A lot of universities offer free music subscriptions to stuff like Napster.
I think I must be the oddball because I have gone to PSU and use Napster quite a lot. Don't know what I'll do when the subscription goes away to be honest.
I'll tell you why I use it over pirating from a P2P system:
1. While I have it, it's legal. 2. While I have it, it's no more expensive than P2P. 3. Using Napster doesn't mean that when it goes away I can't go to P2P to get the same music. 4. It's a lot easier to download from Napster than it is from P2P... no worrying about firewalls blocking inbound ports, no worrying about share ratios, no worrying about "remotely queued" 5. I've seen D/L speeds of 2 MB/s. (Yes, that's BYTES, not bits.) Let's see you get that on P2P. (True, that's not reliable, but it's rare that you'll see a transfer go at under, say, 100 KB/s. At the same time, it's not uncommon to see P2P dls go at, say, 1 KB/s, especially when you take into account #4.) 6. It's a lot easier to find stuff I want on Napster, because they have all of the metadata correct. I can easily find all the tracks on an album, by an artist, etc. without having to worry if people are providing all of them. 7. I DON'T have to sort through 10 different versions of the same song that are all different somehow and try to figure out which one to get. 8. I DON'T have to worry about downloading a song and getting static, which has happened before.
Now, there are of course some drawbacks, such as it's harder to take it with you if you go on a trip, listen to in Linux, or keep after graduation (though none are impossible), and you have to deal with a really crappy interface, but there are a LOT of benefits over straight P2P.
That came up on TheDailyWTF just a few days ago actually... I forget the context, but a number of people said that they have done that by accident when they aren't paying enough attention.
Anyone else think that USB plugs are really poorly designed connectors? It seems like I always have to look at it to figure out if I'm holding it the right way up... almost every other connector I can do by touch alone.
The problem is the engineers had supported the position that "even though the primary o-ring is burning - the secondary is holding, so were are OK to fly". (Despite the fact that the spec said "there shall be no blow by, period".) It wasn't until the eleventh hour that they changed their stance and became concerned about the secondary O-ring - without being able to (in managements eyes) justify and articulate that concern.
Okay, I see what you're saying.
The cause of the failure was joint rotation - there was blowby even at temperatures that were within the nominal spec, not faulty O-rings.
This is starting to get into word play. I understand what you're saying, but I don't really agree. Even if you assume the joint rotation was the largest part of what caused the o-rings to fail, I would still say that the o-ring's failure is what caused the mission failure. Joint rotation, after all, was present in all other flights, and SRB tests, and to my knowledge there's no reason to expect that there was more extensive joint rotation on Challenger than had previously been experienced. (It's been a while since I read the Roger's report, but I don't remember anything.) Complete o-ring failure was never present previously.
There was a small number of engineers who tried to say "Don't launch" at the eleventh hour
You mean the standardly organized preflight meeting?
this represented a near complete reversal of their previous stance
The one formed before the shuttle had been cold soaking in 28 degree weather?
they could not offer a coherent case for changing their stance
Besides the clear evidence that blow-by increased at lower temperatures within the range that they were familiar, that there was one shuttle flight already that had come dangerously close to having the ring burned entirely away, and the 28 degree point being well outside the area they knew about?
Doesn't hurt that they have such nice ads for the MACs now.
Wait, nice? Are you talking about the recent ads with, for example, John Hodgman falling over when he "crashes"?
The recent ads have perhaps done more than anything I can think since the introduction of the iMac* of to DAMAGE my opinion of Apple. I feel like I'm watching the worse of the negative ads during a political campaign.
(It's been a while (about a month and a half) since I watched almost any TV at all, so there might be newer ones.)
*I don't mean to say that the iMac was a mistake on Apple's part; I'm actually saying that that's really when Apple started going RIGHT again.
Just FYI, once when I posted my gripes about both of those Excel things people posted a semi-fix for the multiple window thing, so I thought I'd pass it to you. There's an option somewhere (I'd tell you where but I'm using a computer in Norway and I can't read anything, though I can type åøæ directly) to turn the UI into a standard MDI application. This will make it so that it will display only one window in the taskbar. It's not ideal, and isn't consistent with Word, but it at least doesn't behave like a complete oddity and affords the proper use.
