so that you avoid waiting for a laptop (that you had to carry) to boot before you can fix something.
This doesn't answer your other (good) arguments, but as for booting your laptop, I keep my iBook booted but sleeping 24 hours a day, and only have to plug it in for a couple of hours every week (not including the time charging to support actual use).
I think the Supreme Court will agree that the writers of the Constitution meant "limited" in the human sense, not the mathematical sense.
IANAL, but it's quite possible the SC will see "limited" here in a sense akin to "speedy trial" - that the reference is to a more common understanding of "limited" (e.g., life plus fifty) rather than a more mathematical sense of "finite and bounded."
More likely, though, it is the fact that the law keeps being extended retroactively before copyrights can expire that violates the sense of "limited."
Fonts look really nice (better than Windows and X11R6) inside of aqua as well as having several beutiful fonts provided by Apple, this is something Microsoft has never really cared about.
Usually I'd be happy to join in on the Microsoft bashing, but this really isn't fair. Microsoft has been putting a lot of effort into adding high-quality internationalized fonts into Windows, as Apple is doing with OS X (I'm impressed with a lot of the work both companies have been doing). There are plenty of things you can bash MS for without bashing them for something they're actually doing a good job at.
Non-MS OS's isn't a realistic concern for user products (as opposed to server products). Whether you develop for consumers or even internally for corporations, multiple OS's on the desktop is a moot point. Browsers aren't used on servers.
What do you call OS X? And last time I checked,there were a few million OS X user machines.
What a FUDfest! Well, folks hopefully have seen the Register story on this. A couple of comments.
Technology like clustering would be better in Windows than Linux eventually, said Ballmer: "We will beat Linux on clusters. We can't beat them on price, but we have to add value."
Given the current market for Beowulf, I don't see MS competing on clusters, especially with "add[ed] value."
Asked by one lateral-thinking MVP whether Microsoft planned to offer applications software on Linux, Ballmer said no, adding that the big issue was a reluctance to accept legal liability for open-source software.
"We do not anticipate offering software on Linux," said Ballmer. "Nobody pays for software on Linux." Even StarOffice, sold by Sun, was originally a free product, he said. And IBM, arguably the No. 1 player in the Linux market, promotes Linux to big users, but does not actually sell Linux: "It's weird. IBM says 'Hey British Aerospace! Buy Linux...from SuSE.'"
StarOffice did not start out as a free product, iirc. And as for IBM promoting Linux, how is that any different from HP and Dell promoting Microsoft. And does the first paragraph, as the Register asked, mean that Microsoft accepts liability for their own software?
That's largely because it dates back to the day when skins weren't properly integrated with Mozilla. The main differences now are in skins and menu, and the total recall engine.
Oh. That explains why Archimedes' bathtub wasn't included.
(You know; Archimedes was trying to figure out how to find out if a crown was made out of gold or not; he couldn't figure it out until he saw the displacement of water when he got into the bathtub, fiddled around getting in and out, etc., and finally jumped up and ran around Syracuse naked shouting "I have found it! [Heureka!]"
So, why am I so sure from the title I know why this wasn't included as one of Science's 10 Most Beautiful Experiments? Have you seen what Archimedes
looked like?
On the editorial (or printing) side, SGML got its start the day after Gutenberg's invention of movable type made it necessary to formalize editorial instructions to typesetters. From this perspective, SGML's tags were instructional in nature, as in "start using 42 lines per page here".
The author of this sentence should not be allowed to write on the subject of structured markup. SGML has NOTHING to do with "start using 42 lines per page here." It is NOT a typesetting language; TeX is. SGML is a language that makes it possible to represent the semantic structure of a document (rather like sentence diagramming, only on a document scale), not the appearance of a document.
The rest of the discussion of SGML is equally illinformed. Imagine if someone posted an article that described Apache as a method of implementing SSL on a web server. That's how bad his understanding of SGML is.
More precisely, Sergei Eisenstein, pioneering Russian filmmaker; did Aleksandr Nevsky, Battleship Potemkin, other famous films. If you've seen the steps sequence from Untouchables, that's an allusion/homage to the famous steps sequence in Battleship Potemkin. In Aleksandr Nevsky there's a famous ice battle scene that has influenced nearly all later depictions of battle in film.
