Just have the machine store the previous grades of the student, and give the student some sort of bonus based on how much better their work is from normal. On the other hand, there''s no way for the machine to be able to guage how much effort they put into it, as a teacher might.
What is needed is a sort of wi-fi roaming. Each hotspot could charge a base rate, and each "brand" could charge a monthly fee. If you see some new WAP, you can sign on with your provider's information, and they'll automaticaly be charged.
Maybe if these places charged, for example $3/month or something it wouldn't be a big deal, but $12/mo for access to just one hotspot? Seems a little off to me, I mean sure buying access for one starbucks probably gives you access to all, but other starbucks employees, who's going to care?
What we need is some sort of profit sharing system, similar to how the cellphone system works. And it should be an open system, so that anyone can sign up to be a part. It would also be great in that anyone could make money simply by signing up and setting up WAPs, without worrying about how they are going to bill people.
And let me apologize, I don't have access to a spellchecker right now.
This is a much better solution then SPF. Why? Because SPF is dependant on IP addresses, which is just absolutely horrible.
Suppose, for example, you want to move your mail server to a new location. Mail sent before you change the SPF record might not get delivered. Sure, you could add the new and old IP address to the SPF record, but for some people it might be to expensive to keep both IP addresses hooked up for however long, or they might not have the chance in an emergency.
I have been hoping someone would come up with something like this (and I've been to lazy to do it myself).
It doesn't offer any more protection then SPF, but it is a much more "correct" solution. Of course, the problem is CPU time, as it could be very expensive for some servers to sign all email.
IA was one of the few states that had an anti-spam law on the books before the federal government stepped in and fucked everything up with there idiotic (yes you) CAN-SPAM act.
Hopefully more states will follow suit and things can quiet down for a while before the Fed steps in and legalizes it.
I thinks its funny that the rumor sites never caught onto this parallel, especially since George has been so into creating parallels with the first three movies.
You don't seem to have much of a sense of grammar, I have to say. Not that I'm a grammar Nazi, but I do know a little bit about speech. The subject in "Attack of the Clones" is the attack, not the clones, while the subject of "The Empire Strikes Back" is the empire itself, so there isn't really much of a parallel in the titles, beyond the parallelism in all of the titles.
Not to mention, your analysis is pretty week, because what you call "things in action" are both events and actions. An attack is an event. And so is a "strike", (certainly a military strike, which is what we are talking about).
And of course, all "events" are also "things". I mean, obviously a "new hope" or a "phantom menace" are not anymore corporeal things then events like a "strike", a "birth", a "return" or an "attack".
Finally, you can take any set of pairs and come up with some kind of crazy-ass meaning. For example:
"The Birth of the Empire" and "A new hope", both are about beginnings.
"The Phantom Menace" and "The Empire Strikes Back" both deal with bad things happening. (The Empire, which is evil, doing something. And something being a menace, and a phantom menace at that As opposed to ANH, or RotJ, which are good, and AotC which is neutral)
"Attack of the Clones" and "Return of the Jedi"
Both "verb of the noun" form.
My point isn't that there is some clear pattern, just that you can draw parallels between just about everything if you really try.
Baystar has what, $80 million in SCO?. If sco wins, they'll be worth billions. So even if there's only a 1% they win, it's still worth the risk.
But, you say, they'll lose all their money if they lose!
That's not true either. Baystar can invest another X in Linux companies, which, if SCO wins will see their stock rise by, suppose, Y%. As long as X * Y > X + 80 million, Baystar will make a profit. And, if SCO wins, they make an emense profit.
I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this a somewhat useless measure? I mean, I suppose that the longer a link is, the more interference, but really, seems like a rather pointless mesure to me.
Well, if by 'hot' you mean radioactive. I'd hardly call 3k visitors a year (and at $200/pop that amounts to about $600k, hardly what you'd find in a place like galviston, TX)
The slow march of pocket calculators
on
TI-84 Plus Released
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
You know, it's bizzare almost. This seems to be pretty much the only truly new calculator from TI in the 80x range since I was a sophomore in highschool, like 7 years ago.
a 2.5x speedup? The machine I had then was a pentium 75! I guess this is what happens when you have no competition.
Why would you need more CPU power in a graphing calc? Well, graphing for one thing. It can take a couple seconds for these things to draw a graph. There are plenty of high-power low-cost chips out there that could crank most of those out almost instantly.
And lets not forget the games:P. TIs were fun in HS, but it's just amazing to me how little they've advanced...
I mean, really. Why do you need much speed in anything other then a 3d game or some high-end server stuff that's going to be running constantly (like a web server or database).
