Wrong. Coal's share of our power is falling. 42% of the new power added to the grid last year was wind, and most of the rest, natural gas.
Which is papering over the fact that very little new generation capacity is being added to the grid. And also rather misleading as it's nameplate capacity and wind's actual capacity is much less; while coal's practical capacity is also less than its nameplate capacity, it's not as much less. At the end of 2008, there was a total of 25,369MW of wind power (nameplate capacity) in the US. That's enough to charge a million electric cars simultaneously. Sounds like a lot, but considering the number of cars in the US, it's a drop in the bucket if you're really talking about a major shift to electric.
Even now, watch the very vast majority of those shows, particularly the ones where people do renovations, and have before/after valuations. "You spent how much on your new kitchen?" "$15,000" "Great, you just added $30,000 value to the home. Now, how about the bathroom?" "We spent $8,000 in here." "Excellent, looking around, I'd say you added $20,000 to the value of the home", and so on, ad nauseaum. Add this up, and you have, in my view, a hidden culprit, along with the RE agents who were pretty much as a whole in lock-step with these mantras pushed by TV onto their clients, of the housing bust
Now you're blaming TV? Anyway, the one of those shows I used to watch (simply called "Flip That House", with an annoying blonde real estate agent narrator) was a lot more realistic than you depict, because they disclosed the actual sale price at the end. Typically the flippers went over budget, over schedule, and (despite inflated valuations from the "experts" on the show) ended up making much less than they planned, particular after fees.
You do understand theres other kinds of power plants than just oil? Water power is really green, and nuclear power aswell (and the worries about that aren't really adjusted; theres nuclear reactons everywhere)
Hydro is all used up; we're not building any more big dams. Same goes with nukes (there's one still in the process of being built, but I wouldn't hold my breath). So anything which results in increased demand for electricity is going to mostly end up increasing burning of coal.
It's not the developer's fault that Oracle sucks donkey balls when it comes to "SELECT DISTINCT". I've seen it turn queries that took seconds with "SELECT ALL" into horrendous cartesian-product based monstrosities with "SELECT DISTINCT". I eventually fixed them by writing the SELECT ALL query as a subquery of a SELECT DISTINCT (forcing it to do the DISTINCT filtering last), but the optimizer should have done better than that.
Design patterns are just a formalization of what was going on anyway. Unit tests... well, if you can get your software to work consistently without unit testing, more power to you. I'm not that good. As for the various faddish software development methodologies, I'm with you there... just write the damned software.
You are not required to be a certified engineer to write apps. If that was the case a lot of problems in the industry would go away becasue the developer would be liable, and it would give them power over management when management tries to force q dead line down their throat.
Liability doesn't mean power. Liability just means liability. Personal liability and sign-off for developers just means he has to choose between bankruptcy and a life of "Would you like fries with that?" if failure occurs, or losing his income now (and possibly having trouble finding a job because he's got a reputation for being difficult) because he won't sign off.
If I was a CTO and my department found a botnet like this, I'd be very tempted to play the disinformation game. Clean up some of them, but with others, just move the machines to an isolation area and start feeding them faked drafts of sales figures, annual reports, engineering drawings of dead-end designs, whatever else the botnet might be looking for. Alas there's probably some SEC regulation against that sort of thing.
Uh, no. The presence of significant water and oxygen on Europa is not wild speculation. May have been when Clarke wrote 2001, but subsequent observations have confirmed their presence.
Ni-MH is the superior fucking choice. But the self-discharge rate is too high for the plebes to accept. They've got ones that sacrifice capacity for a lower self-discharge rate (such as Sanyo's Eneloop design), but Li-Ion is firmly entrenched, unfortunately.
Yeah, NiMH is way superior to lithium ion. Well, except the memory effect, self discharge rate (near 0 for lithium ion, high for NiMH), the energy density (higher for ordinary LiIon, much higher for LiPo), charging efficiency (~70% for NiMH, ~95% for LiIon), and power density. Except for all that, NiMH is way better than LiIon.