Thought we had a right to be considered innocent till proven guilty and a right to not be subjected to unreasonable search and seizures?
IANAL, but I'm guessing it's some kind of open door principle - e.g., that the police can arrest you if they can see a dead body in your house through an open door. If you're file sharing, you are by definition inviting people to examine the files you're sharing, and so don't have much right to say "but I didn't mean for BayTSP to see what files I was sharing, only everyone else on the planet."
Anybody who is a lawyer, please feel free to correct if I'm mistaken.
I wholeheartedly agree! Right up until Dooku met Palpatine at the end, I was hoping he really was fighting against the Sith.
I think we're intended to believe that Sith apprentices start out this way, and that their anger eventually leads them to make bad decisions, and that somewhere along the way they are backed into a corner and have to make a compromise to survive, after which they are under their master's almost total control. Then they can only think of killing off the master and adopting their own Sith apprentice. It would fit in with the whole Robert Graves interpretation of Indo-European myth - the king and tanist - and could be shoehorned into Campbell quite easily.
Look, the production values were the production values that one would expect from *any* television production from the late 70's or early 80's.
You mean like Battlestar Galactica (1979?), which is about contemporaneous? Of course, BG is complete trash, and noone involved in it was worthy to lick DNA's boots, but they sure spent a lot on sets.
Even Star Trek's production values were higher.
But a lot of that is a function of BBC's budget and priorities, so perhaps we have to accept cheesy sets and mediocre costuming if we're going to get anything from them at all. After all, without BBC radio, and without Dr. Who, there would be no HHGTTG.
(I always thought that Red Dwarf did a better job of integrating their late 1980s/1990s cheesy sets into the humor of the show than the TV HHGTTG did. Not that Red Dwarf deserves to be compared to DNA either, but it's an example of using what you've got.)
The radio play was much, much better. The actors in the TV series (most of them from the radio show) weren't terribly good as TV actors, and the production values were basically Doctor Who (i.e., god-awful). I just can't call the TV series "good." It's just a little less demanding than listening to the radio series (and even less demanding than reading the book).
How soon we forget: The books were novelizations of the Hith-hikers Radio Scripts, a 12-installment radio programme.
Technically, only the first two could be considered novelizations of the radio series. Even then, Adams considerably changed any number of things so that "novelization" falls somewhat short of describing the reality of the situation. Adams talked about the radio series being one thing, the books another, and the tv show yet another.
Good post. (Sorry, man, no mod points.) From what I remember, Adams pretty much knew he was going to do the books as soon as the first radio series got going. It's worth remembering, too, that radio works very differently from video: one can describe Zaphod almost believably, but one almost certainly cannot show him believably without a hug budget.
But how would you explain the rings around saturn or jupiter? If I am not mistaken there is no solid surface for a big rock to hit to be able to eject debris
Not saying this is the answer, only one possible answer: if a 'roid hits hard enough, it would likely eject some liquid and gaseous "debris", which would tend to collect in lanes, freeze, and coagulate. Voila! Rings.
wait, say I have a string 1AU long,
and I swing it with a peroid of 6
seconds, why would the end not be
going faster than light?
Figure out the mass of it . . . it will take a hell of a lot of energy to whip a string 1 AU long. Eventually you'll start running into relativistic effects at both ends of the string; dilation of both time and length, massive increases of the string's mass (remember, when an object gets up to relativistic speeds its mass dilates upward, and more force is required to accelerate it at the same G; the mass of the tip of the string will approach infinity as its velocity approaches c).
Slashdot Mirror
so that you avoid waiting for a laptop (that you had to carry) to boot before you can fix something.
This doesn't answer your other (good) arguments, but as for booting your laptop, I keep my iBook booted but sleeping 24 hours a day, and only have to plug it in for a couple of hours every week (not including the time charging to support actual use).
Um, have none of you folks heard of the Dublin Core?
In linux you might do something like rm *a*b*c*.* That command can delete anywhere from 0 to all of your files depending on how they are named.
Isn't natural selection wonderful?
