"Firefox feels a little too much "dumbed down" for me." That may be why so many Joe Schmoes out there in WWW land like the browser. Most people are probably intimated by the whole "new browser" thingy and that's why they stick to IE. The more simple it is to use for the average user while still offering better security the more people will adot it. Besides, it's only at level 1.0 right now so there's plenty of time to gain mass adoption and add more "stuff" in later releases.
I teach about 90% of the training courses for both my company and suppliers on our customer's requirements, which leads to a 'final exam' after 4 weeks. Sure, there are homework assignments and little quizzes I give within that period but none of them count towards a final passing grade. They're more like a progress report for each of the 'students' to tell them how well they are absorbing the information I provide. At the end of the course there is a final exam, which is pass / fail (70% is passing). After reviewing the stats I find that I have a 50% or higher failure rate I look at myself. I should; I wrote it...I taught it and I tested others on it. It hasn't happened yet but if it ever does, I'd look at myself first before pointing fingers at people.
I have to agree with you on this one. I had a college prof whose first statement to the class on the first day was: "You will have daily assignments, which are due exactly the next day. After that do not try to turn them in. Daily assignments represent 75% of your grade." Everyone in the class, for the first three weeks, turned in every assignment, however after the same three weeks we still hadn't received our first DAY's assignments back yet. They were not overbearing but that was complete and utter bullshit. If it's supposed to represent 75% of my grade, I better have the damn thing back in less than two. Needless to say, most gave up on that concept after the fourth week and I don't recall anyone failing or dropping the course. Like I said...BS.
Especially at a movie. Chances are if they're showing a Pepsi commercial, you've already purchased a Pepsi; and even if you didn't, how many people are going to run screaming out of the joint because they need a Coke so bad after paying $18,000 for their super-mumbo-jumbo 20 gallon drink? Ridiculous.
To both you and the parent: don't confuse quality control with quality assurance. Quality control is generally accepted as the term to monitor, enhance and improve the processes in place to manufacture the product; usually through some form of inspection process at certain intervals based on the complexity of the product, machinery capability and historical internal organizational data. After that, statistical analysis is used to either increase or decrease the amount of inspection at any given stage of manufacture (keep in mind, inspection in itself is a non-value added process; the less you do the less the cost). However, quality assurance is basically risk management (more or less). Quality assurance also uses statistical analysis for acceptance but in a different way. ASSUMING that the current controls are statsitically acceptable (based on the quality control results during manufacture) a sample of product is taken at random based on a consumer risk number (usually). Most OEM's will use a certain acceptable quality level (AQL) with a rejection level of C=0; meaning no non-conformances in that particular lot of product is acceptable....the whole lot would be rejected and would have to be 100% inspected for the non-conformance. Semantics, maybe, however the QA people deal more with quality concepts rather than actual quality control. If both are used in conjunction with each other properly, there is generally a 99.999% chance you will purchase a product that functions the way it was designed. Apparently in the case of the PS 1, one or both of the systems failed, resulting in severe customer dissatisfaction, which quality ASSURANCE probably had to deal with in the long run followed by a whole can of whoop ass to manufacturing and quality CONTROL.
That's similar to what I've been saying all along in the US on NASCAR vs open wheel racing. In my opinion, NASCAR is not true racing. All you ever have to do is turn left and in the "off chance" that a driver connects with another driver it's generally no big deal and accepted in that form of racing as part of the sport. Try that shit in open wheel (IRL / CART / F1 / Sprint) and not only do you endanger yourself or another driver but the entire racing field. Generally speaking, I think it's more idealistic for an open wheel racer to transfer to NASCAR than the inverse; just because of the driving styles. That and the whole inbreed circumstance that just seems to loom over NASCAR; both in the drivers and the fans. The lack of refinement in the fan base / driver mentality never ceases to amaze me when I'm forced to endure a NASCAR race during a party or social event. NASCAR should go back to it's roots when Daytona was actually raced on the beach with TRUE production cars. At least then I'd have a little more respect.
And who decides that the copyrights exist and are legitimate? Sounds like a HUGE cost with limited success at best. If I share a senior project that I wrote and designed with someone in California am I breaking copyright law? I WROTE IT...I'M THE COPYRIGHT OWNER. How will the network discern that particular document and will they ask me if I'm the original author? Even if they could it would probably take days, which defeats the whole purpose of information now and filesharing.
By commenting that all or most "creative" persons would simply stop creating is ridiculous. I don't know if you've ever been face to face with a true artist in any given field but most likely they were truly insane; not by a medical or legal definition, just plain weird. People like that rarely perform the functions of their talent for monetary gain...it's generally considered a perk. They will continue to create whether the law says they deserve to profit from it or not. I doubt Brittany or Lars would say that. When situations arise like this in a society, it becomes painfully obvious who the money grubbers are and it shows in their work. I am NOT saying that artists don't deserve the fruits of their labor, however your blanket statement doesn't apply.
