They're cheaper than they used to be. And some people like quieter cars that don't emit excessive heat and belch poisonous gases, the more you get used to them, the more other cars sound like harleys. Some people like harleys, I find them excessively noisy.
People have been driving combustion automobiles since the industrial age. It takes time for new technologies to move through adoption stages, not to mention time for manufacturing costs and yields to improve.
They adapted fine to most everything else.
Power steering, power brakes, steer by wire, brake by wire, cd player, seat warmer, rear defrost, powered side mirrors, keyless entry, keyless start, alarm system, electronic fuel injector, unleaded gas, powered seats, ICE's with computer chips, satellite radio, dvd player, radar detector, cruise control, remote start, airbags, pressure sensors for the tires, halogen lights, powered moon-roof, shoulder belts, ABS, rear video camera, radar assisted parking, radar warning for when you are about to hit the car in front of you, automatic transmission, lojack, etc. I remember when most of these didn't exist. I remember having to warm up the car because it had a carburetor, thank goodness for EFI. Some of these features make a big difference in driving a car, try driving without power steering, or even parking a car without it. Hybrid cars are a seamless change from regular cars, took me seconds to adapt to my Prius. Obviously a non-hybrid EV is a much bigger jump, but if someone doesn't like changes in cars, they're screwed, because cars have been changing every couple of years and if gas prices go high enough I'm guessing less people will stay loyal to ICEs.
This is not a fair comparison, the iPhone is twice the price.
You've got a Quad-Core ARM running at twice their Ghz and you barely post benchmarks ahead of a Dual-Core A7, you know you're stupid for buying one.
So, what you are saying is that the Nexus 5 is faster, but it needed twice as many higher clock speed processors, which is bad because it costs half as much or is it because it has a higher resolution display. And now that the iPhone doesn't have the highest resolution display, that's unimportant? Buying one of the fastest phones, that has a great display, has stock Android OS, and is cheap is stupid??? I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Actually, the variety is increasing, especially in size. Some people want smaller phones, so you have phones like the mini, some people want bigger phones, so you have phablets.
My hands are big enough to comfortably hold an LG G2(feels similar in width to a Droid RAZR MAXX), and still flick any part of the screen that I want. There's plenty of room in my pants pocket, so that's not an issue. I used to carry a Palm Pilot with a Rhino case in my pocket, that was a lot bigger, this phone is very slim in comparison, even with a case. I'm far sighted, and even though I have reading glasses, it's a real pain trying to read tiny fonts on a small display. The display on this phone is incredible! It reminds me of the Samsung S4, which had the first display to impress me in years. The quad-core power on this phone is fantastic. Shredder Chess and Stockfish must be playing in the 2400+ range now.
I'm pretty sure I'm not the only person who likes a display that's easy on the eyes, and if it still fits in your pocket and your hand, it's not too big.
That was one of the worst parts! They already stopped and were in the same orbit. When he lets go he should have just hovered there. Afterwards he should realize how silly he was and reclip and gently tug on the tether so he could head back.
Obviously, Hollywood wanted to use a cliche "you need to let me go or we'll both die!", except there was no cliff.
There were a lot of bad physics in the movie, more bad than good. I saw "Machete Kills" the night before, and that was more realistic. I'm betting that "Machete Kills again..In Space" will be more realistic as well.
My first DSLR was a Canon 5D3. it isn't top of the line, but it was a bit pricey, and I've had a blast with it. I've been learning so much on how photography works and what can be done with it (and videography too). I put it on manual about and 2nd day I had it and have been learning since then how to shoot and get the effects "I" want.
You bought a nice camera! If you haven't tried "Magic Lantern" yet, you should check it out. It takes it to another level. I Don't have a mkIII, or even mkII, I have a t2i, which can use "Magic Lantern", but if I didn't have family/kids/mortgage etc. I would have that camera! It's a very nice camera and a very nice camcorder in one package.
If you do your research and if you are willing to learn what you can do with your camera, then of course you should get a nice camera if you an afford it! You'll get the full benefit, professional or amateur. A nice camera also allows for a greater range for what you can learn. There are a lot of people who spend as much money on playing golf and are not professionals, but not as many people question the cost or time. Compared to the old days, when you needed a darkroom and had to buy film/chemicals/photographic paper/enlarger, you can buy a nice dSLR and not spend as much as back then.