I think the Supreme Court will agree that the writers of the Constitution meant "limited" in the human sense, not the mathematical sense.
IANAL, but it's quite possible the SC will see "limited" here in a sense akin to "speedy trial" - that the reference is to a more common understanding of "limited" (e.g., life plus fifty) rather than a more mathematical sense of "finite and bounded."
More likely, though, it is the fact that the law keeps being extended retroactively before copyrights can expire that violates the sense of "limited."
Fonts look really nice (better than Windows and X11R6) inside of aqua as well as having several beutiful fonts provided by Apple, this is something Microsoft has never really cared about.
Usually I'd be happy to join in on the Microsoft bashing, but this really isn't fair. Microsoft has been putting a lot of effort into adding high-quality internationalized fonts into Windows, as Apple is doing with OS X (I'm impressed with a lot of the work both companies have been doing). There are plenty of things you can bash MS for without bashing them for something they're actually doing a good job at.
And I I R C Darwin for x86 only works with some configurations.
Thanks for the correction. I do know what Beowulf clusters are for; I did not realize that Ballmer was talking about a VAX-like cluster.
Non-MS OS's isn't a realistic concern for user products (as opposed to server products). Whether you develop for consumers or even internally for corporations, multiple OS's on the desktop is a moot point. Browsers aren't used on servers.
What do you call OS X? And last time I checked,there were a few million OS X user machines.
What a FUDfest! Well, folks hopefully have seen the Register story on this. A couple of comments.
Technology like clustering would be better in Windows than Linux eventually, said Ballmer: "We will beat Linux on clusters. We can't beat them on price, but we have to add value."
Given the current market for Beowulf, I don't see MS competing on clusters, especially with "add[ed] value."
Asked by one lateral-thinking MVP whether Microsoft planned to offer applications software on Linux, Ballmer said no, adding that the big issue was a reluctance to accept legal liability for open-source software.
"We do not anticipate offering software on Linux," said Ballmer. "Nobody pays for software on Linux." Even StarOffice, sold by Sun, was originally a free product, he said. And IBM, arguably the No. 1 player in the Linux market, promotes Linux to big users, but does not actually sell Linux: "It's weird. IBM says 'Hey British Aerospace! Buy Linux...from SuSE.'"
StarOffice did not start out as a free product, iirc. And as for IBM promoting Linux, how is that any different from HP and Dell promoting Microsoft. And does the first paragraph, as the Register asked, mean that Microsoft accepts liability for their own software?
All you gotta do is drop the COM object into a VB project. You can literally have your "own" browser in about 30 seconds. How's this any different?
Try doing that in any non-Microsoft operating system. THAT'S what's different. You can get Gecko for nearly anything.
That's largely because it dates back to the day when skins weren't properly integrated with Mozilla. The main differences now are in skins and menu, and the total recall engine.
It's a shame development on Aphrodite has slowed to a crawl. Have you seen the Sullivan skin? It would really look good on my iBook.
Oh. That explains why Archimedes' bathtub wasn't included.
(You know; Archimedes was trying to figure out how to find out if a crown was made out of gold or not; he couldn't figure it out until he saw the displacement of water when he got into the bathtub, fiddled around getting in and out, etc., and finally jumped up and ran around Syracuse naked shouting "I have found it! [Heureka!]"
This page at Drexel has the details.)
So, why am I so sure from the title I know why this wasn't included as one of Science's 10 Most Beautiful Experiments? Have you seen what Archimedes looked like?
On the editorial (or printing) side, SGML got its start the day after Gutenberg's invention of movable type made it necessary to formalize editorial instructions to typesetters. From this perspective, SGML's tags were instructional in nature, as in "start using 42 lines per page here".
The author of this sentence should not be allowed to write on the subject of structured markup. SGML has NOTHING to do with "start using 42 lines per page here." It is NOT a typesetting language; TeX is. SGML is a language that makes it possible to represent the semantic structure of a document (rather like sentence diagramming, only on a document scale), not the appearance of a document.
The rest of the discussion of SGML is equally illinformed. Imagine if someone posted an article that described Apache as a method of implementing SSL on a web server. That's how bad his understanding of SGML is.