Not to mention C isn't much faster then C# and java for most tasks these days.
Of course, they can appeal the subpoena, and they may get out of it. It's unlikely, though.
It would be nice if IBM wasn't quite so quiet about all of this. I mean, I wouldn't mind seeing a little bluster from them, what they're thinking. On the other hand, it does give them this aura of a silent killer; you know speak softly and carry a big stick and all. And certainly enough people are complaining about SCO on their own.
If someone types "rm -rf/" at a terminal, you can be pretty sure they want it to be done.
The problem is that programs these days do things that the user dosn't know about, dosn't want, can't control, and ultimately can't even stop when they find out. That's ridiculous.
If I'm root, and I don't trust a program I'm running, I can su it, and run it as a regular user and lock it down to a single folder on the file system with no network access. You have to do it manually, and on windows you can only do it with services.
What I'm talking about doing is automating the process using certs, things like that, and running them in a java-like sandbox. It's not hard and in the case of java, it's already been done.
MSI installation on windows is a huge step up from the old setup.exe situation, but it isn't that often used.
What I'd really love to see on windows is something where windows tracked the 'lineage' of every file (and reg key) on the system. So, when you want to get rid of a program, you're able to remove everything the program touched, save files you've copied over to another location.
It's easy to get software installed on windows, now they need to work on a method to get everything removed, especialy spyware...
Just why is it that all these worms people write nowadays just seem so.. nice? I remember the days when 90% of viruses would at the very least format your hard disc.. now they just sit there.
So they can use the infected machines as spam zombies. Or at least as DDoS networks in their IRC wars...
A lot of the worms don't cause the machines to go down. Obviously, a lot of users are oblivious to the fact that their machines are not only spreading viruses around the 'net, but are infested with Spyware and probably being used as Spam zombies.
It seems like windows was implemented with the "everyone is mostly nice" idea that the original internet, and certainly the original email system was. No one at MS anticipated that people would run programs that actively harmed them, and that their computers would turn against them.
What we really need is an OS that doesn't just protect one user from another, but also protects users from programs and vise versa. Yeah, things like this can be done in Linux, probably MacOS, and even, in theory Windows (run the program as a service with a user logon, but most programs aren't services). But I don't think it's at all a general, easy to use feature.
Honestly, the only ones who seem to have thought ahead were the java people with their sandbox, and the ability to give permissions based on code signatures.
And then, of course, we get MS trying to shoehorn the whole thing into their "trusted computing" framework witch also tries to protect the content from the user which I think is Bullshit. An entire system to protect users could be built simply by using memory protection and standard user-level controls.
They're quite simple, really. Normaly you just lift up one end, and it converts from a couch to a bed, and push down and it changes again. Very convienent for dorm rooms, and that sort of thing.
Google getting sued over privacy concerns? If you don't agree to their privacy statement, don't apply. I'm sure everyone who signs up must click a checkbox indicating that they read it.
And it's not like people can't sue other people in isreal.
Israeli buses, of course, are notorious targets for "suicide" (homicide) bombers
The term "homicide bomber" has got to be one of the most idiotic terms ever invented. First of all, it's only applied to suicide bombers, you never hear about bombers who don't kill themselves refered to that way. It's just a euphamism for people who, for whatever reason, belive that calling a suicide bomber a suicide bomber somehow makes their crime less wrong. But it's completely redundant. Why not just call them 'bombers'.
Is what kind of anti-spam system Gmail is going to have. I mean, the moment Gmail goes live (and probably already) spammers are going to be targeting every conciveable email address @gmail.com. Anyone who gets a 'good' name is going to get spammed.
But you'd think, they're google, they're going to be really good at looking at information and classifying it, they should be able to get some great anti-spam systems setup. I'd figure that anti-spam would be part of the marketing for any email provider these days.
A friend of mine keeps his bike pretty much permanently posted for sale, and a while ago he got one of these calls from Italy from someone "interested" in buying it. He actually told the woman not to take the calls from now on.
Anyway, once we discovered the service, we found out it was a really fantastic way to crank call people. Heh.
It's the same thing with my environment, if a company messes up my surrounding envrionment, I take full responsibility for chosing the location I live in and I take full responsibility for moving away and/or making them stop.
Well, how about this. Capitalism can only work with a perfictly fair, and perfictly efficient jusdicial system.
Slashdot Mirror
Just have the machine store the previous grades of the student, and give the student some sort of bonus based on how much better their work is from normal. On the other hand, there''s no way for the machine to be able to guage how much effort they put into it, as a teacher might.
