OK - imagine this scenario: a large number of very intelligent specialists work for years on this idea and the necessary tech is implemented in every European car and noone ever thought of the 100% obvious first-problem-any-person-would-come-up-with-when-introduced-to-this-idea problem smitty777 discovered with the vast power of his uber-brain. European roads then become deathtraps, depopulating the continent like it's 1349.
I'm just sayin, every/. article with new ideas gets swamped by people stating absolutely obvious problems as if the people working on that project were all functionally retarded. I said the same thing just a few days ago but this article really brought the geniuses out of the woodwork like I haven't seen in some time.
No it's like a car company providing free brake checks and maintenance to car owners and thieves alike but the thieves don't use it because they're afraid the company's gonna call the cops (which they don't afaik but I never checked) and they don't get it done by anyone else either.
They also drive with the handbrake engaged all the time (not behind firewall, anti-virus, whatever) so it's shot and use wheels that are known to overheat brakes (lots more pirated stuff).
Damn that car company does their nefarious schemes know no bounds? Oh the humanity!
Suffice to say your analogy fails harder than their brakes.
Let me add that the reason the whole thing sounds so vague is that they're defining the terms for the debate about interoperability of different public services. It's not about specific implementations or whatever. It is necessarily vague because its point is that when EC, EP and council try to enact a new directive on interoperability in a specific field they need common terms and recommendations as a baseline for said directive that will be less vague.
And even then it's not true that the draft doesn't talk about implementations:
5.2.1 Specifications, openness and re-use
The possibility of sharing and re-using service components based on formalised specification depends
on the openness of the specifications.
If the principle of openness is applied in full:
All stakeholders can contribute to the elaboration of the specification and public review is
organised;
The specification document is freely available for everybody to study and to share with
others;
The specification can be implemented under the different software development approaches.
It is up to the creators of any particular specification to decide how open they want their specification
to be.
Because of their positive effect on interoperability, the use of open specifications, characterised by the
three features mentioned above, as well as sharing and re-use, have been promoted in many policy
statements and are encouraged in the context of European Public Services delivery.
However, public administrations may decide to use less open specifications, especially in cases where
open specifications do not meet the functional interoperability needs or the ones available are not
mature and/or sufficiently supported by the market, or where all cooperating organisations already use
or agree to use the same technologies.
Recommendation 22. Other things being equal, public administrations should prefer open
specifications when establishing European Public Services.
I can certainly agree with that. There definitely are areas where open standards don't exist or aren't used enough to be helpful.
e.g. Flash for audio and video on webpages. Yes, Html 5 has the video-tag but it will be half a decade before it's supported by a similar number of browsers as have flash installed. And while flash exists at the whim of Adobe, just about any system under the sun can get it to work one way or other.
Not everyone reading Slashdot has a degree in chemistry or chemical engineering. I appreciated OP's questions since I had the same ones. I appreciate your answers but not the attitude that I had to endure when reading your post.
The attitude of the GP was the problem. "These are the questions we need to ask", as if they were non-obvious and revolutionary. Whenever there is a post about an invention on/. the easiest way to get "+5 (Group-Wank)" is to write that it will never work because the inventors overlooked an issue a drunk chimpanzee could come up with. Then a thread ensues where everyone congratulates themselves on saving the world yet again.
You are right, the GP's questions were interesting and should have been answered in the article (which is for laypersons) and because they weren't it's good that someone answered them here on/.
The problem is that the GP posed the question in a way that implied he knew what he was talking about and was making a statement about the invention, instead of admitting that he had no idea and was asking for clarification. jm2c
So you, a habitual pirate by your own admission, wanted to make an exception for just this one game until, surprise surprise, you found that excuse you needed to steal it instead.
The problem with US textbooks is professors shilling them in their courses.
In my experience German textbooks, even translations of those US books, cost roughly a third of what you're paying.
This is mostly because for undergraduate lectures universities generally buy enough copies of a book for the library that students don't need their own. That magically increases longevity and reduces prices for said books. If Professor X requires everyone to read Expensive Expenses, LXVIth incompatible to any other Ed., written by Professor X, the students complain to the library, the library complains to the administration and the administration tells X to go and fuck himself.
