something (which is fairly plain looking unless you really pay attention to it), because of the camera, there's a perfect backup copy of the notes in the camera. There are also clipboard/pen combos that do this.
So even without something as conspicuous as a notebook, you can have a digital copy of the notes without the teacher ever knowing. And lets not get into the old fashioned scanner or photocopier, but that requires conscious effort to make the notes.
The teacher just sounds like a paranoid nutcase.
and what percentage of the other 2/3 simply don't know what they are missing? It's like asking the population of 1930s America if they wanted highways - many probably wouldn't have seen the need for it. Many didn't have one in their area (PA turnpike and a few others around). Eisenhower, as a young officer, took part of a cross country convoy, to assess national roads, around the early 1920s IIRC, and it took them nearly 50 days to get coast to coast, that with seeing the German Autobahn in action up close is what lead him to spearhead the interstate system as President.
Infrastructure is almost always good and pays off, like the Hoover Dam + others Depression era projects are still serving us well today. But it's really tough for people with little experience with it to imagine the uses for it. They've been confined to stuff like dial-up for so long, that the concept of the internet as a medium for only text emails, sprinkled with a few static pictures and the like is hard to break for good reason.
Nasa and the military are cooperating with Microsoft on the next generation of ICBM. With Chair-based warheads.
I heard that companies such as Microsoft are using this time to dump their bottom 5-10%, rather than dumping their bottom 5-10% because of the economy - although I am not sure of the validity of that reasoning.
Who are you trying to protect?
Yes, but SSDs are slow at random writes - to the point that it negates the benefits of random reads leaving you with a system about the same speed as harddrives. Technology like MFT fixes that (supposedly). Now, the only problem is that MFT can't be used on boot devices because they run their own program/driver for the device - so the drives have to be secondary.
http://www.easyco.com/zx1295082728181244713/mft/index.htm
http://www.bigdbahead.com/?p=44
http://feedblog.org/2008/01/30/24-hours-with-an-ssd-and-mysql/
Now, if Apple (as it controls the OS), were to license it exclusively (OEM), it could surely make integrated it seamlessly and have a nice edge on other makers while pretty much putting the desire for a ramdisk to bed.
Without RAM, this costs $380 which is probably more than double the RAM itself if you don't use anything to extravagant. I know other companies offered these in the past, with the similiar high price, always to act as a harddrive with a battery for backup. It was always easy in linux to make a portion of your memory act as a ramdisk, however many motherboards often didnt enough ram slots to make it appealing to split memory up like that.
I wonder if a company like Apple can instead, on its laptops for instance, just move to SSD for its laptops since they are becoming seemingly cheap, exclusively (for OEMs) license a technology like MFT, and get a real speed edge on other makers. I think it would make more sense than a ramdisk where the bandwidth of ram vs the hard drive channel seems overkill.
No, I don't.
when you accept it as such.
I don't see why they should regulate video games any more than they regulate the content of books.
In the 1800s, Congress spent some time arguing the Constitutionality of proposed laws. The Supreme Court wasn't supposed to be the only barrier judging Constitutionality. You also had vetos from the executive branch being more than just political tools - in the hands of Constructionist such as Grover Cleveland. Now, almost no one in Congress cares - our government is viewed, not as limited, but unlimited and without bounds (if worded properly).
It's not that people were better back then, but a change in mentality towards government in general.
out getting more 'shrooms.
That's why rogue nuclear weapons became a concern, as cash was king. There were many things Russia was doing to raise money - you could vacation there and for a few measly thousands of $$$, ride in their tanks, shoot many of their weapons, and what not. An adventurer's paradise.
But, now, as Russia is flush with cash through oil/gas from pipelines to Europe and the rest of the world, I suppose those small time endeavors just aren't as attractive anymore. It's not even subsidizing it's oil to Ukraine any more after this year, as it used to give deep discounts to all it's countries behind the iron curtain.
Microsoft is simply delivery more of what they originally promised with Vista, with the crap cut out. It's hardly anything to scream about. Same security (worse with the UAC slider tab, do they never learn?), just a bit leaner. It makes me think they are the same old company - Windows Me vs Win 2k anyone?