That's why I switched to XFCE when GNOME 3 was released. I know what I'm doing thank you!
Lowest common denominator design will lead to a low quality production.
If that was true, then wouldn't that imply that MS Windows is a low quality product?
One might also note that the mainstream industry makes orders of magnitude more money (a measure of success) than the "bedroom produced" music and talent scene that you belong to.
By that logic, Budweiser makes the best beer and Microsoft makes the best OS?
I modded you insightful but I'd like to challenge one point of yours: what makes you believe that smoking marijuana impairs one's ability to drive? This seems to be a common assumption among non-smokers, but I can tell you from (daily) experience such is not the case. It requires the consumption of quite a bit of pot to impair one's driving -- usually this means eating it rather than smoking it -- and once a person is that high they don't want to drive. It's just too stressful (as opposed to driving drunk, where alcohol gives one 'liquid courage').
A lot of drugs affect your ability to drive, and you do not always notice the level of impairment. You don't realize how stoned you are, but the drivers giving you the finger as they drive by probably do. You probably did not realize that a lot of people smoke while driving, and if they get too stoned, it might be too late for them to safely maneuver to the breakdown lane, not that they would.
Even with alcohol, one is considered legally drunk much before they've consumed enough to actually be impaired.
You have to draw a line! Just because one person can drive after a case of beer doesn't mean we all can. You need you to make it clear that if you drink this much, don't drive. I don't care if you think you can drive, and I don't care if it turns out you can drive, don't. If driving is on the schedule, then monitor your drinking. If
you can't monitor your drinking, you have a problem.
A person shouldn't be considered impaired just because a particular chemical is in their body. They should be given basic coordination tests -- such as a field sobriety test (but something that's computerized, kind of like a video game, to eliminate bias on the part of the officer). If you can't pass a field sobriety test because you're too old, you shouldn't be able to drive. If you can't pass it because of a prescribed medication, you shouldn't be able to drive. If you can't pass a field sobriety test because you're just a naturally uncoordinated person, you shouldn't be able to drive. A person's BAC or THC level is irrelevant, what's important is their ability to control a vehicle.
There is no doubt that there are a lot of people who should not be allowed to drive at all. I agree with you on that part. I'll even agree that there are people who can drive better while being legally drunk than some people can completely sober. And I'm not just talking about people who are too old to drive, there are young people who should never be allowed behind the wheel. There should be tougher driving tests for regular cars. If less capable drivers want to drive, let them drive Smart cars or mopeds, at least they won't do as much harm. There's no reason why elderly drivers need an SUV or Cadillac.
Imagine what it would taste like if it was poop out by Super Models!!!
If someone is willing to pay for coffee beans pooped out by a funny looking rat, then imagine what they would pay for something pooped out by a Super Model, or even a mediocre model. Heck, even a double bagger would be an improvement!
On second thought, let's go back to the Super Model.
Eventually you can reduce or even eliminate more of the overhead. It used to be that writers needed publishing companies to get their books to the public. But now that is no longer true with the internet and ebooks you can sell your own books and keep all of the profit. I think that electronic media is going to be more and more popular for music and books as people see the benefits in convenience. Unlike music there's going to be the issue of providing a format as easy on the eyes as paper, but it gets better every year.
Kids going to school will no longer have to carry 50# backpacks, schools will hopefully be able to get access to ebooks that are reasonably priced and they'll last forever. More schools are getting tablets for the kids and changing to ebooks would be easier after that. They have apps that use fonts that make it easier for people with dyslexia to read. If you're blind then text-to-speech can read any ebook, and hopefully text-to-speech will get better over time.
No in a hundred years. I tried reading a book on my phone, and it was a miserable experience. I see people on the bus doing it, but having to scroll constantly is very annoying. I like the form factor of the Nexus 7, if I could make it my phone and just use the bluetooth headset I'd be a happy camper.
There are readers that have the option to automatically scroll for you. If you can read an entire line without moving your eyes and have it scroll at the right speed you can speed read a book with less eye movement.
