Two American Indians stand next to a fire, fanning the flames to produce smoke signals. In the background, a mushroom cloud. One of the indians looks at the cloud and says, "Tell great yellow leader, him using mighty big words now"
(sorry, it's not available online so the description will have to do)
I think aspect ratio is a bigger issue for you than screen size. Is that 21" monitor 16:9 or 4:3
Yes, aspect ratio plays a role. The critical dimension is height. On a 4:3 21", the image is 1200 pixels/30 cm high, and the image on the monitor is the same size as a printed A4. If I went to 16:9, I'd need something like 23" to get the same height.
I want that big honkin window to be maximized but that covers everything.
True. I've found that with Outlook, the bigger the window, the better: on the 14" it's almost unusable because none of the panes is big enough to read its entire contents. A 19" should be big enough, though.
I'm not arguing against multiple monitors here. My own setup is dual, and I prefer it to having just one monitor, even if my secondary screen is only 14" (it's a laptop). I'm just saying that sometimes you're better off with one large and one smaller monitor than with two medium-size monitors.
Clearly, this is caused by the precession generated by all those people who are spinning in their graves. I say we dig 'em up and reverse their polarity.
Two 19" monitors will give you the same flexibility
Close, but not entirely. I've worked with multimonitor setups daily for several years now, I currently use a 21" plus a 14", and have come across several situations where one big monitor is better than two small ones. - writing documents. With a 21", I can view two entire pages (A4 in my case) side-by-side. On a 19" that's possible in principle, but the zoom factor's not comfortable for long periods. 21" is the minimum size for this to work. The palettes get parked on the 14". - many applications consist of one honkin' big window, instead of several medium-size ones. Outlook comes to mind. Watching a movie is better on a 30" than on two 19".
std of living = "standard of living", has nothing to do with sexually transmitted diseases. But now that you bring it up, extrapolating from AIDS I'd say that the STD rate is rather lower in Libya than in most of Africa. Assuming that the data on that page is accurate, of course. The distribution in that graph is a bit odd (notice which countries are colored green).
Ask Steve Ballmer. He's been perfecting a technique (using chairs so competitors won't catch on before MS is ready to go live). Only works for short distances, though.
From their site: Q: Can the results of the Nedap voting machine be manipulated? A: Much more difficult than with "paper" elections
The system we had in place for paper elections wasn't perfect. But it was at least nontrivial to change more than one vote at a time. These machines were introduced because they're convenient and because they eliminate counting errors, not because they were more secure than paper ballots.
After reading a bit of the PDF, I must say that the only thing I don't like is that there is no clear solution offered aside from allusions to opening up the process and technology on how all of this works so that it can be scrutinized. It is pointed out that Security by Obscurity is not the best route... ever. This is good criticism but it's never explored whether or not we could dream up a scheme that would be protected.
A valid point. To be fair, though, the report has been rushed a bit in view of the upcoming general election.
So now I can have a PDA that weighs the same as a laptop? If I'm not going to use the laptop, I'd prefer to stash it somewhere rather than lug it around. And if I've got the whole laptop with me anyway, why mess around with a tiny screen and no decent input method if I can have a 14" monitor and a full keyboard, just by opening the damn device ?
Also, the damn laptop now has an unsightly bulge, making it twice as thick so it won't fit in my laptop bag. Keep the mongrel, I'll use my current laptop plus a separate PDA instead.
Has anyone noticed the size of that dark spot? It's 3000 km wide, and all we have is a 20x20 pixel image. 1. Considering Uranus is 2x10E9 km away, it's amazing we even have this much. 2. Why don't we know more? All we have in terms of 'nearby observation' is one of the Voyagers passing by.
Define 'better off'. The US is nowhere near being overcrowded, with an average of 31 people per square km. Other countries sustain much higher densities. China has 3-4 times the average population density, and probably has less usable (for living on and/or farming) land.
Also, with stringent population controls you create new problems: a generation down the line, you'd have a pensions crisis like the one we have in NW Europe (tax base gets too small to support all the old people).
I've got a wallet, but only carry it when I need my driver's license (and associated stuff like auto club card, etc). Normally, I carry a single debit card (in a plastic sleeve), plus a credit-card sized leather pouch (i.e. just large enough to hold a few folded bills and some coins). No single point of failure (theft, loss), and minimal volume needed.
The ring would probably not be portable, but I don't think the Punkin Chinkin' judges would object to having a device sitting 1000 km away and delivering projectiles into the target area.
This has to be the first marketing droid to succeed in cramming not just one, but two extremely-desirable-for-some-unfathomable-reason letters X into a product name. Well done, Xony!
That's been due to luck (wind cleaning the solar panels more than expected), and planning/keeping limitations in mind (not driving the rovers into dark/shadowy places). For some part of those 3 years, the rovers have been stationary, because they didn't have sufficient power to move/needed to preserve what little power they had to keep essential functions running.
Slashdot Mirror
Intel
Centrino Duo
Dual-Core.
No More
?
Two American Indians stand next to a fire, fanning the flames to produce smoke signals. In the background, a mushroom cloud. One of the indians looks at the cloud and says, "Tell great yellow leader, him using mighty big words now"
(sorry, it's not available online so the description will have to do)
Should have been "Darwin Award", but that was taken already...