Although, compared to several years ago, I do find at more and more websites people fanboying for Microsoft. Which I find perplexing - with Linux I can understand as it's as much a movement than anything - but why shill for a corporation that doesn't give a shit about you?
Fresh water has and is contributing to the continued salinization of our oceans. Originally as water is a solvent and streams/rivers dissolved rock on its way to the ocean and left it there with evaporation, now with all the salt on the roads in the winter plus 6 billion people urinating all over the place.
I wonder if it ever have a bad effect though, considering that we use the ocean as our toilet and food source at the same time.
and sending it down to hit store shelves?
If they can have "iceberg" water, I'm sure Mars water will also have an audience:
http://www.finewaters.com/Bottled_Water/Canada/Berg.asp
Me? I'm going into the dihydrogen monoxide business.
Google indicates my post count is about 1,700 comments although it's probably be higher. I think signed up before subscriptions (~1999) but am not entirely sure. Alway's been using no scipt and adblock since they've been available, not specifically for this site. I'm just not up-to-date on the site's features/developments actually, so I don't know what the subscription is supposed to buy me, sorry. Looking at the subscriptions page, it has a page count rather than a time length....
Conversely, I do buy flash games or donate to certain flash projects and support a few websites.
It's not that I harbor an illusion that people are altruistic and projects will get as much funding as with advertising (PBS's constant pleading is testament to this and little better than intrusive adverts), but there is a correct way and an incorrect way to do things. Modern mainstream advertising stopped riding the coattails of the content that brings the audience and just actively subverts it - Television's new intrusive techniques was an example although I'm not entirely sure if that is also some type of way to prevent people from recording a perfect example of a movie they want rather than getting it on DVD. Another example would be those magazines that were once useful but then became so overrun by ads they easily outnumbered the content - and a magazine is bought and paid for. It's also brings to mind the law of declining returns - all those ads are fighting among themselves to be noticed - which is probably why Geico does the shtick it does.
As for Internet advertising - if the website stuck to a simple advert jpeg/gif or even flash file coming from its own servers and inserted them as static content to the page, along with a link to the sponsor - it would be less of a problem and hard to block anyway coming in.
You're absolutely correct. This actually applies to lesser degrees to terrestial radio and satellite radio. Except that terrestial radio plays only the top 10/40 at any given time, which for pop is fine since it's always new crap every so often, but for anythng remotely older or niche - it becomes a repetitive cycle to an audience who has heard it for years already and since they will undoubtedly hear it again have little incentive to go and buy it anyway. Sattelite is a bit better as far as exposing the audience to something new, however it can't beat the Buy it now option of Pandora (Itunes, Amazon).
Again, it's the industry greed that drove up the royalty fees, but it always seems the advertiser ends up ruining medium they try to convey their message in.
Another service to stop using. I'd rather pay/subscribe than listen to ads (not that the same promise didn't stop ads on cable tv). Not even regular radio interrupts songs in the middle, although a lot of obnoxiously talk into the beginning or cut off the end with their chatter. And replacing Satellite Radio with an iPhone/data_contract + Pandora seemed like a decent idea a while back.
What is it with advertising becoming so pervasive the last 50+ years that it actually ruins the medium it trojan horses itself in to the audience? On TV, the channels seem to enjoy ruining their shows with invasive in-show advertising for other crappy shows on the same channel. I cancelled my premium subscription when those sets of channels insisted on ruining all their shows, like a subtitled movie by covering the subtitles at the worst points with in-show ads. I know this is a reaction to TIVOing, but really, even with a DVR I usually just recorded something and forgot to skip ads half the time. I'd buy the DVD of that subtitled movie mentioned, but then I am forced to watch previews to "coming soon" movies that are long since gone from the theaters. Pirates are better off.
Since I was a teenager, I stopped buying branded shirts, as I refused to pay to be a walking billboard for some corp. It's weird how that became popular. And it's strange that the internet is one of the few mostly ad-free places left if the user chooses (adblock, noscript, etc) yet I bought more based on word-of-mouth there than any actual advertisement in the real world. Just seems like a giant waste of $$$ to be honest.