The ebooks are cheaper, though not nearly as cheap as they should be, but still cheaper. There are also countless books in the public domain that you can get for free.
You can borrow ebooks from the library, you can annotate and bookmark, you can share annotations, and some can go weeks without a recharge.
What is there to like? I like being able to carry a library wherever I go. I have over a dozen tech manuals that are very awkward to carry with me but with a kindle, tablet, or smart phone I have access to the entire library whenever I want. I can electronically search for words like netdev_max_backlog and find all occurrences even if they are not in the index, I don't even use the index anymore.
Manual memory management is a whole class of bugs that Java doesn't have to deal with. A good C/C++ programmer shouldn't have *that* much difficulty, but it does add to debugging costs and detracts from mental focus on the algorithmic aspects of the problem.
It doesn't "detract" from my mental focus at all.
Instead, I view memory management as an integral part of the algorithm design.
When you used the phrase "algorithmic aspects of the problem" you seemed to imply that memory management is divorced from that, and that memory management is something to be separately designed and bolted on later. That is a very unwise approach.
I have found the best approach is to take memory usage into consideration as you do the algorithm design. Often, it simply means having a good understanding of when objects come into existence, and when they go out of existence. For me, taking such things into consideration doesn't "detract" in any way from solving the problem. In my view, efficient use of memory is just another goal of the algorithm design.
Well said! I was starting to wonder if most developers thought that memory management was someone else's problem.
Maybe it's because I started coding when memory was very scarce, but I hate it when developers go crazy on memory usage. I remember having to code under the restraint of a 286 dos extender. Sometimes a module would grow beyond the 64K limit and I would have to break some of it out into another module. The 386 was incredibly awesome compared to that!
Personally I have seen countless servers run out of memory and it's usually java, DB2, or Oracle. When it was DB2 or Oracle it was usually a mistake made by the dba, but java apps like to grow to their maximum java heap size and then spend a lot of cycles in garbage collection. I get an alert, log onto the server, check to see who the biggest memory user is and 19 times out of 20 it's java. Doesn't seem to be a solution for it other than to schedule nightly recycles of the applications.
I have to be careful on my work laptop because some of the applications I have to use run under java. They are easy to identify because they use more memory than any other application. On the bright side I can now justify an 8GB upgrade.
How many people can recall watching a program get ported to java and then watching their PC's memory and cpu usage dramatically increase?
You will win! Just don't go too crazy. If they notice network response issues they might notice your ip address in the top ten in network traffic throughput. They can then drill down and graph the amount of unacknowledged data in-flight. They might get suspicious when they observe the shape doesn't look like your typical saw-tooth graph. Sounds like work, but if they have a tool like OpNet, it's only a couple of mouse clicks.
We don't use TCP because it's particularly efficient, but because it has been the standard for decades. With our current knowledge, humans could also design faster protocols, we just don't want to waste our time, seeing that not even IPv6 has managed to become adopted.
Actually they have been designed. I know there are some that use UDP to encapsulate the faster protocols. Unfortunately you need to install it on both the sender and receiver. But if you have a congestion avoidance algorithm that can perform faster you only have to support it from the sender side.
I agree as well. It's a congestion control algorithm that claims to be better than Cubic which is the default used by Linux.
When trying to find the fastest throughput over a high bandwidth, high latency network I have found Cubic to be much faster than the tcp stack used by AIX and Solaris. I can't even find any reference to AIX or Solaris talking about fixing this issue. And it only needs to be supported from the sender side. So you don't have to worry about what the receiver is using. I know that "fairness" is an issue, but it seems like they can be more aggressive than what they are using now.
Google "tcp sawtooth" to find the more serious discussions about the problem.
Slashdot Mirror
They're cheaper than they used to be. And some people like quieter cars that don't emit excessive heat and belch poisonous gases, the more you get used to them, the more other cars sound like harleys. Some people like harleys, I find them excessively noisy.
People have been driving combustion automobiles since the industrial age. It takes time for new technologies to move through adoption stages, not to mention time for manufacturing costs and yields to improve.
They adapted fine to most everything else.
