Have any of ya'll heard of the Dvorak keyboard? The one that supposedly is better than the QWERTY standard layout? Well, it's creator, Dr. August Dvorak, has also created 2 other layouts, the Dvorak Right hand and Dvorak left hand designs. They are designed to allow typing at over 50 WPM with just a single hand.
Sure, this little gadget might be more stylish, however, you only use one finger to "type", instead of 4. I doubt that you'll be able to type documents using a cellular phone, same for this. For medical use, I would definately recommend the Dvorak right hand or left hand models, for people who have only one functional hand.
Here's a link for more information on the 3 Dvorak type keyboards.
Yeah, I have a friend who still writes in cursive, and he always writes in PENCIL. His handwriting, at least to me, is unreadable, and I sometimes even have to e-mail him asking what he wrote.
Why don't people just save time and just type it the first time around?
actually, the SAT didn't really stipulate that you have to copy that statement entirely in cursive. It just said "do not print". That means that you could have used a cursive-like writing like you did.
I know a few people who were never taught cursive, and just could not do it, but their tests were scored and valid.
Sometimes, this becomes a game of lawyers vs. justice. Sure, they may have an expierenced lawyer, but why does it matter when most of their case is built on FUD and totally irrelevant, skewed details?
Where is the evidence? 80 lines of code is hardly evidence. Where are the "hundreds of lines" of code that they were mentioning earlier? Finally, how do we know that the evidence was or was not planted there? They could have easily downloaded a Linux kernel, and just copy/pasted the code into it, so that it looks like evidence in the eyes of unskilled people. They probably knew that their NDP would deter most expierenced Linux affiliated developers, keeping their "evidence" safe from expierenced eyes.
The code alone is not proof, and it dosen't matter what lawyer they use. This is like me visiting my neighbors house, planting something of mine inside, and claiming that they stole it. Even the most expierenced lawyers wouden't be able to convince reasonable people that my neighbor indeed stole that item from me.
Earlier, didn't I hear someone from SCO claiming that they had "Hundreds of lines" of code to show? I'm not a mathematician, but it seems to me that 80 100.
Apple themselves have made public demonstrations trying to debunk the myth that clock speed is processing power. Being known for sticking to "slower" processors, it seems that Apple is finally starting to cave into the demands of the consumers.
I have tried to use the Distributed.net client on an AMD Athlon 1600 XP running Linux 2.4.10 and a G4 864 Mhz using Mac OS X 10.2. It seems that in terms of raw processing power, the G4 was actually more powerful, at over 10,260,280 nodes/sec, while the Athlon was only at 8,160,200 nodes/sec, and that's with no backgrounds processes running (besides the OS)
Usually, Apple couples a service with each of their products, like the iPod has the music store service, and their Mac G4/iMac/eMac computers all have the.Mac service avaliable to them. It would be unlike Apple to make a new phone without making a service for it or something. Though it would be very nice to see them try to make one, it would look schweet indeed.
I doubt, however, that OSX can possibly be scaled down to the cell phone level, as it appears unlikely due to the heavy system requirements, and lack of flexability, versus Linux, which can be scaled up or down easily.
Moreover, I think that a catchier name would be iTalk, or iDial (as opposed to iPhone, which sounds a bit cliched), something that describes an attribute of the product instead of the product itself. If they just blantently named everything by it's name, then you'd end up with products like iComputer or iAAC/MP3player.
Remember that that was back in the 70's. While in the United States, structures built back many decades ago can be labeled as reliable due to the steadily ongoing progress, in China, it is much different, as this "progress" is still rapidly trying to catch up with the Western World.
Since most technological advances in architecture were made in the 70's and 80's in China, many older structures were hopelessly flawed. That is why in most modern cities, there aren't a lot of older structures (save for historial sites) as they have mostly been torn down and rebuilt.
The same could go for dams. Many of the dams that have failed were built a long time ago, when financing was very short, planning was inadequte, and much corner cutting had to be made. Just because in the past, some older dams have collapsed dosen't necesarily mean that newer dams like the Three Gorges will result in disaster necessarily.
It's just a heatsink and fan?
on
PeltierBeer
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
When I first saw this, I thought it was some sort of super-innovative solid-state cooling device that keeps beer cold, however, then I found out that it was just a heatsink and fan...
Sure, the solution that I mentioned would be more than just "spare parts lying around" but that would be innovation. Someone tell me when they make one of those.
But dosen't that STILL slow most people down? Does it really make sense to move your hands such a long distance for seemingly no reason?
Even if it dosen't slow you down that much, it still is an outdated design. For the sake of crying out loud, it was made for old typewriters made back in the late 19th century! Typewriters made even in the early 20th didn't have this problem! So, here we are, in the 21st century, and we STILL use this retarted design that was designed to solve a problem that stopped existing almost a century ago.
