The credit likely goes to Tim Karr, the author of the article, or one authors of the 34 results for the term on Google. I was surprised there were only 34 results, and I don't imagine that'll be the case for too long, if everyone else was as satisified with the phrase as I was.:)
Is it just me or has there been way too much 'factually incorrect' information in front-page Slashdot articles lately? A very simple peer-review system for facts in Slashdot articles before they go on the main page would do wonders. Additional "+5 Informative" comments could potentially be appended to the article, such as the parent, and more factual and well-balanced news for the general reader would appear on the main page without the need to read all the "+5 Insightful" opinions and "+5 Funny" jokes to just get the facts. It's a humble opinion. What do you guys think?
(This was a response to another terrible article, but reusing it saves time and energy. Dupes are a way of life on Slashdot.)
At least one example of usefulness for this product would be low-cost educational computer labs. I purchased 4 X-terms each with 21" displays for $1.00 on eBay, and picked them up in person to save shipping. My thought was that with a medium power PC serving them, it would make a great low-cost computer lab for a local, under-funded school.
Not needing an internet connection to access this massive amount of information means reduced cost to the previously mentioned under funded schools, for which a connection might not even be available at a reasonable price.
As well, despite it being outdated quite soon in many cases, local-server searches and content could be lightning fast compared to the bogged down Wikipedia servers, or slow Internet connections.
If you guys are so looking forward to his show, please do us all a favor and show your support by watching it by a legitimate means, instead of distributing it by BitTorrent or some other P2P network. You know, so that the show is actually valuable in terms of viewership and advertising to the media networks that produce it. Then they have a reason to not cancel it.
home to over 100,000 active players, has been hosting up online versions of the game to happily addicted players for over a year now (maybe more), and only now does Hasbro come forth with a lawsuit.
Only now? A year?
Give me a break. A year is not a long time for a site to be running and gain enough of a following to prompt the attention of the corporation to the point where they realize "This is signficantly infringing on the rights we have to the game we invested in, and thus have a continued interest in protecting the value of," consider their options, and then organize a lawful approach to the situation.
Authors of the "e-Microsoft" and "e-Slashdot" comments above hit the nail right on the head, and as much as they deserve their "+5 Insightful", it makes me wish there was a "+5 Commonsense".
Is it just me or has there been way too much 'factually incorrect' information in front-page Slashdot articles lately? A very simple peer-review system for facts in Slashdot articles before they go on the main page would do wonders. Additional "+5 Informative" comments could potentially be appended to the article, such as the parent, and more factual and well-balanced news for the general reader would appear on the main page without the need to read all the "+5 Insightful" opinions and "+5 Funny" jokes to just get the facts.
It's a humble opinion. What do you guys think?
I don't think the parent did enough to sell this article to the masses reading through, although it is an excellent reference.
The article linked to by the parent ("The Free Lunch Is Over: A Fundamental Turn Toward Concurrency in Software") should be read, and is of particular interest to developers.
The article draws a very good picture of how the trend towards mutli-core systems will require developers to rethink the way they design their applications if they want to continue taking advantage of future increases in processing power.
I was referred to this article yesterday, and it is so good and motivating that I imagine it will be the feature of or featured in future Slashdot articles.
It might not at all, but it might also be possible that between an economic advantage and being able to use resources more friviously, that they can take shortcuts in certain areas. I don't know what those areas would be in relationship to this type of research.
"Canada, one of the treaty's first signatories, has no clear plan for reaching its target emission cuts. Far from cutting back, its emissions have increased by 20% since 1990."
So how are we (Canadians) going to get every Canadian person and business to reduce their emissions by 20% in 7 years? And Japan is "unsure" about 6%? I'm not saying that this is a bad thing, I'm all for each individual sucking it up and unselfishly changing their lives.
But really, how will we do it? Strick laws? Penelty/Reward programs? Tax deductions for extremely compliant citizens? And what about the impact of a 20% reduction of emissions on the economy? Likely quite huge!
Lots of questions and doubt in the mind of many Canadians, I'm sure. But no need to worry so much, fellow Canadian, because you can take comfort in the fact that we have "NO CLEAR PLAN"!
So.. I don't think it will damage the U.S. economy that much within the next 10 years or so, but it will be relatively damaging in the sense that reliance on foreign technology and resources remains.
It seems everyone assuming that the U.S. won't be involved in developing these new technologies, but without the burden of pollution-reducing treaties, won't they be in an even better position to develop them? Couldn't it end up the opposite of your suggestion, that the treaty nations become dependent on the technology developed in China, India, or the U.S.?
Also when something goes wrong with it, there is someone to hold responsible.
If a developer was making money on the support contracts their customers purchased for the Open Source Software they were using, it's a huge motivation to the developer that they make that support experience completely invaluable so the user renews their contract. As it seems to me, that would be the kind of support a company would be looking for.