Uh, you do realize that you are agreeing with Shuttleworth? He wants the developers to STFU and watch how the end-users use the software, so they can see that their UI sucks.
He's missing the point. Sure, some developers think their UI is great. But most of the developers making lousy UIs KNOW they suck. They just don't know how to make it not suck; they aren't UI designers. Partnering with designers tends not to work; they'll either go off on a tangent and come up with a UI which doesn't do what the product is supposed to do at all, or they'll come up with various concepts which implicitly impose impossible requirements on the underlying code. What's needed is a UI designer with his or her feet on the ground. They exist, but unfortunately I think Apple has nearly all of them.
If these claims are true, it would be near impossible for an end user in the US to claim to be the intended beneficiary. This would be because they had no idea of the specific contract obligations until after the fact which would push them more to the incidental beneficiary then the intended.
Nothing in the information I posted or linked to says anything about concealing the terms of a contract from an intended beneficiary makes the intended beneficiary incidental. If you have other information please post it.
Auto analogy: Ford sells off-lease cars to independent dealer "Car Emporium", with the contract of sale stating that "Car Emporium" will provide complimentary maintenance for these cars to whoever they resell it to for one year after that sale. "Car Emporium" doesn't do so and conceals the existence of that contract from the buyers. The buyers somehow find out. They _DO_ have standing to sue "Car Emporium", as they were an intended beneficiary of the contract.
I have been arguing for years that the GPL is a contract concerning copyright while entities like the FSF and their fan base attempt to claim it's just copyright.
The FSF doesn't claim it's "just copyright". They claim it's a license. They also claim if that IF you don't accept the license, THEN what you have is "just copyright". The defendants in this case could have claimed they never accepted the GPL, but that would have put them in hotter water. There likely STILL would have been a cause of action by the plaintiffs (because the defendant had provided them, unknowingly, with illegal copies of software), and there would have been a cause of action by the copyright owner for copyright violation.
All your fantasies of hidden oceans and "water mining" won't change the fact that earth seems to be the only body in this system with anything more than sparse amounts of water and oxygen.
Arthur C. Clarke's zombie is shambling over to your house chanting "Europa".
It's a platform for use on countries with essentially zero anti-aircraft capability. Saddam at his weakest could have cobbled something together to knock this thing down. Personally I wouldn't bet on the Afghans figuring out how to do it either.
Hang on just a second. Does the AFPA (the plaintiffs) own the copyright on the GPLd source? They do not. Then what standing do they have to sue anyone over it, or receive payment? This is GPL related, but the relief went to a 3rd party!
Well, first of all, this was French law, not US or English, so their idea of standing might be different.
Second, the AFPA were third party beneficiaries of the GPL -- as receivers of the binary, they were entitled (by the GPL) to receive the source. This might have granted them standing even in the US.
Section 302 defines all beneficiaries of a contract as being intended or incidental. Only an intended beneficiary has standing to enforce a contract between two other parties. Whether a person is an intended beneficiary with the resulting right to sue depends upon the intention of the parties to the contract. That intent may be articulated in the contract itself, or discerned or imputed from the statutory context that prompted the contract to be executed.
The GPL (IMO, IANAL) makes it crystal clear that the person receiving the binary is an intended beneficiary.
This sounds a lot like the plot of the movie Conspiracy Theory where Mel Gibson plays a paranoid cab driver who publishes a newsletter of various conspiracy theories jumbled together from random public sources (this was before the age of blogs) and is chased by personnel from a shadowy government agency in black SUVs and helicopters (ala the USSS).
The real shadowy agencies are much smarter than that. If someone finds a bit of the truth, they don't chase him down (which would tend to give him credibility), they leak that truth along with a bunch of obviously bogus and silly information just to discredit him.
Not posting anonymously because They will know who I am anyway.
A better solution: offer anybody who's a member of al Qaeda $10 million to knock it the fuck off.
Judging from the CIA's released estimates of membership, we'd wind up a couple billion ahead at that rate. That's what I call a "free-market solution"!