Power steering, power brakes, steer by wire, brake by wire, cd player, seat warmer, rear defrost, powered side mirrors, keyless entry, keyless start, alarm system, electronic fuel injector, unleaded gas, powered seats, ICE's with computer chips, satellite radio, dvd player, radar detector, cruise control, remote start, airbags, pressure sensors for the tires, halogen lights, powered moon-roof, shoulder belts, ABS, rear video camera, radar assisted parking, radar warning for when you are about to hit the car in front of you, automatic transmission, lojack, etc. I remember when most of these didn't exist. I remember having to warm up the car because it had a carburetor, thank goodness for EFI. Some of these features make a big difference in driving a car, try driving without power steering, or even parking a car without it. Hybrid cars are a seamless change from regular cars, took me seconds to adapt to my Prius. Obviously a non-hybrid EV is a much bigger jump, but if someone doesn't like changes in cars, they're screwed, because cars have been changing every couple of years and if gas prices go high enough I'm guessing less people will stay loyal to ICEs.
This is not a fair comparison, the iPhone is twice the price.
You've got a Quad-Core ARM running at twice their Ghz and you barely post benchmarks ahead of a Dual-Core A7, you know you're stupid for buying one.
So, what you are saying is that the Nexus 5 is faster, but it needed twice as many higher clock speed processors, which is bad because it costs half as much or is it because it has a higher resolution display. And now that the iPhone doesn't have the highest resolution display, that's unimportant? Buying one of the fastest phones, that has a great display, has stock Android OS, and is cheap is stupid??? I do not think that word means what you think it means.
The LG G2 has a 3000mAH battery, so I am assuming it's an issue of keeping the cost down.
They must be thinking of the research done on Dihydrogen Monoxide!!
http://www.dhmo.org/environment.html
Actually, the variety is increasing, especially in size. Some people want smaller phones, so you have phones like the mini, some people want bigger phones, so you have phablets.
My hands are big enough to comfortably hold an LG G2(feels similar in width to a Droid RAZR MAXX), and still flick any part of the screen that I want. There's plenty of room in my pants pocket, so that's not an issue. I used to carry a Palm Pilot with a Rhino case in my pocket, that was a lot bigger, this phone is very slim in comparison, even with a case. I'm far sighted, and even though I have reading glasses, it's a real pain trying to read tiny fonts on a small display. The display on this phone is incredible! It reminds me of the Samsung S4, which had the first display to impress me in years. The quad-core power on this phone is fantastic. Shredder Chess and Stockfish must be playing in the 2400+ range now.
I'm pretty sure I'm not the only person who likes a display that's easy on the eyes, and if it still fits in your pocket and your hand, it's not too big.
And it has an IR blaster too!!
That was one of the worst parts! They already stopped and were in the same orbit. When he lets go he should have just hovered there. Afterwards he should realize how silly he was and reclip and gently tug on the tether so he could head back.
Obviously, Hollywood wanted to use a cliche "you need to let me go or we'll both die!", except there was no cliff.
There were a lot of bad physics in the movie, more bad than good. I saw "Machete Kills" the night before, and that was more realistic. I'm betting that "Machete Kills again..In Space" will be more realistic as well.
I worked in Rexx on MVS and OS/2 in the early 90s. I'm astonished it's not dead and buried.
Unless IBM decides to port another scripting language like Perl or Python to Z/OS(OS/390,MVS) and z/VM/CMS, REXX isn't going anywhere.
I've used REXX on MVS, VM/CMS, and OS/2, it's a lot better than Exec or Exec2. But after moving to UNIX and learning Perl, I never looked back.
My first DSLR was a Canon 5D3. it isn't top of the line, but it was a bit pricey, and I've had a blast with it. I've been learning so much on how photography works and what can be done with it (and videography too). I put it on manual about and 2nd day I had it and have been learning since then how to shoot and get the effects "I" want.
You bought a nice camera! If you haven't tried "Magic Lantern" yet, you should check it out. It takes it to another level. I Don't have a mkIII, or even mkII, I have a t2i, which can use "Magic Lantern", but if I didn't have family/kids/mortgage etc. I would have that camera! It's a very nice camera and a very nice camcorder in one package.