More precisely, Sergei Eisenstein, pioneering Russian filmmaker; did Aleksandr Nevsky, Battleship Potemkin, other famous films. If you've seen the steps sequence from Untouchables, that's an allusion/homage to the famous steps sequence in Battleship Potemkin. In Aleksandr Nevsky there's a famous ice battle scene that has influenced nearly all later depictions of battle in film.
Thought we had a right to be considered innocent till proven guilty and a right to not be subjected to unreasonable search and seizures?
IANAL, but I'm guessing it's some kind of open door principle - e.g., that the police can arrest you if they can see a dead body in your house through an open door. If you're file sharing, you are by definition inviting people to examine the files you're sharing, and so don't have much right to say "but I didn't mean for BayTSP to see what files I was sharing, only everyone else on the planet."
Anybody who is a lawyer, please feel free to correct if I'm mistaken.
I wholeheartedly agree! Right up until Dooku met Palpatine at the end, I was hoping he really was fighting against the Sith.
I think we're intended to believe that Sith apprentices start out this way, and that their anger eventually leads them to make bad decisions, and that somewhere along the way they are backed into a corner and have to make a compromise to survive, after which they are under their master's almost total control. Then they can only think of killing off the master and adopting their own Sith apprentice. It would fit in with the whole Robert Graves interpretation of Indo-European myth - the king and tanist - and could be shoehorned into Campbell quite easily.
Of course, it's silly . . .
Look, the production values were the production values that one would expect from *any* television production from the late 70's or early 80's.
You mean like Battlestar Galactica (1979?), which is about contemporaneous? Of course, BG is complete trash, and noone involved in it was worthy to lick DNA's boots, but they sure spent a lot on sets. Even Star Trek's production values were higher.
But a lot of that is a function of BBC's budget and priorities, so perhaps we have to accept cheesy sets and mediocre costuming if we're going to get anything from them at all. After all, without BBC radio, and without Dr. Who, there would be no HHGTTG.
(I always thought that Red Dwarf did a better job of integrating their late 1980s/1990s cheesy sets into the humor of the show than the TV HHGTTG did. Not that Red Dwarf deserves to be compared to DNA either, but it's an example of using what you've got.)
No, probably just most of the first book, a little of the second, and bits and pieces of the others. Read A Salmon of Doubt for some hints.
The radio play was much, much better. The actors in the TV series (most of them from the radio show) weren't terribly good as TV actors, and the production values were basically Doctor Who (i.e., god-awful). I just can't call the TV series "good." It's just a little less demanding than listening to the radio series (and even less demanding than reading the book).
How soon we forget: The books were novelizations of the Hith-hikers Radio Scripts, a 12-installment radio programme.
Technically, only the first two could be considered novelizations of the radio series. Even then, Adams considerably changed any number of things so that "novelization" falls somewhat short of describing the reality of the situation. Adams talked about the radio series being one thing, the books another, and the tv show yet another.
Good post. (Sorry, man, no mod points.) From what I remember, Adams pretty much knew he was going to do the books as soon as the first radio series got going. It's worth remembering, too, that radio works very differently from video: one can describe Zaphod almost believably, but one almost certainly cannot show him believably without a hug budget.
Just in case you're not kidding Note that the length shortens with higher velocities, while the mass increases.
But how would you explain the rings around saturn or jupiter? If I am not mistaken there is no solid surface for a big rock to hit to be able to eject debris
Not saying this is the answer, only one possible answer: if a 'roid hits hard enough, it would likely eject some liquid and gaseous "debris", which would tend to collect in lanes, freeze, and coagulate. Voila! Rings.
wait, say I have a string 1AU long, and I swing it with a peroid of 6 seconds, why would the end not be going faster than light?
Figure out the mass of it . . . it will take a hell of a lot of energy to whip a string 1 AU long. Eventually you'll start running into relativistic effects at both ends of the string; dilation of both time and length, massive increases of the string's mass (remember, when an object gets up to relativistic speeds its mass dilates upward, and more force is required to accelerate it at the same G; the mass of the tip of the string will approach infinity as its velocity approaches c).
n/t