QWERTY is more error prone, as your fingers have to travel a much longer distance, and therefore, the chance of making an error is increased. It may be true that it does not NECESSARILY slow you down, but you have to move your fingers faster in order to compensate for that. This, arguably, causes much repetive movement injuries, like CTS.
Is it just a coincedence that on QWERTY, only 31% of all typing is done on the home row, and that on Dvorak, 70% of all typing is done on the home row? Is it also merely a coincedence that there are MANY single handed words on the QWERTY design (try these: exacerbate, exaggerated, desegregated, sweetbread... just to name a few), while the longest one handed word on the Dvorak layout is "papaya"?
Sure, it was necessary at the time, but why is it necessary now? It's causing more harm than good. Even Sholes, the creator of the keyboard, decided in his lifetime that something had to be done about this monster of a layout, but he was too late... it was already too firmly established to change.
Your "debunking" of an "urban legend" is an urban legend in itself.
Slanderous statements made by either individuals or companies could be considered libelous, deframatory of character or image. IANAL, but I think that IBM might be able to countersue, claiming that the unfounded statement made by SCO tarnished their image.
Sure, Motif wasn't really good... and making it commercial software was insane. However, the modern UNIX desktops like KDE and Gnome work great and making apps for them using QT or GTK are actually easier(IMO) than MFC.
A lot of peole just don't like to distinguish between "Ancient UNIX" and "Modern UNIX-like systems"
Well, that would require postage. A better way is to put your address as the destination, and the ISS as the sender, but don't put postage on it. Seeing as how the letter had no postage, the post office would send it "back to the sender"
I'm not sure if that works anymore, but I remember reading about how someone did this and they succeeded in mailing something, without postage, to one of their friends in the same city.
Yes, I was just about to mention this, however, I must point out that it is extremely difficult to use and compile. I tried compiling it with EVERY major version of X from 4.0.x to 4.3.x and NONE of them compile right with ANY version of DirectFB (rc1 to rc5). I'm sure I'm patching it right(after looking at its extremely crpytic instructions) and I'm sure that I have adequate module dependencies (It's a compiler error, not a linker, and the readme says nothing about dependicies). It just dosen't compile.
I would gladly change my POV on this if the help was a bit more helpful. I think the author has done a fine job to provide translucency, however, I really do hope that he can provide adequate documentation, or perhaps make it modular so people can package binaries for it.
A common mistake people make is that they call it "Linux version x.x", however, this isn't accruate. The Linux(kernel) that it uses is 2.4, and the version number is what the distributor gives to it. Unlike Microsoft, there are many distributors of Linux, all of them using their own numbering schemes, so it's wrong to call it Linux 9.0, as it is called Mandrake Linux 9.0
Glad you like it though.
Mandrake may be "user friendly" but I think that compared to SuSE 8.0, it is much less robust in features and hardware support. SuSE has much better support for most of the hardware that I use than Mandrake 9.0, which actually took me a while to configure my ISA sound card.
I hope that this distribution will change that.
Nah, that's very insightful, but in China, all the cell phones are in a single "area code" followed by a 8 digit number. It's impossible to tie a 900 number to a cell phone.
Yeah, that would be actually be a very viable solution, as in China, cell phone numbers are literally sold cheaply by the dozens by people sitting on the street, holding pieces of paper with the numbers that they offer on them.
Usually, no names are tied with these phone numbers, and that just makes it much easier for people to change them, effectively rendering this inscentive kinda useless.
I have an old Mac iBook G3 (blueberry, the old kind that had those fruity colors) that has a 300 mhz processor and only 64 MB of memory, as well as a miserably small 3 gig HD. I installed Mac OS X, and it was so incredibly slow that it's hard to comprehend.
I could open up netscape, terminal, and text editor at the same time, fix a drink, drink it down slowly, then go back to the machine and it would still be loading.
Apparently intolerant of this behavior, and lacking the money to purchase a new iBook and also intolerant with the uselessness of OS9, I decided to install Linux. First Mandrake, which was terribly slow, then Debian, which I failed at installing due to the fact it was a notebook, and then Yellow Dog. Out of all three of them, only YLD linux showed usable speed.
In my point of view, it is very useful for making use of older machines, however, we musn't forget the merits that Macs do have, and there needs to be an alternative to the propietary platform that Apple gives out, otherwise Macs can't really be regarded as flexable as ix86 machines.
As much as I am ashamed to bring this up, Micro$oft themselves have made a flavor of UNIX from way before SCO even entered the UNIX field. It's Xenix, and it's designed to use the x86 platform because there was great promise in it, even in the 80's.