I don't know what they're smoking at EA Europe but it gotta be good stuff. Too expensive in a recession, though, because after more than a year of the old price they recently reduced it to about $20.
I thought, futile as it turns out, that by the time I had progressed from
what is often cited as a likely target of US ammunition but combines the hostile terrain of Afghanistan with Iraq's relatively high education standards and a higher population than both combined
via a semi-nuclear power under the protection of China with the ability to level Seoul within a few hours
to a nuclear power with ballistic missiles and 150 million people that furthermore is a US ally
the sarcasm would be obvious to just about everyone.
That said there are credibly scenarios for why US intervention might be necessary and justified in all three cases which just shows how premature this Nobel prize really is.
I hope he bombs Iran and North Korea before invading Pakistan together with India.
Perhaps then the retards at the Nobel Peace Prize committee will stop handing out that thing like it's the Politically Correct Popularity Contest. Thousands of people work their asses off and often risk their lives trying to stop all the conflicts around the world and Obama gets it for...what, exactly?
"Efforts to strengthen international diplomacy?" In other words for holding a bunch of grandstanding speeches. It's not like his approach to international relations is that different to Clinton or many presidents before him, even Bush's later years were pretty mellow.
Yeah, with private insurance for all we've done the first step that leads to being a socialist hellhole like the Soviet Union, or Germany. If this goes on there will be a public option, the US is gonna end up like Cuba, or the UK.
France, Canada, Japan, all engulfed in civil strife, with the walking dead, condemned by bureaucratic Death Panels, roaming the streets and hordes of atheists burning churches.
Thankfully the insurance industry is ready to pay billions to upstanding Congressmen and selfless community organizers so they can spread the truth.
So you've reduced the pool of bidders because of a MMORPG that was crappy before Sony took over, was crappy after Sony took over, doesn't interest anyone at your company in the least and apart from being completely unrelated to plasma displays is also made by a part of the corp that is almost completely unrelated to the part that manufactures said displays.
If that's your kind of decision making I would have fired you years ago, but with/.'s huge SWG fanboy pool your reasoning probably seems perfectly valid and sane.
There are reasons for excluding bidders but nerd rage over SWG isn't one of them.
I won't buy a 360 due to the way MS treats the PC. It's not so much that they no longer release anything for the PC (although it's funny that Sony seems to make more games for MS fucking Windows than MS), that's their right. It's the sheer hypocrisy. The way they tout their efforts to "enhance" PC gaming while even their head honchos admit that they want to kill it because they have more control over the 360 - not to mention that they get their cut of every game sold. (see here)
If you're a smug 360 owner and don't give a fsck about the PC then remember the fate of the original Xbox. Sony's keeping the PS2 around forever and they'll likely do the same with the PS3, you're still gonna get new games years after the PS4 launch. MS killed the Xbox immediatly after the 360 launch. Oh, they say it's gonna be different for the 360 because they don't have to pay intel and Nvidia etc etc, which brings us back to all the crap they spout about their support for PC games.
That's why you should use gpm instead of mpg to get a linear relationship.
Here in the 21st century we use l/100km. A Ford F150 would consume about 17, a large car 10, a small one 6 and a Prius 4. That would achieve what you want don't you think?
Lets propose we could actually build such a network, it would most likely be a hub and spoke arrangement.
Yeah, thank god noone in the airline industry ever heard of the term "hub and spoke". Can you imagine, hours of layovers or racing from one end of a mega terminal to the other because you have to get a "connecting flight". Not to mention the endless possibilities for the airline to lose your luggage.
Thankfully, all that remains firmly in the realm of fantasy.
Gnome 2.0 was just as unusable. They just pretended is was for philosophical reasons.
OSX 10.0 was crap, hell even Microsoft needed 3 years after Vista (with some major architecture changes).
It just takes too much time the achieve feature/stability/usability parity with the old system no matter how needed those major under-the-hood changes were.
So sorry, Gnome will take the same path as everyone else and sites will rush to declare 3.0 "A Major Disappointment". What you can hope for, though, is that distros won't be so braindead to drop Gnome 2 immediately after the 3.0 release.
Honestly, there was a time when distributions were concerned about providing a usable user experience instead of just grabbing all the latest stuff, add their configuration tools and ship that crap. See PulseAudio, great idea, terrible execution on every single fucking distro I've tried.