By introducing such concepts as wind and solar energy sources into any given nation the downfalls will still be passed on to the next generations in the form of economic liabilities. Who's going to pay for the economic infrastructure to change over? Probably not you or I in our lifetime as that's how long it would take to even develop the concept let alone institute it. It would be our kids and grandkids. Granted, the environment would be better off but our kid's financial future wouldn't be. Crap....now I sound like one of those "FOR THE CHILDREN!" fanatics. I'll stick with nuclear for the time being.
I was ready to respond to your statement about costs but you beat me to the punch at the end by stating that they'd be huge. I think the word huge is vastly understated.
Actually, I thought that was an extremely pragmatic line and one that made me go "hmmmmmmm", while scratching my chin. It was also realistic in the fact that it is so believable for the same politicians to drill and denounce the one "astronaut" as never making the trip at all while all the time knowing there was an unexplained variable that coincided with her statements and conflicted with the data. Imagine that; being called a liar by the government when they actually have some suspicion of the real truth; all the while making you question your own morality and sense of self. Hmmmmm. Anyway, to sum up: I liked that line.
Insightful my ass. Don't forget that when a person refers to a 'drug dealer' the conventional thought is one of a minority on the local poverty ridden streets of a major city trying to 'make a living', however, TRUE drug dealers (where the drugs are actually manufactured) sit in multi-million dollar homes far away from any civilized law and simply murder any government officials that tend to interupt business as well as their families to make a statement. They may not get a nod from where they import the drugs but I'll guarantee you it gets one from the citizens where they live. As far as I'm concerned, they are child rapists. They're raping our children's futures. And no, I'm not one of "....for the children" fanatics.
Well, SOMEONE better start thinking of employment as an entitlement. The USA as a country cannot afford to have a more elevated level of unemployment than we already have. I mean, who's going to pay for all these neat new DoD toys if they have no source of federal income? Last I heard, aircraft carriers and submarines are in the billions of dollars each and that's just 2 types of ships in the entire Naval arsenal. And THAT's just the Navy. Mind boggling. Anyway....the if the military and the president want more toys and government programs, they better make damn sure that the vast majority of citizens are employed; especially high end middle class jobs.
How in the hell is this insightful? Now we have to be mindful of the profit margin of certain companies instead of blocking their ads? I call bullshit.
Slashdot Mirror
"Firefox feels a little too much "dumbed down" for me." That may be why so many Joe Schmoes out there in WWW land like the browser. Most people are probably intimated by the whole "new browser" thingy and that's why they stick to IE. The more simple it is to use for the average user while still offering better security the more people will adot it. Besides, it's only at level 1.0 right now so there's plenty of time to gain mass adoption and add more "stuff" in later releases.
It may be a dummy letter that interupts every certain character.
OK, was that really necessary....
I see you don't d/l .wmv files. Clue...you can't; not in full context anyway.
I teach about 90% of the training courses for both my company and suppliers on our customer's requirements, which leads to a 'final exam' after 4 weeks. Sure, there are homework assignments and little quizzes I give within that period but none of them count towards a final passing grade. They're more like a progress report for each of the 'students' to tell them how well they are absorbing the information I provide. At the end of the course there is a final exam, which is pass / fail (70% is passing). After reviewing the stats I find that I have a 50% or higher failure rate I look at myself. I should; I wrote it...I taught it and I tested others on it. It hasn't happened yet but if it ever does, I'd look at myself first before pointing fingers at people.
I have to agree with you on this one. I had a college prof whose first statement to the class on the first day was: "You will have daily assignments, which are due exactly the next day. After that do not try to turn them in. Daily assignments represent 75% of your grade." Everyone in the class, for the first three weeks, turned in every assignment, however after the same three weeks we still hadn't received our first DAY's assignments back yet. They were not overbearing but that was complete and utter bullshit. If it's supposed to represent 75% of my grade, I better have the damn thing back in less than two. Needless to say, most gave up on that concept after the fourth week and I don't recall anyone failing or dropping the course. Like I said...BS.
Especially at a movie. Chances are if they're showing a Pepsi commercial, you've already purchased a Pepsi; and even if you didn't, how many people are going to run screaming out of the joint because they need a Coke so bad after paying $18,000 for their super-mumbo-jumbo 20 gallon drink? Ridiculous.
To both you and the parent: don't confuse quality control with quality assurance. Quality control is generally accepted as the term to monitor, enhance and improve the processes in place to manufacture the product; usually through some form of inspection process at certain intervals based on the complexity of the product, machinery capability and historical internal organizational data. After that, statistical analysis is used to either increase or decrease the amount of inspection at any given stage of manufacture (keep in mind, inspection in itself is a non-value added process; the less you do the less the cost). However, quality assurance is basically risk management (more or less). Quality assurance also uses statistical analysis for acceptance but in a different way. ASSUMING that the current controls are statsitically acceptable (based on the quality control results during manufacture) a sample of product is taken at random based on a consumer risk number (usually). Most OEM's will use a certain acceptable quality level (AQL) with a rejection level of C=0; meaning no non-conformances in that particular lot of product is acceptable....the whole lot would be rejected and would have to be 100% inspected for the non-conformance. Semantics, maybe, however the QA people deal more with quality concepts rather than actual quality control. If both are used in conjunction with each other properly, there is generally a 99.999% chance you will purchase a product that functions the way it was designed. Apparently in the case of the PS 1, one or both of the systems failed, resulting in severe customer dissatisfaction, which quality ASSURANCE probably had to deal with in the long run followed by a whole can of whoop ass to manufacturing and quality CONTROL.