What is needed is a sort of wi-fi roaming. Each hotspot could charge a base rate, and each "brand" could charge a monthly fee. If you see some new WAP, you can sign on with your provider's information, and they'll automaticaly be charged.
We see that free free free does not work unless there is some viable way to make money money money.
I think their problem was that people kept seeing "for-fee" and thinking it said "for-free", and so they never got paid.
Maybe if these places charged, for example $3/month or something it wouldn't be a big deal, but $12/mo for access to just one hotspot? Seems a little off to me, I mean sure buying access for one starbucks probably gives you access to all, but other starbucks employees, who's going to care?
What we need is some sort of profit sharing system, similar to how the cellphone system works. And it should be an open system, so that anyone can sign up to be a part. It would also be great in that anyone could make money simply by signing up and setting up WAPs, without worrying about how they are going to bill people.
And let me apologize, I don't have access to a spellchecker right now.
1. Misread "for-fee" as "for-free" 2. ...
3. Profit!
Actualy, I made the same mistake as you, for what it's worth. But I was able to figure out what was going on by reading the rest of the blurb...
This is a much better solution then SPF. Why? Because SPF is dependant on IP addresses, which is just absolutely horrible.
Suppose, for example, you want to move your mail server to a new location. Mail sent before you change the SPF record might not get delivered. Sure, you could add the new and old IP address to the SPF record, but for some people it might be to expensive to keep both IP addresses hooked up for however long, or they might not have the chance in an emergency.
I have been hoping someone would come up with something like this (and I've been to lazy to do it myself).
It doesn't offer any more protection then SPF, but it is a much more "correct" solution. Of course, the problem is CPU time, as it could be very expensive for some servers to sign all email.
Hopefully, it'll catch on soon.
IA was one of the few states that had an anti-spam law on the books before the federal government stepped in and fucked everything up with there idiotic (yes you) CAN-SPAM act.
Hopefully more states will follow suit and things can quiet down for a while before the Fed steps in and legalizes it.
I thinks its funny that the rumor sites never caught onto this parallel, especially since George has been so into creating parallels with the first three movies.
You don't seem to have much of a sense of grammar, I have to say. Not that I'm a grammar Nazi, but I do know a little bit about speech. The subject in "Attack of the Clones" is the attack, not the clones, while the subject of "The Empire Strikes Back" is the empire itself, so there isn't really much of a parallel in the titles, beyond the parallelism in all of the titles.
Not to mention, your analysis is pretty week, because what you call "things in action" are both events and actions. An attack is an event. And so is a "strike", (certainly a military strike, which is what we are talking about).
And of course, all "events" are also "things". I mean, obviously a "new hope" or a "phantom menace" are not anymore corporeal things then events like a "strike", a "birth", a "return" or an "attack".
Finally, you can take any set of pairs and come up with some kind of crazy-ass meaning. For example:
"The Birth of the Empire" and "A new hope",
both are about beginnings.
"The Phantom Menace" and "The Empire Strikes Back" both deal with bad things happening. (The Empire, which is evil, doing something. And something being a menace, and a phantom menace at that As opposed to ANH, or RotJ, which are good, and AotC which is neutral)
"Attack of the Clones" and "Return of the Jedi"
Both "verb of the noun" form.
My point isn't that there is some clear pattern, just that you can draw parallels between just about everything if you really try.
Baystar has what, $80 million in SCO?. If sco wins, they'll be worth billions. So even if there's only a 1% they win, it's still worth the risk.
But, you say, they'll lose all their money if they lose!
That's not true either. Baystar can invest another X in Linux companies, which, if SCO wins will see their stock rise by, suppose, Y%. As long as X * Y > X + 80 million, Baystar will make a profit. And, if SCO wins, they make an emense profit.
I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this a somewhat useless measure? I mean, I suppose that the longer a link is, the more interference, but really, seems like a rather pointless mesure to me.
Well, if by 'hot' you mean radioactive. I'd hardly call 3k visitors a year (and at $200/pop that amounts to about $600k, hardly what you'd find in a place like galviston, TX)
You know, it's bizzare almost. This seems to be pretty much the only truly new calculator from TI in the 80x range since I was a sophomore in highschool, like 7 years ago.
:P. TIs were fun in HS, but it's just amazing to me how little they've advanced...
a 2.5x speedup? The machine I had then was a pentium 75! I guess this is what happens when you have no competition.
Why would you need more CPU power in a graphing calc? Well, graphing for one thing. It can take a couple seconds for these things to draw a graph. There are plenty of high-power low-cost chips out there that could crank most of those out almost instantly.