If you do your research and if you are willing to learn what you can do with your camera, then of course you should get a nice camera if you an afford it! You'll get the full benefit, professional or amateur. A nice camera also allows for a greater range for what you can learn. There are a lot of people who spend as much money on playing golf and are not professionals, but not as many people question the cost or time. Compared to the old days, when you needed a darkroom and had to buy film/chemicals/photographic paper/enlarger, you can buy a nice dSLR and not spend as much as back then.
That's why I switched to XFCE when GNOME 3 was released. I know what I'm doing thank you! Lowest common denominator design will lead to a low quality production.
If that was true, then wouldn't that imply that MS Windows is a low quality product?
Commonwealth Saga?
One might also note that the mainstream industry makes orders of magnitude more money (a measure of success) than the "bedroom produced" music and talent scene that you belong to.
By that logic, Budweiser makes the best beer and Microsoft makes the best OS?
I modded you insightful but I'd like to challenge one point of yours: what makes you believe that smoking marijuana impairs one's ability to drive? This seems to be a common assumption among non-smokers, but I can tell you from (daily) experience such is not the case. It requires the consumption of quite a bit of pot to impair one's driving -- usually this means eating it rather than smoking it -- and once a person is that high they don't want to drive. It's just too stressful (as opposed to driving drunk, where alcohol gives one 'liquid courage').
A lot of drugs affect your ability to drive, and you do not always notice the level of impairment. You don't realize how stoned you are, but the drivers giving you the finger as they drive by probably do. You probably did not realize that a lot of people smoke while driving, and if they get too stoned, it might be too late for them to safely maneuver to the breakdown lane, not that they would.
Even with alcohol, one is considered legally drunk much before they've consumed enough to actually be impaired.
You have to draw a line! Just because one person can drive after a case of beer doesn't mean we all can. You need you to make it clear that if you drink this much, don't drive. I don't care if you think you can drive, and I don't care if it turns out you can drive, don't. If driving is on the schedule, then monitor your drinking. If you can't monitor your drinking, you have a problem.
A person shouldn't be considered impaired just because a particular chemical is in their body. They should be given basic coordination tests -- such as a field sobriety test (but something that's computerized, kind of like a video game, to eliminate bias on the part of the officer). If you can't pass a field sobriety test because you're too old, you shouldn't be able to drive. If you can't pass it because of a prescribed medication, you shouldn't be able to drive. If you can't pass a field sobriety test because you're just a naturally uncoordinated person, you shouldn't be able to drive. A person's BAC or THC level is irrelevant, what's important is their ability to control a vehicle.
There is no doubt that there are a lot of people who should not be allowed to drive at all. I agree with you on that part. I'll even agree that there are people who can drive better while being legally drunk than some people can completely sober. And I'm not just talking about people who are too old to drive, there are young people who should never be allowed behind the wheel. There should be tougher driving tests for regular cars. If less capable drivers want to drive, let them drive Smart cars or mopeds, at least they won't do as much harm. There's no reason why elderly drivers need an SUV or Cadillac.
Imagine what it would taste like if it was poop out by Super Models!!!
If someone is willing to pay for coffee beans pooped out by a funny looking rat, then imagine what they would pay for something pooped out by a Super Model, or even a mediocre model. Heck, even a double bagger would be an improvement!
On second thought, let's go back to the Super Model.
Eventually you can reduce or even eliminate more of the overhead. It used to be that writers needed publishing companies to get their books to the public. But now that is no longer true with the internet and ebooks you can sell your own books and keep all of the profit. I think that electronic media is going to be more and more popular for music and books as people see the benefits in convenience. Unlike music there's going to be the issue of providing a format as easy on the eyes as paper, but it gets better every year.
Kids going to school will no longer have to carry 50# backpacks, schools will hopefully be able to get access to ebooks that are reasonably priced and they'll last forever. More schools are getting tablets for the kids and changing to ebooks would be easier after that. They have apps that use fonts that make it easier for people with dyslexia to read. If you're blind then text-to-speech can read any ebook, and hopefully text-to-speech will get better over time.
No in a hundred years. I tried reading a book on my phone, and it was a miserable experience. I see people on the bus doing it, but having to scroll constantly is very annoying. I like the form factor of the Nexus 7, if I could make it my phone and just use the bluetooth headset I'd be a happy camper.
