Without Jobs there would be no Apple, Woz would have stuck at HP and written printer drivers.
So that explains why HP's printer drivers suck like a starving lamprey. But surely they could have found at least one other decent software engineer in the last 30 years...
Pound Sterling. Converting to US dollars would roughly double the size of the plume, and using Lira would create a dust cloud that encircles the solar system.
Articles like these make me wonder why Apple is praised as more ethical than Microsoft.
Apple isn't a convicted monopolist? They observe standards, or at worst get their formats accepted as parts of standards, rather than simply using broken or incompatible implementations of standards? Your guess is as good as mine.
Apple controls the hardware...
A non-issue. If you don't like Apple's hardware, you've got plenty of alternatives. Tough luck if you want OSX to run on something else, though, but that is a condition of sale imposed by Apple (just as any vendor of any product can impose conditions); again, you know your alternatives.
...actively squashed clones...
Only after licencing clones to begin with (and doing a large amount of the development work). So what? Since when is a company required to lose money to support its competition, especially when the competition is/was equally capable of creating its own computing platforms (potentially better than the old MacOS)? And frankly, the clones did nothing to either (a) reduce the price of Macs, or (b) increase the market share (quite the opposite, in fact), so the value of the clone experiment is debatable.
...has a history of suppressing MAC OS RUMORS
These situations only occur for information too detailed or accurate to be anything but an educated guess, not for rumours in general (the MacMini was predicted, but they weren't silly enough to include incriminating details like the development name). To summarise: fanboy gets inside info, makes it obvious to the world he's getting it from someone at Apple to prove how clever he is, Apple takes predictable steps to plug the leak (proving how clever he isn't). Two important points: the information in this case was subject to a non-disclosure agreement, and really has no tangible significance to anyone who isn't in the hardware business (so you can't argue its for the "greater public good" without trivialising that argument; its just another piece of hardware, not a cure for cancer!).
If you want to complain about this kind of thing, try starting with government...they're supposed to be publicly accountable. Apple isn't, and they have a legal responsibility to their shareholders to maintain any commercial advantage, including not allowing their competitors access to detailed descriptions of future product plans. They're a corporation; better than many, maybe, but still a corporation.
Wouldn't it have been cheaper to just, say, test it a bit more extensively before releasing it to the public?
There are any number of factors that can influence the reliability of a product between design and manufacture (I've never designed a computer from the ground up, so I'm not clued in to all of them), but I'd be pretty certain Apple have done a cost/benefit analysis on the rigour of their testing procedures. But it is also possible they rushed the MacBookPro to market because of slowing PowerBook G4 sales (it did come sooner after Job's announcement of the Intel switch than we'd been led to expect, though that could just be good marketing).
Is it just me, or are a lot more companies having recalls recently?
Yes, they are. Put simply, manufacturing labour and materials are about as cheap as they're ever going to get (without the reintroduction of slavery), so the only place left to make cost cuts is in the engineering and test phase. The art is finding the point where lack of proper engineering generates more problems than the good units can pay for, and staying above that point. With ever slimmer margins, we will see that point passed more and more frequently.
Basically, its our own fault for demanding ever cheaper rather than more reliable products.
Is it just me, or is CHOP the worst possible acronym for a hospital?
Does this make me weak-minded? Am I foolish to have faith?
I'm an atheist, but I wouldn't call you foolish to look for some kind of comfort in a traumatic situation. But if the condition would have been fatal without treatment, the skill of the medical staff (and the tireless work of the medical research community) probably have more direct bearing, so IMHO the prayers and support most likely did you more good than your son.
(FWIW, my brother was diagnosed with a brain tumor, and given six months to live. He survived for ten years. I put this down to his own determination to live, a brilliant neurosurgeon and some radical new procedures...for the early 80s, that is)
Ah, but what would happen if Satanists pray for a group? Would their dying prove Satanism works, or would we need to verify they became Satan's minions?
I'll not fool myself or pretend to be omniscient, nor will I blindly follow some ancient and poorly translated manual purely because some group of people preach it to be the truth.
Allow me to introduce you to my religion: The Church of the Cosmic Sense of Humour. The fundamental philosophy is "Everything that happens is the lead up to, or the punchline of, a joke; you just have to see it from the right perspective (which usually isn't ours)".
This is a realisation I've come to after a great deal of contemplation. Think about it: the Pope is a guy in a frock who preaches against homosexuality (ha!). Three major religions believe in the same God, but believers will happily break their own mutual first commandment because they disagree about how to worship him; smaller groups within those religions can't even agree (haha!). The USA's bible belt has the highest number of life-threatening storms (hahaha!). Communism (hahahaha!). The idea that unrestrained capitalism is better than communism (hahahahaha!). Don't think any of this is funny? Of course not, because we're the butt of these jokes.
But these examples are just the tip of the prank iceberg. And I'm not making fun of human suffering, just the bizarre and irrational way we respond to that suffering ("thank you, may I have another?"). Any creator that makes us with a sense of dignity, then treats us like crap and still expects our respect and love must be a sadistic bastard not worthy of our worship. Yet millions, even billions do; fucking hilarious!
