So, a tablet with a wireless "base" that has a DVD drive, keyboard, and touchpad, and which the tablet snaps into to protect the screen when not in use, seems the logical way to go. The main point is co-locate the screen and processor so you don't have the video signal sent through the hinge.
Check out the Always Innovating Touchbook to see what your idea looks like in practice. It has its own issues, mainly that the weight distribution is very unlike that of a laptop, producing a top heavy device which tends to fall over if opened at a nice reading angle. Yes, they've mitigated the problem it by modifying the base, and eventually we might see lighter circuitry (or heavier batteries) remove the issue.
It is a shame that they seem to be mismanaging their opportunity away. They've ran into issues that leave Feb. orders unfilled today. They've also stated that they will not produce more product due to the commitments in developing their "new" version.
quickly flip between half a dozen pages to get to the right charts, reference sheets, and examples
eBooks are searchable.
being able to scribble my illegible notes in the margins.
Good god no! Writing in books is evil.
For those who are morally repelled at the concept of writing in books, there's this new technology called "Post-It Notes". They make decent book marks too, enhancing the ability to flip to the right charts.
But you would have to teach teachers how to make a lesson plan again. Administrators are so concerned that their employees are incompetent or overworked that they push the book's pre-packaged lesson plans on the teachers. This oddly creates the scenario they fear. Many teachers haven't touched a lesson plan in years, so they are rusty at drafting them.
I always find it hilarious that people assume the government (CIA, military, etc.) is capable of this type of sophisticated organization. Have you never gone to the DMV? Have you never worked with a government employee?
Say something nasty about the DMV worker's mother. Watch the organization change from one that is barely capable of issuing you a license to a practical powerhouse of efficiency in their ability to make your life miserable. Just because they're not efficient at doing what you want them to do doesn't mean they are not efficient.
A lot of people really hate free choice because then somebody else might use something in a way they don't approve of. The fact that it doesn't deprive anyone else of making the same choice isn't good enough for them.
Exactly how does revealing the killer not affect my ability to enjoy the surprise of finding the killer for the first time in the play? Your high-horse "freedom from the writer" rings hollow when the writer only REQUESTED that you don't spoil the plot. Add to that your stance that your freedom to reveal the plot is a perfect example of arguing that you are both free to swing your fists and hit my nose, and it only makes the stance you are taking look like a big pile of double-standard talk.
Many of your sentiments have the ring of truth to them; but you're missing the point. There's really no way you can argue that because the writer asked you to be considerate of others, it is proper to walk over others' enjoyment of the play as you can't be bound to the writer's wishes.
... to work there. Just imagine growing up programming in your parents basement, and when you finally get a real job, it's in a cave.
On the bright side, they have a lot of room to move up. Through solid rock. Yeah, it's like a career ladder, but you have to dig your way up it. And there's bats.
Things always go smoothly. But seriously - the "debate" (can't believe there even is one) over creationism is harmful intellectually, but I doubt it is actively inhibiting research on anything. Stem cell research, on the other hand, IS being held back by religious groups that believe any fertilized embryo is a human. And I for one truly detest the role religion is playing in actively inhibiting research on diseases that are currently killing people. My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins - I can't find a clever way to say it, but why must this still not apply to religion?
Perhaps because religion teaches you that when it hits you where it hurts, you're the one who is supposed to turn the other cheek.
Most likely the judge is correct in denying the admissibility of the evidence, as Wikipedia really makes statements that the validity of the information it presents may not be correct.
That said, the lawyer was very negligent. DSM-IV-TR is published in book form, and the book acts as the authoritative reference for the United States mental health circles. The lawyer could have have his reference admitted if he just cited out of the published book.
Since it would have been so simple for the lawyer to submit the evidence of an excerpt of DSM-IV-TR directly from the book, yet he submitted it from a 3rd party website (Wikipedia), it raises a lot of questions. Some that come to my mind are: Is the lawyer really that incompetent, or was the choice of choosing Wikipedia as a source deliberate (as it can be manipulated).
In my experience, you can easily ply manpower to many tasks that can be more quickly done with skill.
The problem is that many people lack the ability to evaluate skill levels, so they assume that manpower is the only way possible. With that as a starting reference, you put a million monkeys to the task of writing a Shakespearean play. The only problem is that nobody looks to the obvious issues in such sweatshops, like who is going to read through the millions of lines of generated refuse to determine what is good and what is not?
