I'd like to know what titles people were buying as CDs in 1999. New stuff or old?
Could it be that people were replacing their vinyl in 1999 and before, and that the whole peak in 1999 was really an effect of replacing one version of something with another? I'm not saying that the decline isn't real, I'm suggesting that the curve is much less than it seems and the peak is artificially high.
I had my windows replaced a while ago. If the question is "which is the best tool for window removal?" And you could think of handsaws, sawsalls, wrecking bars or other prybars, etc, they had a clear answer:
Hammers. All hammers. Nothing else is needed, though a screwdriver also seems to come in handy, though not for screws, more for poking things.
Oh, and if you're putting in a replacement, you'll also need a caulking gun.
Paint the inside around the HD with tacky ink, as around fire alarms. Seal the thing with a little tape. If a thief or someone willing to buy stolen goods wants to get at the drive, he'll be unhappy and cussing. There will be ink all over the laptop, his tools, hands, clothes, etc.
The good news: the same thing will happen to a customs person. Be sure to warn them first.
A thumb drive is not a reliable backup, but it's a crucial backup, if all your other plans keep your data at home.
If you've got some crucial data which you absolutely cannot lose, or which you'd need in a hurry if a tragedy happened, you should have that up to date on your keyring. (Encryption is your friend -- use it.)
Why? Because when your house burns down, you lose all your backups except those you've move off site.
So yes, back up to another HD. Back up to disk. Mail those disk somewhere. etc. But also make a copy of the truly crucial stuff you need right away, and key in on your hip when you leave the house.
From TFA: "Every gallon of ethanol made creates one gallon of fresh water out of salt water."
This sounds interesting. If this can be cheaply scaled up, it sounds like coastal towns all over the developing world would want to become gas providers for more inland towns -- it solves their water problem at the same time as it solves their cash flow problem.
I suspect there is a lot of distillation in the process as well, to purify the alcohol. So this sort of system would couple well with hot equator sun and passive solar systems.
All this makes me wonder: how much human waste can you pour into the system to fertilize the algae? Can this system be used to solve that problem, too?
And what do you do with the algae? Once you have a full tank, you just want to maintain the status quo, but the algae will continue to reproduce. Could the excess turn into an animal feed?
This is a part. Like a lock-washer. I suspect it won't be used in robots, either, but rather will be moved by a person with a magnet.
Everything gets called a robot, these days. If I buy my six year old nephew a crappy remote controlled car from Radio Shack, I can hand it to him and tell him it's a robot.
He'll object, of course, since he's not stupid. I'll point to news stories about the stuff being used in Iraq and elsewhere and say, "see -- all remote control dohickies are robots."
Just because he's not stupid doesn't mean editors/reports/promoters/technologists/and the general public aren't.
You don't have to follow it. Just read it. It's very short. Most of the book is recipes, which you can ignore. You can read it at Borders over a cuppa.
Fiber, glycemic index, etc. Full of reasonable diet info. It won't keep you very thin, but it'll arm you understanding your diet and how you can control it.
"People that suggest removing keys willy-nilly reveal themselves as heavy mouse users."
Nope. Emacs user, here. Crappy editors/IDEs which force you to stop typing and move your hand off into unspecified spaces for oddball keys like delete, insert and home just drive me crazy.
I want to get rid of all those keys to make room for the keys I actually use. Eliminating all those keys which you have to take you hands away from the home row to get to would make all the above posters more efficient, and less mouse-driven, rather than the opposite, except for the one guy who says he's completely out of keys. I suggest that another meta/shift key would do much better for him (as a multiplier of his current set) than the additive step of more keys.
I think that you're completely right about the nipple -- note that it allows you to navigate without lifting your fingers from the main area of the keyboard. It makes you faster and causes less travel, which reduces RSI finger/wrist-strain.
That said, I love the extra thumb buttons on my mouse. Useful when surfing.
On the function keys, why not ctl + alt + number for getting those screens, or ESC + number? It means changing the way you do things, yes, but I suspect you'd be just as fast or faster.
On your numlock comment, I was thinking about the number pad, too. The way laptops cram in a bogus one really doesn't work. I don't know a good solution, other than making laptops wider or adding a separate number pad as a USB device. You're actually lucky you have all that space and have that pad.
As for a symbol lock key, I suspect that you're an relatively odd case, but it sounds like you could programmatically just NIX the numbers under the symbols and make every key the symbol, shift or no. That's probably not that hard a keyboard mod under X, though I haven't tried it. Or ou could flip the shift state, so you get the numbers if you DO hit the shift key.
You'd go nuts working on someone else's system, but I think we all do already...
The solution is not to make the key bigger, it's to ditch it.
I'm all for getting rid of insert, delete, home, and end.
Do you use your scroll lock and break key? Lose them, too.
How many function keys do you really need? TWELVE?!?!