From what we know atm and in the cases I'm thinking of in general, it's more like the speedometer crapped out and the cruise control disengaged. Stuff that's serious but shouldn't be life threatening. And it's not happening to you but to a highly trained bus driver.
This case with being in a thunderstorm at night is definitely one of the worse situations but its nevertheless one (assuming there weren't other complications) a pilot should be able to handle.
In the Air New Zealand (some airline from there at least, it was a test flight because they were giving the plane back after the lease was up) crash last year the problem was a stall during landing. How can a fly-by-wire plane stall, why didn't the software prevent it? Well, the stall prevention switches off when the the landing gear is deployed. That's because the original idea was that it should just protect the plane while it's cruising on autopilot. During the final approach the plane would trust the superior judgement of Captain Human and give him as much control as possible.
In this case the judgement of Captain Human was to try a borderline stall (test flight, remember?) during the final approach instead of at high altitude because Captain Computer would save him, right?
Now I don't expect pilots to be perfect and everyone has lapses of judgment and if you're unlucky they have catastrophic consequence. I just think that either pilots should train more often on manual and in simulators to be both able and confident enough to override the computer if they think something's fishy. (another disclaimer: a lot are. I never said that all pilots were idiots, just that the average quality is deteriorating) Or we should build planes that fly themselves all the time and put a computer expert instead of a flight expert into the cockpit.
Who says they should be able to program assembler? It was an analogy. Too many pilots nowadays have real trouble flying a plane when the autopilot craps out (which tends to be in rather unfavorable conditions).
It's like with users and computers. Instead of teaching people how a computer works and how you interact with one, they learn the exact sequence of steps they have to follow to make something happen.
That works fine when everything's okay, when not, they click yes to "do you want to format your hard drive" because they always click yes on those little window with buttons thingies. Then they call IT who has to get the backups. Oh wait, that's where flying a commercial airliner is unlike a PEBKAC.
Airlines aren't interested in the best pilots money can buy. They want the cheapest pilots that are allowed to fly.
Project Natal is useless and the way everyone's going gaga over it is ridiculous.
It's in no way precise enough for precision input (just look at the breakout demo). It's not bad but lacks that last bit that would make it useful. Add the lack of a button-containing controller (oh yes, you can just use gestures...well, the demo of the UI and the paint stuff shows why that doesn't work. You have to flail around like crazy for everything) and the fact that many people have neither the space nor the physical ability for kickboxing in their living room and you will realize that Natal Sports is gonna be like Wii Sports. Timing games with a few exaggerated gestures for the casual demographic.
I don't go gaga about celebrity appearances and imho the voice acting in the Alan Wake demo was just awful (pity, I *really* looked forward to that game). The one moment of brilliance in MS' press conference was the Modern Warfare demo. Holy shit I need that game.
OTOH Sony's blinkendildo could actually be useful if their accuracy claims are true. It might enable RTSes on consoles that don't suck or table tennis where you can actually put some spin on the ball. I'm also a sucker for Last Guardian (kitty dragon ftw.) but the PSP Go didn't deliver (too ugly, too expensive).
Yes, it's great to see that at least one person realizes that it wasn't Bush and the GOP but the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy that raped the constitution and tortured their way through the last 8 years.
Keep up the good work Patriots, I'm off watching a Foxnews docu on how Clinton planned 9/11 and the financial crisis.
I fail to see how this is Griffin's fault. NASA's mission is a political decision and it was decided that we would go back to the moon and then Mars. So Griffin had to shift some of the funding from other programs to achieve said goal.
Now the page you link to complains mostly that the unmanned stuff got axed for the manned stuff while your post blames him for not allocating enough to the manned stuff.
So what the fsck do you suppose he should have done? Shit money?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm just sayin, every /. article with new ideas gets swamped by people stating absolutely obvious problems as if the people working on that project were all functionally retarded. I said the same thing just a few days ago but this article really brought the geniuses out of the woodwork like I haven't seen in some time.
They also drive with the handbrake engaged all the time (not behind firewall, anti-virus, whatever) so it's shot and use wheels that are known to overheat brakes (lots more pirated stuff).
Damn that car company does their nefarious schemes know no bounds? Oh the humanity!
Suffice to say your analogy fails harder than their brakes.
