This kind of non-thinking is one of the reasons I wanted to leave the field.
Seems these administrators are not too different from the rest.
Tell me about it. On 9/11 I stayed home from work when I found out what happened. I then went to get my brothers out of school because our mom was in one of the towers. She was alright, but we could not reach her on her phone until MUCH later so we were all freaking out.
The important thing is I was listed as a legal gaurdian (or what they considered one, we filled out the paperwork) earlier that year in case of emergencies as my mom was in the hospital not too long ago and we didn't want to take chances. I'd already picked one of them up from school when they were sick.
I go to the principal's office and tell her everything that's going on: world trade center, mom unreachable, tower just collapsed, etc.
Wait for it...
Sorry, we can't let you take him without calling your mom first.
Even the secretaries did a double-take. They stopped typing and just stared at her. I was paused and asked "I just finished telling you my mom might be dead and you acknowledge I'm listed as both an emergency contact and legal gaurdian, what's the problem. Hell how about my father, we can call him up right now." (he was at work 1.5 hours away, I lived 5 minutes away, it only made sense I pick them up).
No, I don't let kids out of school without speaking to their mother first.
I got pissed, I demanded that either she release my brother from class or I go find him myself. She eventually caved.
Again, my mom wound up being OK but we didn't know that until like 3PM that day. Later, she met one of the secretaries that said they were proud I was able to talk some sense into the principal.
Back when I was in school they request the parents all sign a document before each school year. It said that they would neither let us ever drink alchohol nor drink any alcohol in front of us, even during holidays.
It wasn't mandatory, but when the school directory (phone listings of teachers and students) were handed out at the beginning of the year it indicated who had signed the document and who hadn't.
My parents thought it was stupid. They'd both immigrated here from Poland so a kid trying a sip of wine on Christmas wasn't taboo there. Likewise, why shouldn't they be able to drink wine during Christmas or their anniversary because of the flipping school?!?
Honestly, if I were that guy's parent I'd find the best lawyers I could.
I'll be honest, I missed the first game. I only played like 2 minutes of it on my friend's PC.
The second one was pretty good though. Very creepy. Playing it at night scared the living hell out of me at times. Sure, now it's pretty weak but back then it was a good a creepy game.
I found SS2 to be less "boring" than the Thief games. Don't get me wrong, I liked the Thief games but some parts were a little too "slow" for some gamers. I loved sneaking around, but many of my friends didn't.
I'm waiting for BioShock. Hopefully it doesn't turn into a Deus Ex 2.
There's a difference between settlement and an all-out win. They could just threaten XM with a big lawsuit to settle out of court for a meager amount. This way the record studios get a little cash and they make an example out of XM.
If XM reguses and they wind up in court, then you can bet that the record studios are going to be going after a LOT more than 0.5 million.
Hence the apeal to just settle and move on: no hassle and you don't lose nearly as much as you might if you go to trial.
Ordinary guy just figured it would be the ultimate annoyance: losing your collection of "questionable content."
So it's not as malevolent as something that could bring down servers or delete crucial Excel files, just piss off a lot of ordinary Internet users. Who's going to complain on CNN: "I lost hundreds of hours become this guy deleted my carefully organized pron collection."
Someone who believes strongly against "immoral" content decided to take it upon themselves to do it. Not impossible, it's not these strong beliefs make the brain function any less.
As others have said, a way to attack piraters and such.
I don't condone it, but there's a difference in the company's eyes between you and a CEO. Mainly, they are more of a "target" than you or I. Also, they might have big fat life insurance policies if they die on the company clock.
Here's the thing. CEOs are a nice target for kidnapping. Remember that big Exxon kidnapping some years back? After that Exxon changed its standard for protecting the CEOs during transport; making sure their expensive guys have plenty of protection when moving around and such (even if the driver is just also a trained bodygaurd, that's at least something).
Chances are, nobody's going to kidnap you and use you as a hostage for Company X because you're just not that valuable to them. Nobody's going to scoop you up and demand that Company X pay some amount of money to get you back (unless it's a political thing) because frankly you're not worth the trouble.