If you must pick an arbitrary item, you should attempt to pick one that's not subject to many seasonal changes, spoils at a slow rate (to prevent stockpiling fluctuations), has a constant yet low demand (prevents speculation), and is not heavily subject to modernization (prevents inappropriate comparisons of "rare X" to "cheap X" due to technological advances).
Wool suits are subject to fashion demands, and while they were almost a staple in the past, today they are conspicuously absent in most of the professional working class. Cars are heavily subject to technological advances reducing the cost of a new vehicle (even if the prices go up, they just go up less).
Cheese is a good bet. Dairy milk fluctuates a bit, but not so much that there's been a huge cheese shortage in any recent past. You can't really modernize it much beyond what was done a few hundred years ago. Certainly machines make the work easier, but really you're paying for the milk and storage time for the biological process to do it's job.
Between 1914 and 2000 the price of 250g of cheddar cheese increased from 2 pence to 126 pence in the United Kingdom, an increase of 53 fold. Cross correlating that with white sliced bread, where the price for 800g rose form 1 pence to 52 pence, shows that a multiplier of ~50 is reasonable.
Your grandfather's suit (12 dollars) cost just over $600 in 2000 dollars. I would argue that the price of suits has (for the most part) come down, because a reasonably nice suit can easily be had for around $400.
We can't accurately assess so many things in life, how are we going to accurately assess hiking risk?
The answer is we aren't going to accurately assess hiking risk, insurance will milk the experienced, conscientious hikers for higher premiums to cover the ones that forget to check their water bottles prior to the hike.
no matter how insignificant the event called it was.
This is a classic "Boy who cried wolf" problem. During an emergency, responders need to take calls seriously unless there is overwhelming evidence that the call is a prank. After the second time the Grand Canyon SatPhone hikers pushed their emergency button, I think they ought to be put in the "sorry, you're on your own from here on out" category, giving bears uninterrupted access to eat their faces.
If only first responder bears were more responsive.
So your hate of Obama is strong enough that you feel the US government's secrets should be widely and freely disseminated? Obama is Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, a field where secrecy of intelligence may be abused; but, where secrecy of intelligence has shown in the past to make the difference between winning and losing a war.
It is not in the Scandinavian justice tradition to name accusers, victims or indeed criminals. Warrants are usually not public unless they have no other means of locating the suspect. Assange has no address.
We don't believe in scapegoating.
And yet, it seems to have happened, US style. What outrage does the Swedish people feel? Will they do anything about it?
As a lab tech that discovered something, and then attempted to explain it to a reporter; let me help you out there.
Reporters love to report the cool, hip, and neeto aspects of Science far more than they love to get the facts right. If it was a $10 microsocope signed by Ozzy Osbourne, the article would have read "Using a microscope signed by Ozzy Osbourne,...".
Imagine my shock when I mentioned that one of our tissue sample donors was a marathon runner, and the reporter twisted our kidney malfunction research into a sort of genetically engineering the super-athlete story.
Instead of trying to catch the culprit, shame the culprit into being a responsible citizen. With a catch the culprit solution, you don't solve the problem; because, if the reckless drivers thought they were going to cause accidents that might take their lives, they wouldn't be driving recklessly.
Offer to set up a "driving awareness" program with the local law enforcement and go school-to-school teaching the children the consequences of poor driving behavior. Deliver the message that it's not just enough to be a good driver; because, good drivers get killed every day due to the other "bad" drivers out there. You have to be a driver that doesn't rely on their skill to get out of a jam, but a driver that relies on their skill to be nowhere near a potential problem.
Present statistics, call on the goodness of the fellow man, and paint a picture where past accidents (providing explicit examples) would have been avoided if only someone had followed a few basic defensive driving rules.
Schools are a good way to reach a lot of children; and, children talk to parents. Mosques, Churches, and Synagogues can reach some of the adults directly; there's not going to be a religion that discourages poor driving. Perhaps with a polished enough delivery, you may even be able to get your message on the local television stations.
When people see bad driving as killing their future, they will drive more defensively; and, they will put more pressure on those who drive badly. Right now, it is an anything goes driving culture; but, resist the urge to punish. The people who are the worst offenders don't even consider punishment, as they don't even consider that they could be caught in an accident (because they are too good to make a mistake). The way to fix those people is to indicate that no matter how good you are as a driver, you must drive slowly and carefully because "the other guy is an idiot that thinks he's the best driver in the world"
Re:DocBook is horrible
on
DocBook 5
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
My experiences are quite different; DocBook is simply awesome.