I sought out a similiar set of rules for Christians in my Bible, and this is what I came up with:
"But Jesus said to him, 'Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.'" (Matthew 26:52)
"Jesus answered, 'My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here.'" (John 18:36)
".. the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom.. " (1 Timothy 4:1) [Illustrating Christ's Kingdom on earth begins with his appearing.]
Is it fair to ask then why (if Christ's Kingdom isn't established yet) Christians have been fighting at all?
(It's a different case to discuss with Old Testament Israel who, according to the Bible, was actually a nation representing the Kingdom of God at that time.)
In short, this problem should have only effected logic boards with *more* than 8 MB of VRAM.
From recent discussion the problem seemed to be narrowed down to models that employed an increased amount of VRAM over the original models. Your model *should* have 8 MB VRAM, whereas the newer models had 16 MB, which apparently had heat-related problems.
Of about 8 friends who purchased iBooks around the time of the transition: Everyone I know with a 16+ MB VRAM model has had problems, and everyone I know with an earlier 8 MB VRAM model has not had problems.
Perhaps they replaced your original 8 MB VRAM logic board with a newer board? Find out how much video memory is on your board, and if it's more than the original 8 MB, give them a call.
Yeah, I think that's an extremely good question. Has anyone heard about how this applies to people who have taken apart their iBook after the warranty had expired?
My complaint is this: I had my iBook logic board replaced within a year of purchase. Free repair, great. But they didn't fix the problem, and I didn't get another year warranty on the new logic board. So, my warranty expires a few months later, and the problem still remained but didn't manifest itself until a few months after my warranty expired. Now they would like US$280 to repair my logic board again, but the problem is that their repair doesn't solve the problem, and you can bet that your iBook will be out of commission within a year again.
And you're right, they aren't obligated to do anything about it, but if they want to maintain a reputation of customer service, they had better.
An additional note: A friend of my with the G3 iBook eventually had so many problems they've now set him up with a brand new G4 iBook. He had Apple Care.
Slashdot Mirror
This is amazing, I'm afraid this'll get lost in the noise!
The credit likely goes to Tim Karr, the author of the article, or one authors of the 34 results for the term on Google. I was surprised there were only 34 results, and I don't imagine that'll be the case for too long, if everyone else was as satisified with the phrase as I was. :)
Is it just me or has there been way too much 'factually incorrect' information in front-page Slashdot articles lately? A very simple peer-review system for facts in Slashdot articles before they go on the main page would do wonders. Additional "+5 Informative" comments could potentially be appended to the article, such as the parent, and more factual and well-balanced news for the general reader would appear on the main page without the need to read all the "+5 Insightful" opinions and "+5 Funny" jokes to just get the facts. It's a humble opinion. What do you guys think?
(This was a response to another terrible article, but reusing it saves time and energy. Dupes are a way of life on Slashdot.)
I wouldn't expect the "multitudes" to buy this.
At least one example of usefulness for this product would be low-cost educational computer labs. I purchased 4 X-terms each with 21" displays for $1.00 on eBay, and picked them up in person to save shipping. My thought was that with a medium power PC serving them, it would make a great low-cost computer lab for a local, under-funded school.
Not needing an internet connection to access this massive amount of information means reduced cost to the previously mentioned under funded schools, for which a connection might not even be available at a reasonable price.
As well, despite it being outdated quite soon in many cases, local-server searches and content could be lightning fast compared to the bogged down Wikipedia servers, or slow Internet connections.
My friend, there is a reason all of our major population centers are near the U.S. border: We've all been waiting! Bring it on!
1 d15tr4c73d 1t w17h th1s!
1 01 00111101010110010001010101001001001100010011110101 00100100010000100001001000000010000001001001001001 11010101100100010100100000010001110100111101010100 00100000010101000100100001000101001000000100011001 00100101001100010101000100010101010010001000010010 00000010000001010011010000110100111101010010010001 01001000000100000100100000001010110011010100100000 01000110010101010100111001001110010110010010000001 00011001001111010100100010000001010100010010000100 01010010000001010010010001010101001101010100001000 00010011110100011000100000010101010101001100100001
*runs*
01000111010011110010000001001001001101000011000
*trips*
If you guys are so looking forward to his show, please do us all a favor and show your support by watching it by a legitimate means, instead of distributing it by BitTorrent or some other P2P network. You know, so that the show is actually valuable in terms of viewership and advertising to the media networks that produce it. Then they have a reason to not cancel it.
*Cough* Enterprise *Cough*
Only now? A year?
Give me a break. A year is not a long time for a site to be running and gain enough of a following to prompt the attention of the corporation to the point where they realize "This is signficantly infringing on the rights we have to the game we invested in, and thus have a continued interest in protecting the value of," consider their options, and then organize a lawful approach to the situation.
Authors of the "e-Microsoft" and "e-Slashdot" comments above hit the nail right on the head, and as much as they deserve their "+5 Insightful", it makes me wish there was a "+5 Commonsense".