We should push way back to the original IBM selectric keyboard which was actually good for typing, and scrap everything that came with the IBM PC keyboard.
Old CP/M, Z-80 based Kaypros had a dynamite keyboard.
We still need to nix the caps lock key, of course.
Go to a dance instructor. You've got the money. Pay for lessons. Then go to group dance lessons. Meet people there and then get groups going to dance clubs.
All your problems will disappear.
Unless you're a girl. All the above assumes you're a boy. You're a boy, right? OK, then go learn to dance.
Well, I work with a few people who say that poor people shouldn't have health care if they can't afford it. "They should get jobs so they can afford it. They could but they don't because they're lazy." I paraphrase.
My coworkers don't hate poor people, they just want them to die if they can't pay for their own care. Because they're lazy and because giving them something would be unfair.
So you're right. Conservatives don't hate poor people. They just want the herd culled, which is good for everyone.
You are absolutely correct. And to add to this, those uninsured people only come in when they're critical, when it costs buckets of money to help them. They never come in for preventative care or advice. The system is designed to financially screw us and to keep them alive with lowest productivity. Perfect.
I think the important thing is that that waste is OURS. We pay for that waste. So it ought to be the people who get the waste, not the investors of a corporation.
We pay $50. We get $20 worth of healthcare. The companies waste $20 and pocket $10.
If the gov gives us $20 worth of healthcare and wastes $20, it still only costs us $40. We get to keep the $10.
I'm a little tired of paying $50 for some disposable blue paper slippers in a hospital. I want the profit on that crap to go back in my pocket.
The Canadian system doesn't work. We know that because we've been told so by our politicians , and they should know because they get a lot of contributions from the health care system and go to a lot of cocktail parties. And we've been told it so many times that we know it's true.
The approximately 20% growth health care stocks showed for at least a decade, back when I paid attention, was because they were so amazing and efficient and wonderful, not because they were siphoning off more and more of our healthcare dollars.
The paperwork is good because it generates jobs. Jobs we NEED. The American system is the best in the world. A Canadian-style system would cost us a fortune and kill us with crappy care. You won't get to choose your own doctor. You'll wait for surgery, the hospitals will fall apart and no one will ever become a doctor again. You should know all that. Haven't you been watching TV?
"I wasn't aware that the carriers were in the business of manufacturing..."
Oh, yes they ARE. Or rather, they dictate what features will be available in the handsets they sell. in particular, they dictate what the handsets WON'T do. They keep their customers from having the ability to load ringtones, download information, upload music, etc. Anything the providers think they can charge for, they keep the handsets from being able to do via any connectivity outside of communication with the carrier.
Carriers routinely tell manufacturers to cripple their offerings. The manufacturers do it, because if they didn't they'd have to look elsewhere for distribution.
I think this is actually the most obvious and non-controversial aspect of code reviews, and yet I don't see it mentioned anywhere above.
Shame. Pride. Vanity. Whatever. You know other people will look at it, so you make it look better. You take another look at it as if someone else might actually need to understand it, and you make it better before the code review.
That's an absolutely wonderful effect, even if the code review is a bunch of grunting and a rubber stamp.
Furthermore, RNs and especially doctors don't necessarily listen to the lower-class, less educated nurse-like workers, who may know that they don't know what to do, but also know that something is wrong. I've seen them report problems upward and have absolutely nothing happen.
Years ago, probably in the early 1980's, a friend of the family had to be checked into a hospital. She was on dialisys (kidney disease) and obese and had other troubles associated with the combination of those two conditions. Things went wrong for her pretty frequently.
The hospital food cart kept bringer her food that would flat out kill her: no kidneys means no ability to deal with floods of certain chemicals -- potassium, for example. She used to joke about committing "bananacide". She could just eat a few bananas and sit down to wait for the inevitable.
Day after day, meal after meal, the food cart would bring her food she couldn't eat. She was going hungry when she was sick. She would plead with the staff, but they didn't change anything.
My father went to visit her and she begged him to help her. She was getting weaker every day. He talked to the staff and pursued the problem until he got to one of the people actually choosing the meals.
The nutritionists were doing the right thing. They were picking the right foods for someone who was obese and had other problems. They were NOT considering the fact that her kidneys didn't work. Why? Because the screen they saw only had room for a few conditions. The last one on the list -- Kidney failure -- wasn't showing. There were a fixed number of lines.
Someone had to shuffle the order of the values so that the various nutritionists, with their hundreds of patients a day, could keep track of what to feed her from then on.
She died a few days later.
Was it because she'd been underfed for days? Would feeding her have helped? I don't know.
But the story illustrates how a reasonable assumption made by someone in the chain that you'd need, let's say "four" lines in that field there, could kill someone.
Surge suppression seems like a no brainer, but the people making the decisions are not always the people who should be.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd like to know what titles people were buying as CDs in 1999. New stuff or old?