I'm suprised that nobody has mentioned this (or at least nobody that I've seen) but the linked article on CNN indicates that 'Hacker accesses 5.6 million credit cards' while the article title is 2.2 million.
You're right. The system is senseless. Why 7 digits? It seems quite arbitrary to me. In China, in the larger provinces, the phone numbers are 8 digits long.
It would be much better to have some area codes have more than 7 digits when they get filled up. It's much easier that way than putting 4 more in there, making the total to 11. It could be where existing 7 digit numbers would have like a '1' or a '2' tacked on to the beginning of the number, and they would have like 7 or 8 times the numbers they had before, just by introducing 8 digit numbers.
Sure, convention is good, but sometimes, convention is outgrown. If this continues, then a single city may have up to 3 or 4 area codes.
Slashdot Mirror
Smithers: But sir....
Burns (pointing a gun at Smithers): I said, hop in....
Sure, this little gadget might be more stylish, however, you only use one finger to "type", instead of 4. I doubt that you'll be able to type documents using a cellular phone, same for this. For medical use, I would definately recommend the Dvorak right hand or left hand models, for people who have only one functional hand. Here's a link for more information on the 3 Dvorak type keyboards.
Yeah, I have a friend who still writes in cursive, and he always writes in PENCIL. His handwriting, at least to me, is unreadable, and I sometimes even have to e-mail him asking what he wrote. Why don't people just save time and just type it the first time around?
actually, the SAT didn't really stipulate that you have to copy that statement entirely in cursive. It just said "do not print". That means that you could have used a cursive-like writing like you did.
I know a few people who were never taught cursive, and just could not do it, but their tests were scored and valid.
On the UNIX version, all you have to do is
:P
1. CLICK SOLVE
that's 1 click. I did better than you
Sometimes, this becomes a game of lawyers vs. justice. Sure, they may have an expierenced lawyer, but why does it matter when most of their case is built on FUD and totally irrelevant, skewed details?
Where is the evidence? 80 lines of code is hardly evidence. Where are the "hundreds of lines" of code that they were mentioning earlier? Finally, how do we know that the evidence was or was not planted there? They could have easily downloaded a Linux kernel, and just copy/pasted the code into it, so that it looks like evidence in the eyes of unskilled people. They probably knew that their NDP would deter most expierenced Linux affiliated developers, keeping their "evidence" safe from expierenced eyes.
The code alone is not proof, and it dosen't matter what lawyer they use. This is like me visiting my neighbors house, planting something of mine inside, and claiming that they stole it. Even the most expierenced lawyers wouden't be able to convince reasonable people that my neighbor indeed stole that item from me.
Earlier, didn't I hear someone from SCO claiming that they had "Hundreds of lines" of code to show? I'm not a mathematician, but it seems to me that 80 100.
Apple themselves have made public demonstrations trying to debunk the myth that clock speed is processing power. Being known for sticking to "slower" processors, it seems that Apple is finally starting to cave into the demands of the consumers.
I have tried to use the Distributed.net client on an AMD Athlon 1600 XP running Linux 2.4.10 and a G4 864 Mhz using Mac OS X 10.2. It seems that in terms of raw processing power, the G4 was actually more powerful, at over 10,260,280 nodes/sec, while the Athlon was only at 8,160,200 nodes/sec, and that's with no backgrounds processes running (besides the OS)
I doubt, however, that OSX can possibly be scaled down to the cell phone level, as it appears unlikely due to the heavy system requirements, and lack of flexability, versus Linux, which can be scaled up or down easily.
Moreover, I think that a catchier name would be iTalk, or iDial (as opposed to iPhone, which sounds a bit cliched), something that describes an attribute of the product instead of the product itself. If they just blantently named everything by it's name, then you'd end up with products like iComputer or iAAC/MP3player.
Since most technological advances in architecture were made in the 70's and 80's in China, many older structures were hopelessly flawed. That is why in most modern cities, there aren't a lot of older structures (save for historial sites) as they have mostly been torn down and rebuilt.
The same could go for dams. Many of the dams that have failed were built a long time ago, when financing was very short, planning was inadequte, and much corner cutting had to be made. Just because in the past, some older dams have collapsed dosen't necesarily mean that newer dams like the Three Gorges will result in disaster necessarily.
When I first saw this, I thought it was some sort of super-innovative solid-state cooling device that keeps beer cold, however, then I found out that it was just a heatsink and fan...
Sure, the solution that I mentioned would be more than just "spare parts lying around" but that would be innovation. Someone tell me when they make one of those.
But dosen't that STILL slow most people down? Does it really make sense to move your hands such a long distance for seemingly no reason?