IMHO I don't think an update or a patch counts as a full download of a new software package.
That's similar to what I've been saying all along in the US on NASCAR vs open wheel racing. In my opinion, NASCAR is not true racing. All you ever have to do is turn left and in the "off chance" that a driver connects with another driver it's generally no big deal and accepted in that form of racing as part of the sport. Try that shit in open wheel (IRL / CART / F1 / Sprint) and not only do you endanger yourself or another driver but the entire racing field. Generally speaking, I think it's more idealistic for an open wheel racer to transfer to NASCAR than the inverse; just because of the driving styles. That and the whole inbreed circumstance that just seems to loom over NASCAR; both in the drivers and the fans. The lack of refinement in the fan base / driver mentality never ceases to amaze me when I'm forced to endure a NASCAR race during a party or social event. NASCAR should go back to it's roots when Daytona was actually raced on the beach with TRUE production cars. At least then I'd have a little more respect.
And who decides that the copyrights exist and are legitimate? Sounds like a HUGE cost with limited success at best. If I share a senior project that I wrote and designed with someone in California am I breaking copyright law? I WROTE IT...I'M THE COPYRIGHT OWNER. How will the network discern that particular document and will they ask me if I'm the original author? Even if they could it would probably take days, which defeats the whole purpose of information now and filesharing.
By commenting that all or most "creative" persons would simply stop creating is ridiculous. I don't know if you've ever been face to face with a true artist in any given field but most likely they were truly insane; not by a medical or legal definition, just plain weird. People like that rarely perform the functions of their talent for monetary gain...it's generally considered a perk. They will continue to create whether the law says they deserve to profit from it or not. I doubt Brittany or Lars would say that. When situations arise like this in a society, it becomes painfully obvious who the money grubbers are and it shows in their work. I am NOT saying that artists don't deserve the fruits of their labor, however your blanket statement doesn't apply.
Oh God....you had me until the whole grits statemenmt.
Thanks...comic book guy.
By introducing such concepts as wind and solar energy sources into any given nation the downfalls will still be passed on to the next generations in the form of economic liabilities. Who's going to pay for the economic infrastructure to change over? Probably not you or I in our lifetime as that's how long it would take to even develop the concept let alone institute it. It would be our kids and grandkids. Granted, the environment would be better off but our kid's financial future wouldn't be. Crap....now I sound like one of those "FOR THE CHILDREN!" fanatics. I'll stick with nuclear for the time being.
I was ready to respond to your statement about costs but you beat me to the punch at the end by stating that they'd be huge. I think the word huge is vastly understated.
Actually, I thought that was an extremely pragmatic line and one that made me go "hmmmmmmm", while scratching my chin. It was also realistic in the fact that it is so believable for the same politicians to drill and denounce the one "astronaut" as never making the trip at all while all the time knowing there was an unexplained variable that coincided with her statements and conflicted with the data. Imagine that; being called a liar by the government when they actually have some suspicion of the real truth; all the while making you question your own morality and sense of self. Hmmmmm. Anyway, to sum up: I liked that line.
Alice in Wonderland; interesting. Especially if the rabbit hole actually turned out to be the Matrix!
Actually with all these patents being granted, you're probably violating someone elses idea; granted inadvertently.
What do people have against the crust anyway? It's not like it should be on Fear Factor or anyting. Sheesh. Quit coddling the little bastards.
Insightful my ass. Don't forget that when a person refers to a 'drug dealer' the conventional thought is one of a minority on the local poverty ridden streets of a major city trying to 'make a living', however, TRUE drug dealers (where the drugs are actually manufactured) sit in multi-million dollar homes far away from any civilized law and simply murder any government officials that tend to interupt business as well as their families to make a statement. They may not get a nod from where they import the drugs but I'll guarantee you it gets one from the citizens where they live. As far as I'm concerned, they are child rapists. They're raping our children's futures. And no, I'm not one of "....for the children" fanatics.
Well, SOMEONE better start thinking of employment as an entitlement. The USA as a country cannot afford to have a more elevated level of unemployment than we already have. I mean, who's going to pay for all these neat new DoD toys if they have no source of federal income? Last I heard, aircraft carriers and submarines are in the billions of dollars each and that's just 2 types of ships in the entire Naval arsenal. And THAT's just the Navy. Mind boggling. Anyway....the if the military and the president want more toys and government programs, they better make damn sure that the vast majority of citizens are employed; especially high end middle class jobs.
How in the hell is this insightful? Now we have to be mindful of the profit margin of certain companies instead of blocking their ads? I call bullshit.
I was sad when the ZX-81 went obsolete so don't take it too personal.
Just curious...do pictures of the developers entice you to buy their products? Hmmm