I think aspect ratio is a bigger issue for you than screen size. Is that 21" monitor 16:9 or 4:3
Yes, aspect ratio plays a role. The critical dimension is height. On a 4:3 21", the image is 1200 pixels/30 cm high, and the image on the monitor is the same size as a printed A4.
If I went to 16:9, I'd need something like 23" to get the same height.
I want that big honkin window to be maximized but that covers everything.
True. I've found that with Outlook, the bigger the window, the better: on the 14" it's almost unusable because none of the panes is big enough to read its entire contents. A 19" should be big enough, though.
I'm not arguing against multiple monitors here. My own setup is dual, and I prefer it to having just one monitor, even if my secondary screen is only 14" (it's a laptop). I'm just saying that sometimes you're better off with one large and one smaller monitor than with two medium-size monitors.
Clearly, this is caused by the precession generated by all those people who are spinning in their graves. I say we dig 'em up and reverse their polarity.
Two 19" monitors will give you the same flexibility
Close, but not entirely. I've worked with multimonitor setups daily for several years now, I currently use a 21" plus a 14", and have come across several situations where one big monitor is better than two small ones.
- writing documents. With a 21", I can view two entire pages (A4 in my case) side-by-side. On a 19" that's possible in principle, but the zoom factor's not comfortable for long periods. 21" is the minimum size for this to work. The palettes get parked on the 14".
- many applications consist of one honkin' big window, instead of several medium-size ones. Outlook comes to mind. Watching a movie is better on a 30" than on two 19".
std of living = "standard of living", has nothing to do with sexually transmitted diseases.
But now that you bring it up, extrapolating from AIDS I'd say that the STD rate is rather lower in Libya than in most of Africa. Assuming that the data on that page is accurate, of course. The distribution in that graph is a bit odd (notice which countries are colored green).
Ask Steve Ballmer. He's been perfecting a technique (using chairs so competitors won't catch on before MS is ready to go live). Only works for short distances, though.
Where's that -1, Eww mod when you need it?
I was going to say that, but you beat me to it. I'm feeling a little sluggish today.
That should have read "a is less than g"
Preumably, lift doesn't drop to zero during sleep, so ag.
How, exactly, is a 'powernap' any different from a generic nap? I expect Bullshit Bingo from the WSJ, not from scientists.
Duh, it's a misspelling of pwn3d.
From their site:
Q: Can the results of the Nedap voting machine be manipulated?
A: Much more difficult than with "paper" elections
The system we had in place for paper elections wasn't perfect. But it was at least nontrivial to change more than one vote at a time. These machines were introduced because they're convenient and because they eliminate counting errors, not because they were more secure than paper ballots.
After reading a bit of the PDF, I must say that the only thing I don't like is that there is no clear solution offered aside from allusions to opening up the process and technology on how all of this works so that it can be scrutinized. It is pointed out that Security by Obscurity is not the best route ... ever. This is good criticism but it's never explored whether or not we could dream up a scheme that would be protected.
A valid point. To be fair, though, the report has been rushed a bit in view of the upcoming general election.
I am more so amazed that someone was kind enough to take the time to translate it to English.
a minor point: The report was written in English; not written in Dutch and then translated. Some of the writers don't speak Dutch.
So now I can have a PDA that weighs the same as a laptop? If I'm not going to use the laptop, I'd prefer to stash it somewhere rather than lug it around.
And if I've got the whole laptop with me anyway, why mess around with a tiny screen and no decent input method if I can have a 14" monitor and a full keyboard, just by opening the damn device ?
Also, the damn laptop now has an unsightly bulge, making it twice as thick so it won't fit in my laptop bag. Keep the mongrel, I'll use my current laptop plus a separate PDA instead.
Has anyone noticed the size of that dark spot? It's 3000 km wide, and all we have is a 20x20 pixel image.
1. Considering Uranus is 2x10E9 km away, it's amazing we even have this much.
2. Why don't we know more? All we have in terms of 'nearby observation' is one of the Voyagers passing by.
Define 'better off'. The US is nowhere near being overcrowded, with an average of 31 people per square km. Other countries sustain much higher densities.
China has 3-4 times the average population density, and probably has less usable (for living on and/or farming) land.
Also, with stringent population controls you create new problems: a generation down the line, you'd have a pensions crisis like the one we have in NW Europe (tax base gets too small to support all the old people).
I've got a wallet, but only carry it when I need my driver's license (and associated stuff like auto club card, etc).
Normally, I carry a single debit card (in a plastic sleeve), plus a credit-card sized leather pouch (i.e. just large enough to hold a few folded bills and some coins). No single point of failure (theft, loss), and minimal volume needed.
The ring would probably not be portable, but I don't think the Punkin Chinkin' judges would object to having a device sitting 1000 km away and delivering projectiles into the target area.
This has to be the first marketing droid to succeed in cramming not just one, but two extremely-desirable-for-some-unfathomable-reason letters X into a product name. Well done, Xony!
Does it run on the WOPR?
That's been due to luck (wind cleaning the solar panels more than expected), and planning/keeping limitations in mind (not driving the rovers into dark/shadowy places). For some part of those 3 years, the rovers have been stationary, because they didn't have sufficient power to move/needed to preserve what little power they had to keep essential functions running.