So learn to sit back and laugh, because sometimes there's bugger all else you can do, and going along with a gag is often the only way to disappoint a practical joker. Praying only marks you as a target, and following earthly leaders makes you prey to lesser pranksters (so don't believe me, decide for yourself whether it makes sense, then treat what I say as the joke it is).
And to any religious nut who finds any of the above offensive: Gotcha!
This particular study actually contradicts what you're saying, as the group that had been told they were being prayed for did the worst. That said, other studies show that depression lengthens recovery time, so the confounding factor might be religion itself.
Think of it this way: what if someone believes its God's will they have a defective heart? Surely simply begging God to change his mind won't have an effect, since the disease is part of "his plan" (or if it does, it shows God to be a very shallow, callous egomaniac with no real plan other than frightening people into worshipping him...but then, we've all read the Old Testament*). Alternatively, praying for someone might induce (albeit subconsciously) the thought "if I need praying for, I'm really in serious trouble", which I could imagine is counterproductive.
Either way, this study is more about psychology than religion, so the strength and nature of the subjects' belief is probably a confounding factor; do Seventh Day Adventists respond differently to, say, lapsed Greek Orthodox, since they'd clearly have different attitude to the value of prayer? I wonder.
*Yes, this is A-grade flamebait around here, but I'm actually quoting a nun (hi, Sister Veronica)
Except those who were prayed for (with their knowledgde) fared significantly worse out of all the groups, which suggests the FSM is indeed a jealous god.
But hey, what's the point of being a god unless you can make people's lives miserable?
Slashdot Mirror
Forgive him. He's a Mac user, so he doesn't realise that software is supposed to be obtuse to learn, frustrating to maintain and butt ugly.
"Camp" is not decent enough a word to be used.
So is the goatse link in your sig there to demonstrate the evils of "camp"?
Without Jobs there would be no Apple, Woz would have stuck at HP and written printer drivers.
So that explains why HP's printer drivers suck like a starving lamprey. But surely they could have found at least one other decent software engineer in the last 30 years...
Ah, but the question was: "What do you have on the moon which can be converted to water and oxygen?"
Are there known quantities of hydrogen peroxide on the moon?
What do you have on the moon which can be converted to water and oxygen?
Water + energy (electricity)=hydrogen + oxygen
I give up, what can be converted to water and oxygen?
Is that Moon pounds or earth pounds?
Pound Sterling. Converting to US dollars would roughly double the size of the plume, and using Lira would create a dust cloud that encircles the solar system.
To ensure the probe actually crashes I suggest we use MS Windows.
Then it could make history by being the only vehicle ever to crash before take-off.
From your link...
...pieces of ejecta about a centimeter across (inch-sized fragments)...
1 inch=1cm? Come on, metric conversion isn't rocket science...apparently...
I'm sorry. I really am.
Not as sorry as NASA, I'll bet.
Though to be fair, the Soviet space program was far more efficient; they achieved more fatalities per accident.
Why learn how to change spark plugs when you haven't got a car?
Curiosity. The real question is how to learn when you haven't got a car.
Besides, its just saving time learning a skill that will be obsolete when the oil runs out. Plan for the future and learn to wind coils instead.
Articles like these make me wonder why Apple is praised as more ethical than Microsoft.
...actively squashed clones...
...has a history of suppressing MAC OS RUMORS
Apple isn't a convicted monopolist? They observe standards, or at worst get their formats accepted as parts of standards, rather than simply using broken or incompatible implementations of standards? Your guess is as good as mine.
Apple controls the hardware...
A non-issue. If you don't like Apple's hardware, you've got plenty of alternatives. Tough luck if you want OSX to run on something else, though, but that is a condition of sale imposed by Apple (just as any vendor of any product can impose conditions); again, you know your alternatives.
Only after licencing clones to begin with (and doing a large amount of the development work). So what? Since when is a company required to lose money to support its competition, especially when the competition is/was equally capable of creating its own computing platforms (potentially better than the old MacOS)? And frankly, the clones did nothing to either (a) reduce the price of Macs, or (b) increase the market share (quite the opposite, in fact), so the value of the clone experiment is debatable.
These situations only occur for information too detailed or accurate to be anything but an educated guess, not for rumours in general (the MacMini was predicted, but they weren't silly enough to include incriminating details like the development name). To summarise: fanboy gets inside info, makes it obvious to the world he's getting it from someone at Apple to prove how clever he is, Apple takes predictable steps to plug the leak (proving how clever he isn't). Two important points: the information in this case was subject to a non-disclosure agreement, and really has no tangible significance to anyone who isn't in the hardware business (so you can't argue its for the "greater public good" without trivialising that argument; its just another piece of hardware, not a cure for cancer!).
If you want to complain about this kind of thing, try starting with government...they're supposed to be publicly accountable. Apple isn't, and they have a legal responsibility to their shareholders to maintain any commercial advantage, including not allowing their competitors access to detailed descriptions of future product plans. They're a corporation; better than many, maybe, but still a corporation.
Ever since I heard about the FTC's spam address I forwarded all my spam to it
The amount of spam I received dropped drastically when I stopped forwarding it to the FTC.