You're forgetting about supply and demand. Make that offer, and every Tom, Dick, and Muhammed will be setting up "Al Queda in Peoria" cells just to qualify for the $10 million.
You've got a row of tiny buttons across the top of the window, just big enough to show their names. You click on one, and a row of small, temporary text-labeled buttons (the menu) appears underneath, in a simple row. You have to go down to the row you want and click it (or hold the mouse down and release it, which is awkward, but saves a fraction of a second once you're used to it). Then, all these buttons (the menu items) disappear. It's kind of awful, really.
Sounds pretty cool to me. It's like having a large toolbox, with the drawers labeled by general function and the tools neatly in a row beside the drawers. Open a drawer, grab a tool, and then get the drawer out of my workspace by closing it.
Now, look at the Ribbon. Once again you have a row of text-buttons like the menu bar, but this time (in office, at least) they're a bit bigger. Once again, when you pick one a set of buttons appears underneath, but this time instead of a linear column of plain buttons of all the same size and shape, these are laid out however the UI designer wants, for (theoretically) maximum usability.
Now I've got the drawers still, but the tools are arranged haphazardly within them. And I always have to have a drawer open, so the other drawers are that much harder to get to. So, it's modal, and it's harder to search. Yech.
Fructose is a monosaccharide and is extracted primarily form corn
Fructose is a monosaccharide and is derived primarily from glucose extracted from corn. While there are natural sources of fructose, corn isn't one of them.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is papering over the fact that very little new generation capacity is being added to the grid. And also rather misleading as it's nameplate capacity and wind's actual capacity is much less; while coal's practical capacity is also less than its nameplate capacity, it's not as much less. At the end of 2008, there was a total of 25,369MW of wind power (nameplate capacity) in the US. That's enough to charge a million electric cars simultaneously. Sounds like a lot, but considering the number of cars in the US, it's a drop in the bucket if you're really talking about a major shift to electric.
Now you're blaming TV? Anyway, the one of those shows I used to watch (simply called "Flip That House", with an annoying blonde real estate agent narrator) was a lot more realistic than you depict, because they disclosed the actual sale price at the end. Typically the flippers went over budget, over schedule, and (despite inflated valuations from the "experts" on the show) ended up making much less than they planned, particular after fees.
Assuming Google even got to reply. It could have been an ex parte order.
Now try to square that statement with the state of the US primary and secondary educational systems...
Hydro is all used up; we're not building any more big dams. Same goes with nukes (there's one still in the process of being built, but I wouldn't hold my breath). So anything which results in increased demand for electricity is going to mostly end up increasing burning of coal.
It's not the developer's fault that Oracle sucks donkey balls when it comes to "SELECT DISTINCT". I've seen it turn queries that took seconds with "SELECT ALL" into horrendous cartesian-product based monstrosities with "SELECT DISTINCT". I eventually fixed them by writing the SELECT ALL query as a subquery of a SELECT DISTINCT (forcing it to do the DISTINCT filtering last), but the optimizer should have done better than that.
Design patterns are just a formalization of what was going on anyway. Unit tests... well, if you can get your software to work consistently without unit testing, more power to you. I'm not that good. As for the various faddish software development methodologies, I'm with you there... just write the damned software.
Liability doesn't mean power. Liability just means liability. Personal liability and sign-off for developers just means he has to choose between bankruptcy and a life of "Would you like fries with that?" if failure occurs, or losing his income now (and possibly having trouble finding a job because he's got a reputation for being difficult) because he won't sign off.
There's only one thing you want LESS than "duct tape" code in a pacemaker. And that's the kind of fancy nonsense Joel's "duct tape programmer" abhors.
If I was a CTO and my department found a botnet like this, I'd be very tempted to play the disinformation game. Clean up some of them, but with others, just move the machines to an isolation area and start feeding them faked drafts of sales figures, annual reports, engineering drawings of dead-end designs, whatever else the botnet might be looking for. Alas there's probably some SEC regulation against that sort of thing.