If you start selecting tags to make the output look the way you want it to look, you don't understand XML (and subsequently shouldn't be using DocBook).
Any sane documentation project separates the formatting from the content; because, when you need to update the look of the documentation, you don't want to spend days checking each individual document element to determine if it is the correct font, point, weight, etc. Only the novices create documentation that doesn't permit consistent formatting. Using something that goes half way there (inconsistently applied style sheets) eventually leaves you with the same amount of work to make sure your documentation shows as it should. Style sheets may be applied consistently, but you can't know for sure without paying the "verify the whole document" price.
With XML, there is no formatting in the document. All of the formatting is done with the XSL document. If you didn't like the format, layout, font, italics, or whatever of the output documentation, the correct choice was to change the XSL document used to build the output, not to go on a happy hunting DocBook tag search for the tags that made it look how you wanted it.
The fact that you couldn't find the <code> tag but could find the other tags you've mentioned is just depressing, especially when those tags are most often sub-tags of a code tag block.
Just wait until you need to generate HTML help, Text file documentation, a web page manual, and a printed PDF of the same core documentation. The single-source design of DocBook will be much better appreciated then, if you learn how to use it.
Re:DocBook - like HTML 1.0, only dumber
on
DocBook 5
·
· Score: 1
Not only that, it sounds like a horrible format if you need documentation to write in the documentation language. Just looking at their What is DocBook page leaves me wondering what the hell it really is...
Even how to write English is documented in English, so why do you argue that any language which can use itself to document how to make more of itself is bad?
Slashdot Mirror
So, a tablet with a wireless "base" that has a DVD drive, keyboard, and touchpad, and which the tablet snaps into to protect the screen when not in use, seems the logical way to go. The main point is co-locate the screen and processor so you don't have the video signal sent through the hinge.
Check out the Always Innovating Touchbook to see what your idea looks like in practice. It has its own issues, mainly that the weight distribution is very unlike that of a laptop, producing a top heavy device which tends to fall over if opened at a nice reading angle. Yes, they've mitigated the problem it by modifying the base, and eventually we might see lighter circuitry (or heavier batteries) remove the issue.
It is a shame that they seem to be mismanaging their opportunity away. They've ran into issues that leave Feb. orders unfilled today. They've also stated that they will not produce more product due to the commitments in developing their "new" version.
You know, they could have just borrowed the code for Clippy from Microsoft...
-l
Correct, Clippy has been pretending to help you for years, except that he's really a sociopath who enjoys ruining your day (and your document).
Kill the fracking toasters!
It's no use, have you seen the toaster fleets? They have us outnumbered. Afterdark they will come for you.
quickly flip between half a dozen pages to get to the right charts, reference sheets, and examples
eBooks are searchable.
being able to scribble my illegible notes in the margins.
Good god no! Writing in books is evil.
For those who are morally repelled at the concept of writing in books, there's this new technology called "Post-It Notes". They make decent book marks too, enhancing the ability to flip to the right charts.
But you would have to teach teachers how to make a lesson plan again. Administrators are so concerned that their employees are incompetent or overworked that they push the book's pre-packaged lesson plans on the teachers. This oddly creates the scenario they fear. Many teachers haven't touched a lesson plan in years, so they are rusty at drafting them.
In related news, a three year long Canadian study that recently concluded has revealed that snow is cold and water is wet.
That's funny, I would have thought that the water in Canada was cold too.
I always find it hilarious that people assume the government (CIA, military, etc.) is capable of this type of sophisticated organization. Have you never gone to the DMV? Have you never worked with a government employee?
Say something nasty about the DMV worker's mother. Watch the organization change from one that is barely capable of issuing you a license to a practical powerhouse of efficiency in their ability to make your life miserable. Just because they're not efficient at doing what you want them to do doesn't mean they are not efficient.
and a few stranglers might show up only to find out there's no exam.
How very disappointing for the stranglers. I'm assuming they were hired to deal with the cheaters?
With their task at hand so removed, it's hard not to get all choked up.
A lot of people really hate free choice because then somebody else might use something in a way they don't approve of. The fact that it doesn't deprive anyone else of making the same choice isn't good enough for them.