(Also, pressing Ctrl-C twice brings up the clipboard sidebar, and you can access copied information even after things that usually cause you to lose the selection.)
Buffet didn't dump this cash out there 10 years ago for a reason: the money was still worth something to him. Now, he's old, the reaper is at the door, and he is fearful of how history will judge him.
Okay, there's a lot of cynicism in the world, and a lot of it is well-placed. However, I really think that yours here is largely not.
To some extent, I'm sure what you said is right. He's probably been living quite nicely over the last 10 years. At the same time, he's been planning to donate most of his fortune for a LONG time. From the article:
No, what I've always said is that my family won't receive huge amounts of my net worth. That doesn't mean they'll get nothing. My children have already received some money from me and Susie and will receive more.
I still believe in the philosophy - FORTUNE quoted me saying this 20 years ago - that a very rich person should leave his kids enough to do anything but not enough to do nothing.
So he's not suddenly thinking "oh, jeez, I've been a real jackass" and deciding to donate his money; it's been on the table for a couple decades. I would be very surprised if he hasn't had a will that left his money to charity during that time.
So the first half of what you said may be true, and the money is worth something, but at the same time the appearance of the reaper isn't changing his attitude, because his attitude doesn't appear to be changing.
At least MS business practices haven't caused any deaths and required the national guard to be called up.* Or have caused who knows how many thousands of people to have to work in unsafe conditions. When that takes place at MS, you can put them on the same level.
(And yes, I know the Homestead strike took place when Carnegie wasn't directly involved, but I think my point still stands.)
* You might be able to find a place where a software bug has caused a death, but that's not the same thing.
If the NAS saves $8/month in electricity at the wall, that will add $10-15/month savings on AC during the summer months depending on the efficiency of the AC unit.
Why do you assume A/C? I've lived in 7 places I think, and only one (an apt. I had for under 3 mths) had A/C. I don't think I'm alone. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if the percentage of people with A/C, even among/. posters, was under half.
See, I've heard this before, and I've forgotten. I was just thinking of the cable routers I've seen where you can set your MAC address, which probably store it in flash memory.
(I realize that flashing stuff and flash memory are essentially unrelated.)
MS has quite a few projects that are out under their own open source license. I forget what it's called, and I think it's incompatible with the GPL, but MS does go OSS when it thinks it will benefit them (which isn't very often).
280 million americans wouldn't have any weapons to use against the army even if you could have any weapon you wanted. What could you set up that would defend against a cruise missile?
I guess the problem there is that you need a supermajority to get an amendment made in the first place.
You need a lot more than a supermajority...
You need a supermajority of both houses of Congress to even send it out to the states. After that, it needs to be ratified by, uh, a super-duper majority of the states (3/4, which is greater than the 2/3 supermajority).
Oh really? Which of the following powers allows the FCC to regulate my washing machine's communication?
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post offices and post roads;
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;
To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings
Because that's all the congress (theoretically) has power to do...
Each Mac Address is traceable to a specific manufacturer, who can then determine the lot number your card from. Once they determine the lot number, they can determine who they sold that lot to... continuing on, they contact the laptop manufacturer... record of purchase... your ass in a sling.
Which is COMPLETELY foolproof, especially with all the networking equipment out there that lets you flash your MAC address.
I think that if they want to be known as something other than the one who sued prominent Linux users they should DROP THEIR CLAIMS AGAINST LINUX! If you want to be known as something other than the company that sued prominent users of Linux, it might be helpful to not sue them. That way they can be known as something other than the company that sued prominent users of Linux.
In many projects they ARE using managed code. Parts of Office are written in managed code, as are I believe parts of the shell itself (I can check that if you'd like). Also, you'll see he says that parts of IE8 will be in managed code.
Most of the rights in the bill of rights have been incorporated to restict the states too, via the 14th amendment. If you have a problem with that, take it up with whatever late 19th century or early 20th century court made that decision, not the federal system now.
To be fair, "how come" is how he describes it on his website, and he even uses the email address howcome@opera.com. That wasn't an editorial or something by the editors.
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of universities offer free music subscriptions to stuff like Napster.
I think I must be the oddball because I have gone to PSU and use Napster quite a lot. Don't know what I'll do when the subscription goes away to be honest.