Hell, look at Geico commercials, at least they at least try to be entertaining. Maybe more advertising to follow the same route, becoming patrons of specific songs/etc (like in the middle ages) and actually add to the mediums rather than sabotaging them.
It really depends if you what view of the commerce and general welfare clauses, as well as the enumerated powers being exhaustive.
"Curious" isn't the view. They limited-government types are interested in a limited government. Too often, when society changed to the point that some people view government powers need expansion, necessitating a Constitutional amendment, they opt instead to ignore/reinterpret the founding document. This has two effect: that part of the document is neutered by the rerouting and the document becomes more distant to current realities instead of being amended in a sufficient manner - so that once it's proposed to follow it, the old interpretation seems "quaint" and out-of-touch.
I'm not sure about you, but I think government running a trillion dollar deficit, bailing out businesses/people left and right is hardly limited.
That's what will kill Microsoft (and why I believe Ubuntu has become one of the top distros). Everytime I hear about Microsoft management story, it seems to be an exercise in bureacracy.
But what will hurt Microsoft is the day Quicken or Photoshop have Wine 1.xx on their system requirements, next to XP/Vista/Etc. I'm too cynical to think they'll come out with native Linux version, but eventually they'll want to tap into the 10 million+ users of Ubuntu and other Linuxes, if nothing else but to stop their competition from taking hold.
At this point, there isn't much reason to not be OS agnostic for those type of programs.
Well, I'm not talking about a test.
When I was responding to my previous parent, I meant more that OS designed to become Microsoft Bob friendly instead of doing thing the right way. In this case, Windows allowing a USB stick being plugged in and having the programs greeting override window's own action dialog. Stupid crap like that.
I recently switched my parents because they were complaining for some time they were getting too much spam (mostly their fault as they were signed on to stupid things, hopefully corrected that with advice that may have gone in one ear and out the other). But my motivation was simply the new gmail video chat - as they are the type that can't figure it out with an outside program - but hopefully something like that will finally allow me to keep in video contact with them.
But every time I look at Yahoo's mail, I feel I'm stuck in 2001. The most common sense thing: conversations as google tracks them, keeps inboxes so much more manageable. Tags are open-ended and great (when you designate them yourself, unlike current /. system which is low in value), but more than that: it always feels as it's evolving because it is.
Yahoo's new mail is so slow and I don't even know the point - maybe the new chat? The point isn't so much the millions of users Yahoo has, it's the stagnation that leads to eventual death and decline. Even a black hole with all it's mass dissipates slowly. And that's how I feel about a company in decline, getting less and less attention.
Often, I think Yahoo's mistake is this web portal mentality taken over from AOL. Looking at a hotmail or yahoo main page today (or a my yahoo page) was often an excercise in cluttered information overload and contrasted with Google's keep-it-simple approach. It turned into a portal with a search engine attached.
I like yahoo's finance, especially with no sign-in, the ticker still has stored what stocks I looked up. I'd hate to see Yahoo go, but they definitely need to focus on a core set of services to replace or update what became stale.
I think his point was more about Google having everything in a nice centralized spot, like if the police wanted to build a nice, big profile about you and see you have a gmail email address - they would head to Google with a warrant and get a buffet of information.
It's definitely something to think about, and completely innocent people get symbolically hung by too much info in the hands of the authorities:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
Google should love the idea of Microsoft buying Yahoo. One more albatross around Microsoft's neck, a lot more straws to grasp at while it flails around searching for direction, and a bunch of cash taken out of Microsoft's coffer = less resources.
And face it: yahoo is becoming a failure in many areas. Its search, while second best, still sucks. It's webmail stagnates since the early 2000s and the "new" yahoo mail is atrocious. Etc, etc, etc. Nothing better than to hobble MS than with a soon-to-be hasbeen. Just like Compaq and HP merger screwed both companies for years, this will be much worse.
As a consumer, I would like Yahoo to keep going, to innovate and update, to keep Google on its toes. But as Google, nothing would be better than to let Microsoft have at it.
Perhaps retards shouldn't be allowed to be on computers. Sorry, if you're a computer user and don't get the concept of a file nor what running a programs means - elementary concepts really - perhaps you should just stay away. There is no other piece of equipment on this world where utter ignorance on behalf of the operator is so actively accepted.