Now, I haven't heard of a bigwig getting kidnapped in a while. But the chance is always there. Make enough money, stay in a position of power, and possibly make tough decisions that ruin lives and someone may get the idea.
In short, in the corporate world nobody gives a crap about us.
Does power corrupt or does power attract the corruptible?
I say both.
On one hand, those that seek power are probably not the most morale people in the world.
On the other hand, if power is simply dropped in someone's lap (ie, he/she did not seek it out) I think it wouldn't be long before they started getting corrupted.
I think the puzzles that you say were there to "show off the physics" were actually taking advantage of the physics. It's like saying the original Star Wars' space battles were showing off the special effects.
I think what put a lot of people off was the cinder-block sea-saw at the beginning of the game. I didn't have a problem with it, but some people I talked to thought it was "lame, it's like they just want to show us that they use physics over and over."
Ok, lets look at the plot of HL1 and HL2 for a second here.
Agreed. I liked HL2, but the original was definately more fun (for the most part).
However, we kind of over-romanticize the original. It kind of tapered off when you start getting more involved with Xen. At some point it simply becomes a run-and-gun killing and endless stream of Xen electricity-spouting slaves and other monsters popping out of cocoon type things.
The beginning and middle of the original was a masterpiece. The environment, the AI at the time (or appearance of AI), the enemy squads, enemy assassins, helping your comrad scientists, etc. Then BAM. All of that dissapears and you're back to old-fashioned FPS mode.
I would disagree. I would instead say that we are a culture who blindly purchases brand names with very little actual research into performance. Sytle is everything. IBM has style. Lenovo doesn't.
I don't know about that. ThinkPads were pretty dull looking. My current work Thinkpad (P2 1.6) looks like a friggin Yugo, and the new ones I've seen don't look as sleek/stylish as some of the Dells, Apples, or Alienwares. However, I've always classified them in their own category: Quality Windows-Based.
What I always liked about Thinkpads is their rugged construction and stability. My Thinkpads have always been the most stable laptops I've used personally and professionally and they've been able to take one hell of a beating from International commuting without taking any damage. Sure, my PowerBook is also pretty decent about that but my job requires a Windows laptop so Apple is out when it comes to work (though the MacBook is interesting).
I haven't looked into Lenovo yet as I'm not in the market for a new Laptop. However, when it's time for a new one I'll definately give them a look to see if they've kept at least some of the design features I liked from the old IBM Thinkpads. I'll also wait to read reviews about the stability to see if that's suffered any.
I try not to cast judgements on products before at least testing them out in person.
I'm all for blaming Apple if they messed up. But when you plaster "BETA" all over the thing and show warning saying to back up all data before proceeding, you shouldn't be annoyed at the company. It's BETA, and they warned you.
Now, if they never called it a Beta product or didn't have ANY warnings saying "doing this might screw up your machine" then I'd say they deserve a major headache. But that wasn't the case.
True. But the parent has a point. In "Spies Like Us" they used lasers bouncing off satellites to strike down missles (or at least tried to). But they didn't use a jet as an initial delivery system, which "Real Genius" did.
What do you mean? If we're products of evolution, then we humans are supremely natural. Furthermore, everything we do is supremely natural. Just as bees act according to their nature, and whales act according to their nature, so do we act according to our nature. How could it be otherwise? At what point would you say that "un-nature" has been introduced into the process?
You sound like one of my College professors (that's a compliment).
Yes, humans are natural and everything we do is natural. The problem is (as others mentioned) sustainability. That's something that we'd like to deal with before we die, as we have the ability to prevent this.
You can introduce bateria to a culture in a petry dish environment containing a food source. The bacteria will follow their natural course and start multiplying while consuming the food source. Unfortunately, eventually the bacteria will eat all of the food and start to die en-masse.
It's sad, but an inevitable outcome. The bacteria were simply doing what they naturally do: consume + reproduce. The food source was doing what it normally does: sit there. Unfortunately, the bacteria ate themselves to death. A normal course of action in a closed environment.
For us, our closed environment is the Earth. And while we are not alone and the Earth does regenerate somewhat thanks to its ecosystem, our ever-increasing numbers and manufacturing will overtake its regenerative properties (if it hasn't already). Leaving us in the same situation as the poor bacteria.