It would explain why there's no such thing as a Jewish cockroach...
Ah, so that explains why Cylons keep attacking my kitchen cupboards...
I know a few people who communicate with chemical emissions. It isn't a sign of intelligence.
Of course there might be some minor side effects...you might not be able to run just any old software you want.
Good idea. Its not like anyone spends a kilobuck so they can run the software of their choice...
I bet there are some smart people at microsoft...
Bet accepted. Where do I collect?
If Microsoft were to aquire some ordinary home-grade clarity, that would be enough for me.
Wouldn't it have been cheaper to just, say, test it a bit more extensively before releasing it to the public?
There are any number of factors that can influence the reliability of a product between design and manufacture (I've never designed a computer from the ground up, so I'm not clued in to all of them), but I'd be pretty certain Apple have done a cost/benefit analysis on the rigour of their testing procedures. But it is also possible they rushed the MacBookPro to market because of slowing PowerBook G4 sales (it did come sooner after Job's announcement of the Intel switch than we'd been led to expect, though that could just be good marketing).
Is it just me, or are a lot more companies having recalls recently?
Yes, they are. Put simply, manufacturing labour and materials are about as cheap as they're ever going to get (without the reintroduction of slavery), so the only place left to make cost cuts is in the engineering and test phase. The art is finding the point where lack of proper engineering generates more problems than the good units can pay for, and staying above that point. With ever slimmer margins, we will see that point passed more and more frequently.
Basically, its our own fault for demanding ever cheaper rather than more reliable products.
(Your balls are on fire.)
I take it that isn't a eunuch's LPT error message...
Is it just me, or is CHOP the worst possible acronym for a hospital?
Does this make me weak-minded? Am I foolish to have faith?
I'm an atheist, but I wouldn't call you foolish to look for some kind of comfort in a traumatic situation. But if the condition would have been fatal without treatment, the skill of the medical staff (and the tireless work of the medical research community) probably have more direct bearing, so IMHO the prayers and support most likely did you more good than your son.
(FWIW, my brother was diagnosed with a brain tumor, and given six months to live. He survived for ten years. I put this down to his own determination to live, a brilliant neurosurgeon and some radical new procedures...for the early 80s, that is)
Ah, but what would happen if Satanists pray for a group? Would their dying prove Satanism works, or would we need to verify they became Satan's minions?
I'll not fool myself or pretend to be omniscient, nor will I blindly follow some ancient and poorly translated manual purely because some group of people preach it to be the truth.
Allow me to introduce you to my religion: The Church of the Cosmic Sense of Humour. The fundamental philosophy is "Everything that happens is the lead up to, or the punchline of, a joke; you just have to see it from the right perspective (which usually isn't ours)".
This is a realisation I've come to after a great deal of contemplation. Think about it: the Pope is a guy in a frock who preaches against homosexuality (ha!). Three major religions believe in the same God, but believers will happily break their own mutual first commandment because they disagree about how to worship him; smaller groups within those religions can't even agree (haha!). The USA's bible belt has the highest number of life-threatening storms (hahaha!). Communism (hahahaha!). The idea that unrestrained capitalism is better than communism (hahahahaha!). Don't think any of this is funny? Of course not, because we're the butt of these jokes.
But these examples are just the tip of the prank iceberg. And I'm not making fun of human suffering, just the bizarre and irrational way we respond to that suffering ("thank you, may I have another?"). Any creator that makes us with a sense of dignity, then treats us like crap and still expects our respect and love must be a sadistic bastard not worthy of our worship. Yet millions, even billions do; fucking hilarious!
So learn to sit back and laugh, because sometimes there's bugger all else you can do, and going along with a gag is often the only way to disappoint a practical joker. Praying only marks you as a target, and following earthly leaders makes you prey to lesser pranksters (so don't believe me, decide for yourself whether it makes sense, then treat what I say as the joke it is).
And to any religious nut who finds any of the above offensive: Gotcha!
This particular study actually contradicts what you're saying, as the group that had been told they were being prayed for did the worst. That said, other studies show that depression lengthens recovery time, so the confounding factor might be religion itself.
Think of it this way: what if someone believes its God's will they have a defective heart? Surely simply begging God to change his mind won't have an effect, since the disease is part of "his plan" (or if it does, it shows God to be a very shallow, callous egomaniac with no real plan other than frightening people into worshipping him...but then, we've all read the Old Testament*). Alternatively, praying for someone might induce (albeit subconsciously) the thought "if I need praying for, I'm really in serious trouble", which I could imagine is counterproductive.
Either way, this study is more about psychology than religion, so the strength and nature of the subjects' belief is probably a confounding factor; do Seventh Day Adventists respond differently to, say, lapsed Greek Orthodox, since they'd clearly have different attitude to the value of prayer? I wonder.
*Yes, this is A-grade flamebait around here, but I'm actually quoting a nun (hi, Sister Veronica)
I'm sure the FSM will forgive them.
Except those who were prayed for (with their knowledgde) fared significantly worse out of all the groups, which suggests the FSM is indeed a jealous god.
But hey, what's the point of being a god unless you can make people's lives miserable?