I'll tell you why I use it over pirating from a P2P system:
1. While I have it, it's legal.
2. While I have it, it's no more expensive than P2P.
3. Using Napster doesn't mean that when it goes away I can't go to P2P to get the same music.
4. It's a lot easier to download from Napster than it is from P2P... no worrying about firewalls blocking inbound ports, no worrying about share ratios, no worrying about "remotely queued"
5. I've seen D/L speeds of 2 MB/s. (Yes, that's BYTES, not bits.) Let's see you get that on P2P. (True, that's not reliable, but it's rare that you'll see a transfer go at under, say, 100 KB/s. At the same time, it's not uncommon to see P2P dls go at, say, 1 KB/s, especially when you take into account #4.)
6. It's a lot easier to find stuff I want on Napster, because they have all of the metadata correct. I can easily find all the tracks on an album, by an artist, etc. without having to worry if people are providing all of them.
7. I DON'T have to sort through 10 different versions of the same song that are all different somehow and try to figure out which one to get.
8. I DON'T have to worry about downloading a song and getting static, which has happened before.
Now, there are of course some drawbacks, such as it's harder to take it with you if you go on a trip, listen to in Linux, or keep after graduation (though none are impossible), and you have to deal with a really crappy interface, but there are a LOT of benefits over straight P2P.
That came up on TheDailyWTF just a few days ago actually... I forget the context, but a number of people said that they have done that by accident when they aren't paying enough attention.
Anyone else think that USB plugs are really poorly designed connectors? It seems like I always have to look at it to figure out if I'm holding it the right way up... almost every other connector I can do by touch alone.
Keep in mind re. your last point that Apollo 12 was struck by lightning on liftoff.
Stop with that freaking urban legend!
The space pen was developed wholely without prompting and without money from NASA, by the Fisher Pen company.
The problem is the engineers had supported the position that "even though the primary o-ring is burning - the secondary is holding, so were are OK to fly". (Despite the fact that the spec said "there shall be no blow by, period".) It wasn't until the eleventh hour that they changed their stance and became concerned about the secondary O-ring - without being able to (in managements eyes) justify and articulate that concern.
Okay, I see what you're saying.
The cause of the failure was joint rotation - there was blowby even at temperatures that were within the nominal spec, not faulty O-rings.
This is starting to get into word play. I understand what you're saying, but I don't really agree. Even if you assume the joint rotation was the largest part of what caused the o-rings to fail, I would still say that the o-ring's failure is what caused the mission failure. Joint rotation, after all, was present in all other flights, and SRB tests, and to my knowledge there's no reason to expect that there was more extensive joint rotation on Challenger than had previously been experienced. (It's been a while since I read the Roger's report, but I don't remember anything.) Complete o-ring failure was never present previously.
There was a small number of engineers who tried to say "Don't launch" at the eleventh hour
You mean the standardly organized preflight meeting?
this represented a near complete reversal of their previous stance
The one formed before the shuttle had been cold soaking in 28 degree weather?
they could not offer a coherent case for changing their stance
Besides the clear evidence that blow-by increased at lower temperatures within the range that they were familiar, that there was one shuttle flight already that had come dangerously close to having the ring burned entirely away, and the 28 degree point being well outside the area they knew about?
Doesn't hurt that they have such nice ads for the MACs now.
Wait, nice? Are you talking about the recent ads with, for example, John Hodgman falling over when he "crashes"?
The recent ads have perhaps done more than anything I can think since the introduction of the iMac* of to DAMAGE my opinion of Apple. I feel like I'm watching the worse of the negative ads during a political campaign.
(It's been a while (about a month and a half) since I watched almost any TV at all, so there might be newer ones.)
*I don't mean to say that the iMac was a mistake on Apple's part; I'm actually saying that that's really when Apple started going RIGHT again.
There's a computer lab in my local public library. It was paid for by the Gates Foundation.
Not "they donated Windows". They donated MACHINES.
Um, there's a big difference between giving the money to charities his children run, and giving his children money to spend.
The CEO of a company can't go out and buy a new house with the company's money.
Just FYI, once when I posted my gripes about both of those Excel things people posted a semi-fix for the multiple window thing, so I thought I'd pass it to you. There's an option somewhere (I'd tell you where but I'm using a computer in Norway and I can't read anything, though I can type åøæ directly) to turn the UI into a standard MDI application. This will make it so that it will display only one window in the taskbar. It's not ideal, and isn't consistent with Word, but it at least doesn't behave like a complete oddity and affords the proper use.