Fortunately, we are not bacteria: we can think and make conscious decisions (as well as self sacrifices). We can say "wait a minute, we're using up our environment and if we continue we'll all die." As a result, maybe we start trying to reduce how much we consume or how quickly we procreate/expand. We can try to do other things besides consuming + reproducing like trying to give back to the environment is other ways that our natural waste.
In short, we must use our god-given/nature-given talents to prevent ourselves from sharing the bacteria's fate.
Thought about it actually:) I dedicated some weekends to finding what I'd consider a safe route to take.
Unfortunately while the commute is through the 'burbs, most of the commute isn't bike friendly. Just about any direct, semi-direct, or ballparks direct (20 miles) route is a fast street (+35MpH, some +40Mph) with no shoulder or sidewalk. This wouldn't be bad, except for about 8 miles the lanes themselves are just wide enough for 1 car yet cars fly down them, damn the reprecussions (or any parked cars).
The end result is I could not find what I consider "semi safe" conditions. I've seen some serious bikers almost get nailed every month on my way in and I know for a fact I have nowhere near those reflexes or anywhere near that amount of luck. While I consider the weekends quiet enough to ride through, rush hour is just too hectic for me to risk it.
I live.25 miles from a train station near the main line that I used to commute to college. I'd love to be able to take the train into work, but the company's location makes it too complicated for even train + bike combo trip.
I'm all for the environment, and I think Bush's actions have been abysmal. That was one of the key reasons why I voted against him.
The fact of the matter is I live a short hop from my company. Between commuting, shopping, trips, etc I average less than 120 miles per week (less if I telecommute during the week). That's a fillup every 2 weeks. Meanwhile I know people that have to fill up 4 times as much due to their commute.
If I lived any further I would have probably gone with the 4-cyl Camry. And if I worked close to the trainstation I wouldn't have bothered getting new car at all.
But in the end I needed at least a midsize (preferably fullsize) sedan for interior space reaons (ie, passengers). If the fed says "all new cars need at least 20 MpG in the city" I'd say great. If they say "all new cars need at least 30 MpG in the city" then I'd hope that would be after all of the companies have already converted all of the cars to hybrids.
Also, by your question I'm assuming you live outside of the US. Do you by chance use diesel? I know that even large/heavy cars can get a lot more miles per gallon than gasonline cars.
I was also eyeing a Volkswagen using their TDI (diesel) engine. Great gas mileage, cheaper gas (at the time) and most stations near me carry diesel fuel.
What kind of cars do you have over there? I get 30 miles per gallon in the old car I'm driving, my father's new car gets 40 miles per gallon.
It's very easy to find new cars 30-40 MpG or better around here. Most midsize sedans reach the 30-mark on in the city without a problem, and some can reach the 40 mark in the city. Obviously, having a 4-cyl engine helps but even with a V6 it's pretty normal.
However, fullsize sedans have a harder time due to the weight of the frame, the bigger engine to move the heavier frame, and the increased weight of the engine. A new V6 fullsize sedan can often get 30 MpG on the highway (mine isn't far off). Don't let the American stereotype full you, I'd say there are a lot more compact and midsize sedans on the road than fullsize. I just happened to fall into that stereotype this time around.
I went for a fullsize entry-level luxury sedan. It's not a HUGE car, but it is very heavy for its size. Likewise it has a larger-than-normal V6 in it (3.6L).
Had I gotten a 4-cyl Camry (midsize sedan) I'd have very nice gas mileage. Even the V6 Camry would have slightly better because it's a smaller engine and a lighter car.
But as I don't have a far commute, and I really really really liked the car I picked, the decreased fuel efficiency didn't bother me.
I recently bought a new car. I was on the hedge about getting either a super-efficient car or a larger car with a sporty engine. I picked the larger car that gets around 20MpG with suburban-area driving (better on the highway).
However, my commute is only 10 miles (through the suburbs) each way and I don't go very far during the weekends. Meanwhile, I know people who drive 4-cyl Civics that drive about 4-5 times as much as I do commuting alone; lord knows what their weekend travel is like. Meaning they use at least twice the fuel I use.