Even if it dosen't slow you down that much, it still is an outdated design. For the sake of crying out loud, it was made for old typewriters made back in the late 19th century! Typewriters made even in the early 20th didn't have this problem! So, here we are, in the 21st century, and we STILL use this retarted design that was designed to solve a problem that stopped existing almost a century ago.
QWERTY is more error prone, as your fingers have to travel a much longer distance, and therefore, the chance of making an error is increased. It may be true that it does not NECESSARILY slow you down, but you have to move your fingers faster in order to compensate for that. This, arguably, causes much repetive movement injuries, like CTS.
Is it just a coincedence that on QWERTY, only 31% of all typing is done on the home row, and that on Dvorak, 70% of all typing is done on the home row? Is it also merely a coincedence that there are MANY single handed words on the QWERTY design (try these: exacerbate, exaggerated, desegregated, sweetbread... just to name a few), while the longest one handed word on the Dvorak layout is "papaya"?
Sure, it was necessary at the time, but why is it necessary now? It's causing more harm than good. Even Sholes, the creator of the keyboard, decided in his lifetime that something had to be done about this monster of a layout, but he was too late... it was already too firmly established to change.
Your "debunking" of an "urban legend" is an urban legend in itself.
Slanderous statements made by either individuals or companies could be considered libelous, deframatory of character or image. IANAL, but I think that IBM might be able to countersue, claiming that the unfounded statement made by SCO tarnished their image.
A lot of peole just don't like to distinguish between "Ancient UNIX" and "Modern UNIX-like systems"
I'm not sure if that works anymore, but I remember reading about how someone did this and they succeeded in mailing something, without postage, to one of their friends in the same city.
I would gladly change my POV on this if the help was a bit more helpful. I think the author has done a fine job to provide translucency, however, I really do hope that he can provide adequate documentation, or perhaps make it modular so people can package binaries for it.
A common mistake people make is that they call it "Linux version x.x", however, this isn't accruate. The Linux(kernel) that it uses is 2.4, and the version number is what the distributor gives to it. Unlike Microsoft, there are many distributors of Linux, all of them using their own numbering schemes, so it's wrong to call it Linux 9.0, as it is called Mandrake Linux 9.0 Glad you like it though.
Mandrake may be "user friendly" but I think that compared to SuSE 8.0, it is much less robust in features and hardware support. SuSE has much better support for most of the hardware that I use than Mandrake 9.0, which actually took me a while to configure my ISA sound card. I hope that this distribution will change that.
Nah, that's very insightful, but in China, all the cell phones are in a single "area code" followed by a 8 digit number. It's impossible to tie a 900 number to a cell phone.
Yeah, that would be actually be a very viable solution, as in China, cell phone numbers are literally sold cheaply by the dozens by people sitting on the street, holding pieces of paper with the numbers that they offer on them.
Usually, no names are tied with these phone numbers, and that just makes it much easier for people to change them, effectively rendering this inscentive kinda useless.
I have an old Mac iBook G3 (blueberry, the old kind that had those fruity colors) that has a 300 mhz processor and only 64 MB of memory, as well as a miserably small 3 gig HD. I installed Mac OS X, and it was so incredibly slow that it's hard to comprehend.
I could open up netscape, terminal, and text editor at the same time, fix a drink, drink it down slowly, then go back to the machine and it would still be loading.
Apparently intolerant of this behavior, and lacking the money to purchase a new iBook and also intolerant with the uselessness of OS9, I decided to install Linux. First Mandrake, which was terribly slow, then Debian, which I failed at installing due to the fact it was a notebook, and then Yellow Dog. Out of all three of them, only YLD linux showed usable speed.
In my point of view, it is very useful for making use of older machines, however, we musn't forget the merits that Macs do have, and there needs to be an alternative to the propietary platform that Apple gives out, otherwise Macs can't really be regarded as flexable as ix86 machines.
Yeah, what's my name?
As much as I am ashamed to bring this up, Micro$oft themselves have made a flavor of UNIX from way before SCO even entered the UNIX field. It's Xenix, and it's designed to use the x86 platform because there was great promise in it, even in the 80's.
I'm suprised that nobody has mentioned this (or at least nobody that I've seen) but the linked article on CNN indicates that 'Hacker accesses 5.6 million credit cards' while the article title is 2.2 million.
It would be much better to have some area codes have more than 7 digits when they get filled up. It's much easier that way than putting 4 more in there, making the total to 11. It could be where existing 7 digit numbers would have like a '1' or a '2' tacked on to the beginning of the number, and they would have like 7 or 8 times the numbers they had before, just by introducing 8 digit numbers.
Sure, convention is good, but sometimes, convention is outgrown. If this continues, then a single city may have up to 3 or 4 area codes.