Usually that's not how it works when Jared is using Hasbro's registered mark.
Is it just me or has there been way too much 'factually incorrect' information in front-page Slashdot articles lately? A very simple peer-review system for facts in Slashdot articles before they go on the main page would do wonders. Additional "+5 Informative" comments could potentially be appended to the article, such as the parent, and more factual and well-balanced news for the general reader would appear on the main page without the need to read all the "+5 Insightful" opinions and "+5 Funny" jokes to just get the facts. It's a humble opinion. What do you guys think?
Exactly what I was thinking, but according to the comments on this earlier Mozillazine article, there is no planned Palm OS 5 port.
I don't think the parent did enough to sell this article to the masses reading through, although it is an excellent reference.
The article linked to by the parent ("The Free Lunch Is Over: A Fundamental Turn Toward Concurrency in Software") should be read, and is of particular interest to developers.
The article draws a very good picture of how the trend towards mutli-core systems will require developers to rethink the way they design their applications if they want to continue taking advantage of future increases in processing power.
I was referred to this article yesterday, and it is so good and motivating that I imagine it will be the feature of or featured in future Slashdot articles.
It will be appearing in Dr. Dobb's Journal later this month.
It might not at all, but it might also be possible that between an economic advantage and being able to use resources more friviously, that they can take shortcuts in certain areas. I don't know what those areas would be in relationship to this type of research.
An issue nicely summarized in the article:
"Canada, one of the treaty's first signatories, has no clear plan for reaching its target emission cuts. Far from cutting back, its emissions have increased by 20% since 1990."
So how are we (Canadians) going to get every Canadian person and business to reduce their emissions by 20% in 7 years? And Japan is "unsure" about 6%? I'm not saying that this is a bad thing, I'm all for each individual sucking it up and unselfishly changing their lives.
But really, how will we do it? Strick laws? Penelty/Reward programs? Tax deductions for extremely compliant citizens? And what about the impact of a 20% reduction of emissions on the economy? Likely quite huge!
Lots of questions and doubt in the mind of many Canadians, I'm sure. But no need to worry so much, fellow Canadian, because you can take comfort in the fact that we have "NO CLEAR PLAN"!
According to this screenshot, the MonoDevelop IDE (in it's early stages) appears to run on Mac OS X.
People want to buy stuff from solid companies that they know of, and can feel certain that company will be around. Free software doesn't give that.
You mean like Novell? It also seems as if Apache has dominated their market.
Also when something goes wrong with it, there is someone to hold responsible.
If a developer was making money on the support contracts their customers purchased for the Open Source Software they were using, it's a huge motivation to the developer that they make that support experience completely invaluable so the user renews their contract. As it seems to me, that would be the kind of support a company would be looking for.
Did anyone notice that the thunder and lightning are out of order in the video?
And how do I know I'm not just seeing the People-Trying-To-Observe-The-Slashdot-Effect-In-Re altime effect?
I sought out a similiar set of rules for Christians in my Bible, and this is what I came up with:
.. " (1 Timothy 4:1) [Illustrating Christ's Kingdom on earth begins with his appearing.]
"But Jesus said to him, 'Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword.'" (Matthew 26:52)
"Jesus answered, 'My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here.'" (John 18:36)
".. the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom
Is it fair to ask then why (if Christ's Kingdom isn't established yet) Christians have been fighting at all?
(It's a different case to discuss with Old Testament Israel who, according to the Bible, was actually a nation representing the Kingdom of God at that time.)
In short, this problem should have only effected logic boards with *more* than 8 MB of VRAM.
From recent discussion the problem seemed to be narrowed down to models that employed an increased amount of VRAM over the original models. Your model *should* have 8 MB VRAM, whereas the newer models had 16 MB, which apparently had heat-related problems.
Of about 8 friends who purchased iBooks around the time of the transition: Everyone I know with a 16+ MB VRAM model has had problems, and everyone I know with an earlier 8 MB VRAM model has not had problems.
Perhaps they replaced your original 8 MB VRAM logic board with a newer board? Find out how much video memory is on your board, and if it's more than the original 8 MB, give them a call.
Yeah, I think that's an extremely good question. Has anyone heard about how this applies to people who have taken apart their iBook after the warranty had expired?
My complaint is this: I had my iBook logic board replaced within a year of purchase. Free repair, great. But they didn't fix the problem, and I didn't get another year warranty on the new logic board. So, my warranty expires a few months later, and the problem still remained but didn't manifest itself until a few months after my warranty expired. Now they would like US$280 to repair my logic board again, but the problem is that their repair doesn't solve the problem, and you can bet that your iBook will be out of commission within a year again.
And you're right, they aren't obligated to do anything about it, but if they want to maintain a reputation of customer service, they had better.
An additional note: A friend of my with the G3 iBook eventually had so many problems they've now set him up with a brand new G4 iBook. He had Apple Care.
What happened to those days, Jeff?