If I have to pay more at the pump, then fine. But if I want to buy a bigger car with a sporty V6 then I should be able to without having to worry about the Fed crippling it.
Sure, my next car will probably be a more efficient car (possibly a hybrid) but for now this is the car I wanted.
However, I'm all for gas-guzzler tax. I just think that margin shouldn't be raised much more than it is. If you have a newer vehical that can't even break 15MpG on the highway (and it isn't a commercial truck/transport) then getting hit with a tax is acceptable.
In my philosophy class last night someone was just saying that they didn't believe in that "global warming nonsense". I guess they fall in the 29% bracket.
Back in college during one of classes the guy sitting next to me refused to believe the Moon Landing actually happened. I wonder what percent-bracket he falls under.
The odd thing was, he actually knew his Astronomy and his physics were pretty good too. Until then I never really thought a well informed people could actually not believe in the landing.
Slashdot Mirror
Tell me about it. On 9/11 I stayed home from work when I found out what happened. I then went to get my brothers out of school because our mom was in one of the towers. She was alright, but we could not reach her on her phone until MUCH later so we were all freaking out.
The important thing is I was listed as a legal gaurdian (or what they considered one, we filled out the paperwork) earlier that year in case of emergencies as my mom was in the hospital not too long ago and we didn't want to take chances. I'd already picked one of them up from school when they were sick.
I go to the principal's office and tell her everything that's going on: world trade center, mom unreachable, tower just collapsed, etc.
Wait for it...
Sorry, we can't let you take him without calling your mom first.
Even the secretaries did a double-take. They stopped typing and just stared at her. I was paused and asked "I just finished telling you my mom might be dead and you acknowledge I'm listed as both an emergency contact and legal gaurdian, what's the problem. Hell how about my father, we can call him up right now." (he was at work 1.5 hours away, I lived 5 minutes away, it only made sense I pick them up).
No, I don't let kids out of school without speaking to their mother first.
I got pissed, I demanded that either she release my brother from class or I go find him myself. She eventually caved.
Again, my mom wound up being OK but we didn't know that until like 3PM that day. Later, she met one of the secretaries that said they were proud I was able to talk some sense into the principal.
Back when I was in school they request the parents all sign a document before each school year. It said that they would neither let us ever drink alchohol nor drink any alcohol in front of us, even during holidays.
It wasn't mandatory, but when the school directory (phone listings of teachers and students) were handed out at the beginning of the year it indicated who had signed the document and who hadn't.
My parents thought it was stupid. They'd both immigrated here from Poland so a kid trying a sip of wine on Christmas wasn't taboo there. Likewise, why shouldn't they be able to drink wine during Christmas or their anniversary because of the flipping school?!?
Honestly, if I were that guy's parent I'd find the best lawyers I could.
Beta has bugs. And here, many of the problems are with drivers (laptop drivers at that).
Release Candidates are supposed to be near release quality with few (if any bugs).
But beta is still a buggy risk. Google has really warped the definition of the word with their products.
I'll be honest, I missed the first game. I only played like 2 minutes of it on my friend's PC.
The second one was pretty good though. Very creepy. Playing it at night scared the living hell out of me at times. Sure, now it's pretty weak but back then it was a good a creepy game.
I found SS2 to be less "boring" than the Thief games. Don't get me wrong, I liked the Thief games but some parts were a little too "slow" for some gamers. I loved sneaking around, but many of my friends didn't.
I'm waiting for BioShock. Hopefully it doesn't turn into a Deus Ex 2.
There's a difference between settlement and an all-out win. They could just threaten XM with a big lawsuit to settle out of court for a meager amount. This way the record studios get a little cash and they make an example out of XM.
If XM reguses and they wind up in court, then you can bet that the record studios are going to be going after a LOT more than 0.5 million.
Hence the apeal to just settle and move on: no hassle and you don't lose nearly as much as you might if you go to trial.
So it's not as malevolent as something that could bring down servers or delete crucial Excel files, just piss off a lot of ordinary Internet users. Who's going to complain on CNN: "I lost hundreds of hours become this guy deleted my carefully organized pron collection."