The end users may not have the right to modify software. But the owner of a copy of software most certainly has the right to modify that copy.
(insert auto analogy here).
Isn't a faster boot into windows like a faster elevator into Hell?
Uh, no. The presence of significant water and oxygen on Europa is not wild speculation. May have been when Clarke wrote 2001, but subsequent observations have confirmed their presence.
Yeah, NiMH is way superior to lithium ion. Well, except the memory effect, self discharge rate (near 0 for lithium ion, high for NiMH), the energy density (higher for ordinary LiIon, much higher for LiPo), charging efficiency (~70% for NiMH, ~95% for LiIon), and power density. Except for all that, NiMH is way better than LiIon.
Eh, rob a high school. I've never heard of a high school chemistry teacher without a good sized chunk of sodium in a jar in the classroom somewhere.
He's missing the point. Sure, some developers think their UI is great. But most of the developers making lousy UIs KNOW they suck. They just don't know how to make it not suck; they aren't UI designers. Partnering with designers tends not to work; they'll either go off on a tangent and come up with a UI which doesn't do what the product is supposed to do at all, or they'll come up with various concepts which implicitly impose impossible requirements on the underlying code. What's needed is a UI designer with his or her feet on the ground. They exist, but unfortunately I think Apple has nearly all of them.
Nothing in the information I posted or linked to says anything about concealing the terms of a contract from an intended beneficiary makes the intended beneficiary incidental. If you have other information please post it.
Auto analogy:
Ford sells off-lease cars to independent dealer "Car Emporium", with the contract of sale stating that "Car Emporium" will provide complimentary maintenance for these cars to whoever they resell it to for one year after that sale. "Car Emporium" doesn't do so and conceals the existence of that contract from the buyers. The buyers somehow find out. They _DO_ have standing to sue "Car Emporium", as they were an intended beneficiary of the contract.
The FSF doesn't claim it's "just copyright". They claim it's a license. They also claim if that IF you don't accept the license, THEN what you have is "just copyright". The defendants in this case could have claimed they never accepted the GPL, but that would have put them in hotter water. There likely STILL would have been a cause of action by the plaintiffs (because the defendant had provided them, unknowingly, with illegal copies of software), and there would have been a cause of action by the copyright owner for copyright violation.
Arthur C. Clarke's zombie is shambling over to your house chanting "Europa".
It's a platform for use on countries with essentially zero anti-aircraft capability. Saddam at his weakest could have cobbled something together to knock this thing down. Personally I wouldn't bet on the Afghans figuring out how to do it either.
Well, first of all, this was French law, not US or English, so their idea of standing might be different.
Second, the AFPA were third party beneficiaries of the GPL -- as receivers of the binary, they were entitled (by the GPL) to receive the source. This might have granted them standing even in the US.
From
http://ejustice.org/federal_practice_manual_2006/chapter_5/chap5sec3.html
The GPL (IMO, IANAL) makes it crystal clear that the person receiving the binary is an intended beneficiary.
The real shadowy agencies are much smarter than that. If someone finds a bit of the truth, they don't chase him down (which would tend to give him credibility), they leak that truth along with a bunch of obviously bogus and silly information just to discredit him.
Not posting anonymously because They will know who I am anyway.
You're forgetting about supply and demand. Make that offer, and every Tom, Dick, and Muhammed will be setting up "Al Queda in Peoria" cells just to qualify for the $10 million.
If they were playing the department's Wii, no. They weren't. They were playing a suspect's Wii.
Sounds pretty cool to me. It's like having a large toolbox, with the drawers labeled by general function and the tools neatly in a row beside the drawers. Open a drawer, grab a tool, and then get the drawer out of my workspace by closing it.
Now I've got the drawers still, but the tools are arranged haphazardly within them. And I always have to have a drawer open, so the other drawers are that much harder to get to. So, it's modal, and it's harder to search. Yech.
Fructose is a monosaccharide and is derived primarily from glucose extracted from corn. While there are natural sources of fructose, corn isn't one of them.