And even then it's not true that the draft doesn't talk about implementations:
5.2.1 Specifications, openness and re-use
The possibility of sharing and re-using service components based on formalised specification depends on the openness of the specifications. If the principle of openness is applied in full:
It is up to the creators of any particular specification to decide how open they want their specification to be.
Because of their positive effect on interoperability, the use of open specifications, characterised by the three features mentioned above, as well as sharing and re-use, have been promoted in many policy statements and are encouraged in the context of European Public Services delivery.
However, public administrations may decide to use less open specifications, especially in cases where open specifications do not meet the functional interoperability needs or the ones available are not mature and/or sufficiently supported by the market, or where all cooperating organisations already use or agree to use the same technologies.
Recommendation 22. Other things being equal, public administrations should prefer open specifications when establishing European Public Services.
I can certainly agree with that. There definitely are areas where open standards don't exist or aren't used enough to be helpful.
e.g. Flash for audio and video on webpages. Yes, Html 5 has the video-tag but it will be half a decade before it's supported by a similar number of browsers as have flash installed. And while flash exists at the whim of Adobe, just about any system under the sun can get it to work one way or other.
The attitude of the GP was the problem. "These are the questions we need to ask", as if they were non-obvious and revolutionary. Whenever there is a post about an invention on /. the easiest way to get "+5 (Group-Wank)" is to write that it will never work because the inventors overlooked an issue a drunk chimpanzee could come up with. Then a thread ensues where everyone congratulates themselves on saving the world yet again.
You are right, the GP's questions were interesting and should have been answered in the article (which is for laypersons) and because they weren't it's good that someone answered them here on /.
The problem is that the GP posed the question in a way that implied he knew what he was talking about and was making a statement about the invention, instead of admitting that he had no idea and was asking for clarification. jm2c
Cry me a river.
In my experience German textbooks, even translations of those US books, cost roughly a third of what you're paying.
This is mostly because for undergraduate lectures universities generally buy enough copies of a book for the library that students don't need their own. That magically increases longevity and reduces prices for said books. If Professor X requires everyone to read Expensive Expenses, LXVIth incompatible to any other Ed., written by Professor X, the students complain to the library, the library complains to the administration and the administration tells X to go and fuck himself.
I don't know what they're smoking at EA Europe but it gotta be good stuff. Too expensive in a recession, though, because after more than a year of the old price they recently reduced it to about $20.
the sarcasm would be obvious to just about everyone.
That said there are credibly scenarios for why US intervention might be necessary and justified in all three cases which just shows how premature this Nobel prize really is.
Perhaps then the retards at the Nobel Peace Prize committee will stop handing out that thing like it's the Politically Correct Popularity Contest. Thousands of people work their asses off and often risk their lives trying to stop all the conflicts around the world and Obama gets it for...what, exactly?
"Efforts to strengthen international diplomacy?" In other words for holding a bunch of grandstanding speeches. It's not like his approach to international relations is that different to Clinton or many presidents before him, even Bush's later years were pretty mellow.
France, Canada, Japan, all engulfed in civil strife, with the walking dead, condemned by bureaucratic Death Panels, roaming the streets and hordes of atheists burning churches.
Thankfully the insurance industry is ready to pay billions to upstanding Congressmen and selfless community organizers so they can spread the truth.
If that's your kind of decision making I would have fired you years ago, but with /.'s huge SWG fanboy pool your reasoning probably seems perfectly valid and sane.
There are reasons for excluding bidders but nerd rage over SWG isn't one of them.
If you're a smug 360 owner and don't give a fsck about the PC then remember the fate of the original Xbox. Sony's keeping the PS2 around forever and they'll likely do the same with the PS3, you're still gonna get new games years after the PS4 launch. MS killed the Xbox immediatly after the 360 launch. Oh, they say it's gonna be different for the 360 because they don't have to pay intel and Nvidia etc etc, which brings us back to all the crap they spout about their support for PC games.
Here in the 21st century we use l/100km. A Ford F150 would consume about 17, a large car 10, a small one 6 and a Prius 4. That would achieve what you want don't you think?
Yeah, thank god noone in the airline industry ever heard of the term "hub and spoke". Can you imagine, hours of layovers or racing from one end of a mega terminal to the other because you have to get a "connecting flight". Not to mention the endless possibilities for the airline to lose your luggage.