(Also, pressing Ctrl-C twice brings up the clipboard sidebar, and you can access copied information even after things that usually cause you to lose the selection.)
Buffet didn't dump this cash out there 10 years ago for a reason: the money was still worth something to him. Now, he's old, the reaper is at the door, and he is fearful of how history will judge him.
Okay, there's a lot of cynicism in the world, and a lot of it is well-placed. However, I really think that yours here is largely not.
To some extent, I'm sure what you said is right. He's probably been living quite nicely over the last 10 years. At the same time, he's been planning to donate most of his fortune for a LONG time. From the article:
No, what I've always said is that my family won't receive huge amounts of my net worth. That doesn't mean they'll get nothing. My children have already received some money from me and Susie and will receive more.
I still believe in the philosophy - FORTUNE quoted me saying this 20 years ago - that a very rich person should leave his kids enough to do anything but not enough to do nothing.
So he's not suddenly thinking "oh, jeez, I've been a real jackass" and deciding to donate his money; it's been on the table for a couple decades. I would be very surprised if he hasn't had a will that left his money to charity during that time.
So the first half of what you said may be true, and the money is worth something, but at the same time the appearance of the reaper isn't changing his attitude, because his attitude doesn't appear to be changing.
At least MS business practices haven't caused any deaths and required the national guard to be called up.* Or have caused who knows how many thousands of people to have to work in unsafe conditions. When that takes place at MS, you can put them on the same level.
(And yes, I know the Homestead strike took place when Carnegie wasn't directly involved, but I think my point still stands.)
* You might be able to find a place where a software bug has caused a death, but that's not the same thing.
The odds of surviving an asteroid field are 3720 to 1.
A sentence you'll never see on an Internet discussion board: "You know what? You're right."
I think that statement is full of crap.
If the NAS saves $8/month in electricity at the wall, that will add $10-15/month savings on AC during the summer months depending on the efficiency of the AC unit.
/. posters, was under half.
Why do you assume A/C? I've lived in 7 places I think, and only one (an apt. I had for under 3 mths) had A/C. I don't think I'm alone. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if the percentage of people with A/C, even among
See, I've heard this before, and I've forgotten. I was just thinking of the cable routers I've seen where you can set your MAC address, which probably store it in flash memory.
(I realize that flashing stuff and flash memory are essentially unrelated.)
MS has quite a few projects that are out under their own open source license. I forget what it's called, and I think it's incompatible with the GPL, but MS does go OSS when it thinks it will benefit them (which isn't very often).
280 million americans wouldn't have any weapons to use against the army even if you could have any weapon you wanted. What could you set up that would defend against a cruise missile?
I guess the problem there is that you need a supermajority to get an amendment made in the first place.
You need a lot more than a supermajority...
You need a supermajority of both houses of Congress to even send it out to the states. After that, it needs to be ratified by, uh, a super-duper majority of the states (3/4, which is greater than the 2/3 supermajority).
Because that's all the congress (theoretically) has power to do...
Each Mac Address is traceable to a specific manufacturer, who can then determine the lot number your card from. Once they determine the lot number, they can determine who they sold that lot to ... continuing on, they contact the laptop manufacturer ... record of purchase ... your ass in a sling.
Which is COMPLETELY foolproof, especially with all the networking equipment out there that lets you flash your MAC address.
Oh wait...
I think that if they want to be known as something other than the one who sued prominent Linux users they should DROP THEIR CLAIMS AGAINST LINUX! If you want to be known as something other than the company that sued prominent users of Linux, it might be helpful to not sue them. That way they can be known as something other than the company that sued prominent users of Linux.
In many projects they ARE using managed code. Parts of Office are written in managed code, as are I believe parts of the shell itself (I can check that if you'd like). Also, you'll see he says that parts of IE8 will be in managed code.
Most of the rights in the bill of rights have been incorporated to restict the states too, via the 14th amendment. If you have a problem with that, take it up with whatever late 19th century or early 20th century court made that decision, not the federal system now.
To be fair, "how come" is how he describes it on his website, and he even uses the email address howcome@opera.com. That wasn't an editorial or something by the editors.