Exactly how does revealing the killer not affect my ability to enjoy the surprise of finding the killer for the first time in the play? Your high-horse "freedom from the writer" rings hollow when the writer only REQUESTED that you don't spoil the plot. Add to that your stance that your freedom to reveal the plot is a perfect example of arguing that you are both free to swing your fists and hit my nose, and it only makes the stance you are taking look like a big pile of double-standard talk.
Many of your sentiments have the ring of truth to them; but you're missing the point. There's really no way you can argue that because the writer asked you to be considerate of others, it is proper to walk over others' enjoyment of the play as you can't be bound to the writer's wishes.
A cron job he resets every day? Really, it doesn't take much to dream up a system that can deliver something after one's disappearance.
It will also be much easier to control access.
Meh, someone's probably already installed a back door.
... to work there. Just imagine growing up programming in your parents basement, and when you finally get a real job, it's in a cave.
On the bright side, they have a lot of room to move up. Through solid rock. Yeah, it's like a career ladder, but you have to dig your way up it. And there's bats.
Things always go smoothly. But seriously - the "debate" (can't believe there even is one) over creationism is harmful intellectually, but I doubt it is actively inhibiting research on anything. Stem cell research, on the other hand, IS being held back by religious groups that believe any fertilized embryo is a human. And I for one truly detest the role religion is playing in actively inhibiting research on diseases that are currently killing people. My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins - I can't find a clever way to say it, but why must this still not apply to religion?
Perhaps because religion teaches you that when it hits you where it hurts, you're the one who is supposed to turn the other cheek.
Most likely the judge is correct in denying the admissibility of the evidence, as Wikipedia really makes statements that the validity of the information it presents may not be correct.
That said, the lawyer was very negligent. DSM-IV-TR is published in book form, and the book acts as the authoritative reference for the United States mental health circles. The lawyer could have have his reference admitted if he just cited out of the published book.
Since it would have been so simple for the lawyer to submit the evidence of an excerpt of DSM-IV-TR directly from the book, yet he submitted it from a 3rd party website (Wikipedia), it raises a lot of questions. Some that come to my mind are: Is the lawyer really that incompetent, or was the choice of choosing Wikipedia as a source deliberate (as it can be manipulated).
In my experience, you can easily ply manpower to many tasks that can be more quickly done with skill.
The problem is that many people lack the ability to evaluate skill levels, so they assume that manpower is the only way possible. With that as a starting reference, you put a million monkeys to the task of writing a Shakespearean play. The only problem is that nobody looks to the obvious issues in such sweatshops, like who is going to read through the millions of lines of generated refuse to determine what is good and what is not?
which platform do Mortgage lenders usually target?
Dead center mass?
Agreed.
If you must pick an arbitrary item, you should attempt to pick one that's not subject to many seasonal changes, spoils at a slow rate (to prevent stockpiling fluctuations), has a constant yet low demand (prevents speculation), and is not heavily subject to modernization (prevents inappropriate comparisons of "rare X" to "cheap X" due to technological advances).
Wool suits are subject to fashion demands, and while they were almost a staple in the past, today they are conspicuously absent in most of the professional working class. Cars are heavily subject to technological advances reducing the cost of a new vehicle (even if the prices go up, they just go up less).
Cheese is a good bet. Dairy milk fluctuates a bit, but not so much that there's been a huge cheese shortage in any recent past. You can't really modernize it much beyond what was done a few hundred years ago. Certainly machines make the work easier, but really you're paying for the milk and storage time for the biological process to do it's job.
Between 1914 and 2000 the price of 250g of cheddar cheese increased from 2 pence to 126 pence in the United Kingdom, an increase of 53 fold. Cross correlating that with white sliced bread, where the price for 800g rose form 1 pence to 52 pence, shows that a multiplier of ~50 is reasonable.
Your grandfather's suit (12 dollars) cost just over $600 in 2000 dollars. I would argue that the price of suits has (for the most part) come down, because a reasonably nice suit can easily be had for around $400.
We can't accurately assess so many things in life, how are we going to accurately assess hiking risk?
The answer is we aren't going to accurately assess hiking risk, insurance will milk the experienced, conscientious hikers for higher premiums to cover the ones that forget to check their water bottles prior to the hike.
no matter how insignificant the event called it was.