Thankfully, all that remains firmly in the realm of fantasy.
OSX 10.0 was crap, hell even Microsoft needed 3 years after Vista (with some major architecture changes).
It just takes too much time the achieve feature/stability/usability parity with the old system no matter how needed those major under-the-hood changes were.
So sorry, Gnome will take the same path as everyone else and sites will rush to declare 3.0 "A Major Disappointment". What you can hope for, though, is that distros won't be so braindead to drop Gnome 2 immediately after the 3.0 release.
Honestly, there was a time when distributions were concerned about providing a usable user experience instead of just grabbing all the latest stuff, add their configuration tools and ship that crap. See PulseAudio, great idea, terrible execution on every single fucking distro I've tried.
For the ultimate online discussion experience you can then ring up your wife and tell her that she's fat.
I could care less about people not saying what they mean out of sheer laziness and/or stupidity.
This case with being in a thunderstorm at night is definitely one of the worse situations but its nevertheless one (assuming there weren't other complications) a pilot should be able to handle.
In the Air New Zealand (some airline from there at least, it was a test flight because they were giving the plane back after the lease was up) crash last year the problem was a stall during landing. How can a fly-by-wire plane stall, why didn't the software prevent it? Well, the stall prevention switches off when the the landing gear is deployed. That's because the original idea was that it should just protect the plane while it's cruising on autopilot. During the final approach the plane would trust the superior judgement of Captain Human and give him as much control as possible.
In this case the judgement of Captain Human was to try a borderline stall (test flight, remember?) during the final approach instead of at high altitude because Captain Computer would save him, right?
Now I don't expect pilots to be perfect and everyone has lapses of judgment and if you're unlucky they have catastrophic consequence. I just think that either pilots should train more often on manual and in simulators to be both able and confident enough to override the computer if they think something's fishy. (another disclaimer: a lot are. I never said that all pilots were idiots, just that the average quality is deteriorating) Or we should build planes that fly themselves all the time and put a computer expert instead of a flight expert into the cockpit.
Who says they should be able to program assembler? It was an analogy. Too many pilots nowadays have real trouble flying a plane when the autopilot craps out (which tends to be in rather unfavorable conditions).
That works fine when everything's okay, when not, they click yes to "do you want to format your hard drive" because they always click yes on those little window with buttons thingies. Then they call IT who has to get the backups. Oh wait, that's where flying a commercial airliner is unlike a PEBKAC.
Airlines aren't interested in the best pilots money can buy. They want the cheapest pilots that are allowed to fly.
It's in no way precise enough for precision input (just look at the breakout demo). It's not bad but lacks that last bit that would make it useful. Add the lack of a button-containing controller (oh yes, you can just use gestures...well, the demo of the UI and the paint stuff shows why that doesn't work. You have to flail around like crazy for everything) and the fact that many people have neither the space nor the physical ability for kickboxing in their living room and you will realize that Natal Sports is gonna be like Wii Sports. Timing games with a few exaggerated gestures for the casual demographic.
I don't go gaga about celebrity appearances and imho the voice acting in the Alan Wake demo was just awful (pity, I *really* looked forward to that game). The one moment of brilliance in MS' press conference was the Modern Warfare demo. Holy shit I need that game.
OTOH Sony's blinkendildo could actually be useful if their accuracy claims are true. It might enable RTSes on consoles that don't suck or table tennis where you can actually put some spin on the ball. I'm also a sucker for Last Guardian (kitty dragon ftw.) but the PSP Go didn't deliver (too ugly, too expensive).
I couldn't care less about Nintendo.
Well, he's come to the right place.
Keep up the good work Patriots, I'm off watching a Foxnews docu on how Clinton planned 9/11 and the financial crisis.
I fail to see how this is Griffin's fault. NASA's mission is a political decision and it was decided that we would go back to the moon and then Mars. So Griffin had to shift some of the funding from other programs to achieve said goal.
Now the page you link to complains mostly that the unmanned stuff got axed for the manned stuff while your post blames him for not allocating enough to the manned stuff.
So what the fsck do you suppose he should have done? Shit money?
Well, if electric cars keep lunatics from driving for 40 hrs straight, I'm all for it.