I don't condone it, but there's a difference in the company's eyes between you and a CEO. Mainly, they are more of a "target" than you or I. Also, they might have big fat life insurance policies if they die on the company clock.
Here's the thing. CEOs are a nice target for kidnapping. Remember that big Exxon kidnapping some years back? After that Exxon changed its standard for protecting the CEOs during transport; making sure their expensive guys have plenty of protection when moving around and such (even if the driver is just also a trained bodygaurd, that's at least something).
Chances are, nobody's going to kidnap you and use you as a hostage for Company X because you're just not that valuable to them. Nobody's going to scoop you up and demand that Company X pay some amount of money to get you back (unless it's a political thing) because frankly you're not worth the trouble.
Now, I haven't heard of a bigwig getting kidnapped in a while. But the chance is always there. Make enough money, stay in a position of power, and possibly make tough decisions that ruin lives and someone may get the idea.
In short, in the corporate world nobody gives a crap about us.
On one hand, those that seek power are probably not the most morale people in the world.
On the other hand, if power is simply dropped in someone's lap (ie, he/she did not seek it out) I think it wouldn't be long before they started getting corrupted.
I find that virus scanning isn't so bad on the CPU but is killer with the I/O. And personally, I'd rather save my IO for map loading and such.
Plenty big does not mean huge. Plenty big is "big enough to be considered big."
I consider it "big," particualr when I'm only sitting 4 feet in front of it.
Extremely small?
Yes, if I you place it far away in a big room it will look about the same as an ordinary TV. But in a medium or small room it's plenty big.
However, we kind of over-romanticize the original. It kind of tapered off when you start getting more involved with Xen. At some point it simply becomes a run-and-gun killing and endless stream of Xen electricity-spouting slaves and other monsters popping out of cocoon type things.
The beginning and middle of the original was a masterpiece. The environment, the AI at the time (or appearance of AI), the enemy squads, enemy assassins, helping your comrad scientists, etc. Then BAM. All of that dissapears and you're back to old-fashioned FPS mode.
What I always liked about Thinkpads is their rugged construction and stability. My Thinkpads have always been the most stable laptops I've used personally and professionally and they've been able to take one hell of a beating from International commuting without taking any damage. Sure, my PowerBook is also pretty decent about that but my job requires a Windows laptop so Apple is out when it comes to work (though the MacBook is interesting).
I haven't looked into Lenovo yet as I'm not in the market for a new Laptop. However, when it's time for a new one I'll definately give them a look to see if they've kept at least some of the design features I liked from the old IBM Thinkpads. I'll also wait to read reviews about the stability to see if that's suffered any.
I try not to cast judgements on products before at least testing them out in person.
Now, if they never called it a Beta product or didn't have ANY warnings saying "doing this might screw up your machine" then I'd say they deserve a major headache. But that wasn't the case.
True. But the parent has a point. In "Spies Like Us" they used lasers bouncing off satellites to strike down missles (or at least tried to). But they didn't use a jet as an initial delivery system, which "Real Genius" did.
You sound like one of my College professors (that's a compliment).
Yes, humans are natural and everything we do is natural. The problem is (as others mentioned) sustainability. That's something that we'd like to deal with before we die, as we have the ability to prevent this.
You can introduce bateria to a culture in a petry dish environment containing a food source. The bacteria will follow their natural course and start multiplying while consuming the food source. Unfortunately, eventually the bacteria will eat all of the food and start to die en-masse.
It's sad, but an inevitable outcome. The bacteria were simply doing what they naturally do: consume + reproduce. The food source was doing what it normally does: sit there. Unfortunately, the bacteria ate themselves to death. A normal course of action in a closed environment.
For us, our closed environment is the Earth. And while we are not alone and the Earth does regenerate somewhat thanks to its ecosystem, our ever-increasing numbers and manufacturing will overtake its regenerative properties (if it hasn't already). Leaving us in the same situation as the poor bacteria.
Fortunately, we are not bacteria: we can think and make conscious decisions (as well as self sacrifices). We can say "wait a minute, we're using up our environment and if we continue we'll all die." As a result, maybe we start trying to reduce how much we consume or how quickly we procreate/expand. We can try to do other things besides consuming + reproducing like trying to give back to the environment is other ways that our natural waste.