And lets not forget the games
I mean, really. Why do you need much speed in anything other then a 3d game or some high-end server stuff that's going to be running constantly (like a web server or database).
Not to mention C isn't much faster then C# and java for most tasks these days.
Of course, they can appeal the subpoena, and they may get out of it. It's unlikely, though.
It would be nice if IBM wasn't quite so quiet about all of this. I mean, I wouldn't mind seeing a little bluster from them, what they're thinking. On the other hand, it does give them this aura of a silent killer; you know speak softly and carry a big stick and all. And certainly enough people are complaining about SCO on their own.
If someone types "rm -rf /" at a terminal, you can be pretty sure they want it to be done.
The problem is that programs these days do things that the user dosn't know about, dosn't want, can't control, and ultimately can't even stop when they find out. That's ridiculous.
If I'm root, and I don't trust a program I'm running, I can su it, and run it as a regular user and lock it down to a single folder on the file system with no network access. You have to do it manually, and on windows you can only do it with services.
What I'm talking about doing is automating the process using certs, things like that, and running them in a java-like sandbox. It's not hard and in the case of java, it's already been done.
MSI installation on windows is a huge step up from the old setup.exe situation, but it isn't that often used.
What I'd really love to see on windows is something where windows tracked the 'lineage' of every file (and reg key) on the system. So, when you want to get rid of a program, you're able to remove everything the program touched, save files you've copied over to another location.
It's easy to get software installed on windows, now they need to work on a method to get everything removed, especialy spyware...
IIRC, dosn't Xprize require two people to go up? or am I off my rocker?
Just why is it that all these worms people write nowadays just seem so.. nice? I remember the days when 90% of viruses would at the very least format your hard disc.. now they just sit there.
So they can use the infected machines as spam zombies. Or at least as DDoS networks in their IRC wars...
A lot of the worms don't cause the machines to go down. Obviously, a lot of users are oblivious to the fact that their machines are not only spreading viruses around the 'net, but are infested with Spyware and probably being used as Spam zombies.
It seems like windows was implemented with the "everyone is mostly nice" idea that the original internet, and certainly the original email system was. No one at MS anticipated that people would run programs that actively harmed them, and that their computers would turn against them.
What we really need is an OS that doesn't just protect one user from another, but also protects users from programs and vise versa. Yeah, things like this can be done in Linux, probably MacOS, and even, in theory Windows (run the program as a service with a user logon, but most programs aren't services). But I don't think it's at all a general, easy to use feature.
Honestly, the only ones who seem to have thought ahead were the java people with their sandbox, and the ability to give permissions based on code signatures.
And then, of course, we get MS trying to shoehorn the whole thing into their "trusted computing" framework witch also tries to protect the content from the user which I think is Bullshit. An entire system to protect users could be built simply by using memory protection and standard user-level controls.
but damned if i know how futons work!
They're quite simple, really. Normaly you just lift up one end, and it converts from a couch to a bed, and push down and it changes again. Very convienent for dorm rooms, and that sort of thing.
Google getting sued over privacy concerns? If you don't agree to their privacy statement, don't apply. I'm sure everyone who signs up must click a checkbox indicating that they read it.
And it's not like people can't sue other people in isreal.
Israeli buses, of course, are notorious targets for "suicide" (homicide) bombers
The term "homicide bomber" has got to be one of the most idiotic terms ever invented. First of all, it's only applied to suicide bombers, you never hear about bombers who don't kill themselves refered to that way. It's just a euphamism for people who, for whatever reason, belive that calling a suicide bomber a suicide bomber somehow makes their crime less wrong. But it's completely redundant. Why not just call them 'bombers'.
Is what kind of anti-spam system Gmail is going to have. I mean, the moment Gmail goes live (and probably already) spammers are going to be targeting every conciveable email address @gmail.com. Anyone who gets a 'good' name is going to get spammed.
But you'd think, they're google, they're going to be really good at looking at information and classifying it, they should be able to get some great anti-spam systems setup. I'd figure that anti-spam would be part of the marketing for any email provider these days.
A friend of mine keeps his bike pretty much permanently posted for sale, and a while ago he got one of these calls from Italy from someone "interested" in buying it. He actually told the woman not to take the calls from now on.
Anyway, once we discovered the service, we found out it was a really fantastic way to crank call people. Heh.
It's the same thing with my environment, if a company messes up my surrounding envrionment, I take full responsibility for chosing the location I live in and I take full responsibility for moving away and/or making them stop.
Well, how about this. Capitalism can only work with a perfictly fair, and perfictly efficient jusdicial system.