This is a classic "Boy who cried wolf" problem. During an emergency, responders need to take calls seriously unless there is overwhelming evidence that the call is a prank. After the second time the Grand Canyon SatPhone hikers pushed their emergency button, I think they ought to be put in the "sorry, you're on your own from here on out" category, giving bears uninterrupted access to eat their faces.
If only first responder bears were more responsive.
So your hate of Obama is strong enough that you feel the US government's secrets should be widely and freely disseminated? Obama is Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, a field where secrecy of intelligence may be abused; but, where secrecy of intelligence has shown in the past to make the difference between winning and losing a war.
It is not in the Scandinavian justice tradition to name accusers, victims or indeed criminals. Warrants are usually not public unless they have no other means of locating the suspect. Assange has no address.
We don't believe in scapegoating.
And yet, it seems to have happened, US style. What outrage does the Swedish people feel? Will they do anything about it?
As a lab tech that discovered something, and then attempted to explain it to a reporter; let me help you out there.
Reporters love to report the cool, hip, and neeto aspects of Science far more than they love to get the facts right. If it was a $10 microsocope signed by Ozzy Osbourne, the article would have read "Using a microscope signed by Ozzy Osbourne, ...".
Imagine my shock when I mentioned that one of our tissue sample donors was a marathon runner, and the reporter twisted our kidney malfunction research into a sort of genetically engineering the super-athlete story.
Total agreement.
Instead of trying to catch the culprit, shame the culprit into being a responsible citizen. With a catch the culprit solution, you don't solve the problem; because, if the reckless drivers thought they were going to cause accidents that might take their lives, they wouldn't be driving recklessly.
Offer to set up a "driving awareness" program with the local law enforcement and go school-to-school teaching the children the consequences of poor driving behavior. Deliver the message that it's not just enough to be a good driver; because, good drivers get killed every day due to the other "bad" drivers out there. You have to be a driver that doesn't rely on their skill to get out of a jam, but a driver that relies on their skill to be nowhere near a potential problem.
Present statistics, call on the goodness of the fellow man, and paint a picture where past accidents (providing explicit examples) would have been avoided if only someone had followed a few basic defensive driving rules.
Schools are a good way to reach a lot of children; and, children talk to parents. Mosques, Churches, and Synagogues can reach some of the adults directly; there's not going to be a religion that discourages poor driving. Perhaps with a polished enough delivery, you may even be able to get your message on the local television stations.
When people see bad driving as killing their future, they will drive more defensively; and, they will put more pressure on those who drive badly. Right now, it is an anything goes driving culture; but, resist the urge to punish. The people who are the worst offenders don't even consider punishment, as they don't even consider that they could be caught in an accident (because they are too good to make a mistake). The way to fix those people is to indicate that no matter how good you are as a driver, you must drive slowly and carefully because "the other guy is an idiot that thinks he's the best driver in the world"
My experiences are quite different; DocBook is simply awesome.
If you start selecting tags to make the output look the way you want it to look, you don't understand XML (and subsequently shouldn't be using DocBook).
Any sane documentation project separates the formatting from the content; because, when you need to update the look of the documentation, you don't want to spend days checking each individual document element to determine if it is the correct font, point, weight, etc. Only the novices create documentation that doesn't permit consistent formatting. Using something that goes half way there (inconsistently applied style sheets) eventually leaves you with the same amount of work to make sure your documentation shows as it should. Style sheets may be applied consistently, but you can't know for sure without paying the "verify the whole document" price.
With XML, there is no formatting in the document. All of the formatting is done with the XSL document. If you didn't like the format, layout, font, italics, or whatever of the output documentation, the correct choice was to change the XSL document used to build the output, not to go on a happy hunting DocBook tag search for the tags that made it look how you wanted it.
The fact that you couldn't find the <code> tag but could find the other tags you've mentioned is just depressing, especially when those tags are most often sub-tags of a code tag block.
Just wait until you need to generate HTML help, Text file documentation, a web page manual, and a printed PDF of the same core documentation. The single-source design of DocBook will be much better appreciated then, if you learn how to use it.
Not only that, it sounds like a horrible format if you need documentation to write in the documentation language. Just looking at their What is DocBook page leaves me wondering what the hell it really is...
Even how to write English is documented in English, so why do you argue that any language which can use itself to document how to make more of itself is bad?