In short, we must use our god-given/nature-given talents to prevent ourselves from sharing the bacteria's fate.
When it's working, that is
Check out MacRumors.com! Virtualization is here (beta anyway).
Unfortunately while the commute is through the 'burbs, most of the commute isn't bike friendly. Just about any direct, semi-direct, or ballparks direct (20 miles) route is a fast street (+35MpH, some +40Mph) with no shoulder or sidewalk. This wouldn't be bad, except for about 8 miles the lanes themselves are just wide enough for 1 car yet cars fly down them, damn the reprecussions (or any parked cars).
The end result is I could not find what I consider "semi safe" conditions. I've seen some serious bikers almost get nailed every month on my way in and I know for a fact I have nowhere near those reflexes or anywhere near that amount of luck. While I consider the weekends quiet enough to ride through, rush hour is just too hectic for me to risk it.
I live .25 miles from a train station near the main line that I used to commute to college. I'd love to be able to take the train into work, but the company's location makes it too complicated for even train + bike combo trip.
I'm all for the environment, and I think Bush's actions have been abysmal. That was one of the key reasons why I voted against him.
The fact of the matter is I live a short hop from my company. Between commuting, shopping, trips, etc I average less than 120 miles per week (less if I telecommute during the week). That's a fillup every 2 weeks. Meanwhile I know people that have to fill up 4 times as much due to their commute.
If I lived any further I would have probably gone with the 4-cyl Camry. And if I worked close to the trainstation I wouldn't have bothered getting new car at all.
But in the end I needed at least a midsize (preferably fullsize) sedan for interior space reaons (ie, passengers). If the fed says "all new cars need at least 20 MpG in the city" I'd say great. If they say "all new cars need at least 30 MpG in the city" then I'd hope that would be after all of the companies have already converted all of the cars to hybrids.
Also, by your question I'm assuming you live outside of the US. Do you by chance use diesel? I know that even large/heavy cars can get a lot more miles per gallon than gasonline cars.
I was also eyeing a Volkswagen using their TDI (diesel) engine. Great gas mileage, cheaper gas (at the time) and most stations near me carry diesel fuel.
Loved the engine, but hated the car.
However, fullsize sedans have a harder time due to the weight of the frame, the bigger engine to move the heavier frame, and the increased weight of the engine. A new V6 fullsize sedan can often get 30 MpG on the highway (mine isn't far off). Don't let the American stereotype full you, I'd say there are a lot more compact and midsize sedans on the road than fullsize. I just happened to fall into that stereotype this time around.
I went for a fullsize entry-level luxury sedan. It's not a HUGE car, but it is very heavy for its size. Likewise it has a larger-than-normal V6 in it (3.6L).
Had I gotten a 4-cyl Camry (midsize sedan) I'd have very nice gas mileage. Even the V6 Camry would have slightly better because it's a smaller engine and a lighter car.
But as I don't have a far commute, and I really really really liked the car I picked, the decreased fuel efficiency didn't bother me.
Exactly.
I recently bought a new car. I was on the hedge about getting either a super-efficient car or a larger car with a sporty engine. I picked the larger car that gets around 20MpG with suburban-area driving (better on the highway).
However, my commute is only 10 miles (through the suburbs) each way and I don't go very far during the weekends. Meanwhile, I know people who drive 4-cyl Civics that drive about 4-5 times as much as I do commuting alone; lord knows what their weekend travel is like. Meaning they use at least twice the fuel I use.
If I have to pay more at the pump, then fine. But if I want to buy a bigger car with a sporty V6 then I should be able to without having to worry about the Fed crippling it.
Sure, my next car will probably be a more efficient car (possibly a hybrid) but for now this is the car I wanted.
However, I'm all for gas-guzzler tax. I just think that margin shouldn't be raised much more than it is. If you have a newer vehical that can't even break 15MpG on the highway (and it isn't a commercial truck/transport) then getting hit with a tax is acceptable.
The odd thing was, he actually knew his Astronomy and his physics were pretty good too. Until then I never really thought a well informed people could actually not believe in the landing.
And yes, he was being 100% serious.