There are readers that have the option to automatically scroll for you. If you can read an entire line without moving your eyes and have it scroll at the right speed you can speed read a book with less eye movement.
What are you talking about?
The ebooks are cheaper, though not nearly as cheap as they should be, but still cheaper. There are also countless books in the public domain that you can get for free.
You can borrow ebooks from the library, you can annotate and bookmark, you can share annotations, and some can go weeks without a recharge.
What is there to like? I like being able to carry a library wherever I go. I have over a dozen tech manuals that are very awkward to carry with me but with a kindle, tablet, or smart phone I have access to the entire library whenever I want. I can electronically search for words like netdev_max_backlog and find all occurrences even if they are not in the index, I don't even use the index anymore.
Manual memory management is a whole class of bugs that Java doesn't have to deal with. A good C/C++ programmer shouldn't have *that* much difficulty, but it does add to debugging costs and detracts from mental focus on the algorithmic aspects of the problem.
It doesn't "detract" from my mental focus at all.
Instead, I view memory management as an integral part of the algorithm design.
When you used the phrase "algorithmic aspects of the problem" you seemed to imply that memory management is divorced from that, and that memory management is something to be separately designed and bolted on later. That is a very unwise approach.
I have found the best approach is to take memory usage into consideration as you do the algorithm design. Often, it simply means having a good understanding of when objects come into existence, and when they go out of existence. For me, taking such things into consideration doesn't "detract" in any way from solving the problem. In my view, efficient use of memory is just another goal of the algorithm design.
Well said! I was starting to wonder if most developers thought that memory management was someone else's problem.
Maybe it's because I started coding when memory was very scarce, but I hate it when developers go crazy on memory usage. I remember having to code under the restraint of a 286 dos extender. Sometimes a module would grow beyond the 64K limit and I would have to break some of it out into another module. The 386 was incredibly awesome compared to that!
I suspect he does have knowledge on the topic.
Personally I have seen countless servers run out of memory and it's usually java, DB2, or Oracle. When it was DB2 or Oracle it was usually a mistake made by the dba, but java apps like to grow to their maximum java heap size and then spend a lot of cycles in garbage collection. I get an alert, log onto the server, check to see who the biggest memory user is and 19 times out of 20 it's java. Doesn't seem to be a solution for it other than to schedule nightly recycles of the applications.
I have to be careful on my work laptop because some of the applications I have to use run under java. They are easy to identify because they use more memory than any other application. On the bright side I can now justify an 8GB upgrade.
How many people can recall watching a program get ported to java and then watching their PC's memory and cpu usage dramatically increase?
If you are trying to light up the entire yard I agree. But if you are only trying to light up walkways then they work very well.
Can it also prevent STDs?
You will win! Just don't go too crazy. If they notice network response issues they might notice your ip address in the top ten in network traffic throughput. They can then drill down and graph the amount of unacknowledged data in-flight. They might get suspicious when they observe the shape doesn't look like your typical saw-tooth graph. Sounds like work, but if they have a tool like OpNet, it's only a couple of mouse clicks.
We don't use TCP because it's particularly efficient, but because it has been the standard for decades. With our current knowledge, humans could also design faster protocols, we just don't want to waste our time, seeing that not even IPv6 has managed to become adopted.
Actually they have been designed. I know there are some that use UDP to encapsulate the faster protocols. Unfortunately you need to install it on both the sender and receiver. But if you have a congestion avoidance algorithm that can perform faster you only have to support it from the sender side.
I agree as well. It's a congestion control algorithm that claims to be better than Cubic which is the default used by Linux.
When trying to find the fastest throughput over a high bandwidth, high latency network I have found Cubic to be much faster than the tcp stack used by AIX and Solaris. I can't even find any reference to AIX or Solaris talking about fixing this issue. And it only needs to be supported from the sender side. So you don't have to worry about what the receiver is using. I know that "fairness" is an issue, but it seems like they can be more aggressive than what they are using now.
Google "tcp sawtooth" to find the more serious discussions about the problem.
He would probably watch the pitcher's body language and the way the ball was thrown to work out what the ball was going to do.