Could it be that people were replacing their vinyl in 1999 and before, and that the whole peak in 1999 was really an effect of replacing one version of something with another? I'm not saying that the decline isn't real, I'm suggesting that the curve is much less than it seems and the peak is artificially high.
I know some of you remember it and how much fun it was. A couple of movies consisting of ENTIRELY of chase scenes and a 3d graphical version.
I, on the other hand, always thought the problem with contact-free power was cancer.
I had my windows replaced a while ago. If the question is "which is the best tool for window removal?" And you could think of handsaws, sawsalls, wrecking bars or other prybars, etc, they had a clear answer:
Hammers. All hammers. Nothing else is needed, though a screwdriver also seems to come in handy, though not for screws, more for poking things.
Oh, and if you're putting in a replacement, you'll also need a caulking gun.
Paint the inside around the HD with tacky ink, as around fire alarms. Seal the thing with a little tape. If a thief or someone willing to buy stolen goods wants to get at the drive, he'll be unhappy and cussing. There will be ink all over the laptop, his tools, hands, clothes, etc.
The good news: the same thing will happen to a customs person. Be sure to warn them first.
New Theory: MS got tired of embracing and extending things already out there, so...
A thumb drive is not a reliable backup, but it's a crucial backup, if all your other plans keep your data at home.
If you've got some crucial data which you absolutely cannot lose, or which you'd need in a hurry if a tragedy happened, you should have that up to date on your keyring. (Encryption is your friend -- use it.)
Why? Because when your house burns down, you lose all your backups except those you've move off site.
So yes, back up to another HD. Back up to disk. Mail those disk somewhere. etc. But also make a copy of the truly crucial stuff you need right away, and key in on your hip when you leave the house.
From TFA: "Every gallon of ethanol made creates one gallon of fresh water out of salt water."
This sounds interesting. If this can be cheaply scaled up, it sounds like coastal towns all over the developing world would want to become gas providers for more inland towns -- it solves their water problem at the same time as it solves their cash flow problem.
I suspect there is a lot of distillation in the process as well, to purify the alcohol. So this sort of system would couple well with hot equator sun and passive solar systems.
All this makes me wonder: how much human waste can you pour into the system to fertilize the algae? Can this system be used to solve that problem, too?
And what do you do with the algae? Once you have a full tank, you just want to maintain the status quo, but the algae will continue to reproduce. Could the excess turn into an animal feed?
I thought you were going to say that the car salesman knows how to drive.
I think this is both true and focusing on a tree, not the forest. There's a lot more than this going on.
This is a part. Like a lock-washer. I suspect it won't be used in robots, either, but rather will be moved by a person with a magnet.
Everything gets called a robot, these days. If I buy my six year old nephew a crappy remote controlled car from Radio Shack, I can hand it to him and tell him it's a robot.
He'll object, of course, since he's not stupid. I'll point to news stories about the stuff being used in Iraq and elsewhere and say, "see -- all remote control dohickies are robots."
Just because he's not stupid doesn't mean editors/reports/promoters/technologists/and the general public aren't.
You don't have to follow it. Just read it. It's very short. Most of the book is recipes, which you can ignore. You can read it at Borders over a cuppa.
Fiber, glycemic index, etc. Full of reasonable diet info. It won't keep you very thin, but it'll arm you understanding your diet and how you can control it.
"People that suggest removing keys willy-nilly reveal themselves as heavy mouse users."
Nope. Emacs user, here. Crappy editors/IDEs which force you to stop typing and move your hand off into unspecified spaces for oddball keys like delete, insert and home just drive me crazy.
I want to get rid of all those keys to make room for the keys I actually use. Eliminating all those keys which you have to take you hands away from the home row to get to would make all the above posters more efficient, and less mouse-driven, rather than the opposite, except for the one guy who says he's completely out of keys. I suggest that another meta/shift key would do much better for him (as a multiplier of his current set) than the additive step of more keys.
I think that you're completely right about the nipple -- note that it allows you to navigate without lifting your fingers from the main area of the keyboard. It makes you faster and causes less travel, which reduces RSI finger/wrist-strain.
That said, I love the extra thumb buttons on my mouse. Useful when surfing.
On the function keys, why not ctl + alt + number for getting those screens, or ESC + number? It means changing the way you do things, yes, but I suspect you'd be just as fast or faster.
On your numlock comment, I was thinking about the number pad, too. The way laptops cram in a bogus one really doesn't work. I don't know a good solution, other than making laptops wider or adding a separate number pad as a USB device. You're actually lucky you have all that space and have that pad.
As for a symbol lock key, I suspect that you're an relatively odd case, but it sounds like you could programmatically just NIX the numbers under the symbols and make every key the symbol, shift or no. That's probably not that hard a keyboard mod under X, though I haven't tried it. Or ou could flip the shift state, so you get the numbers if you DO hit the shift key.
You'd go nuts working on someone else's system, but I think we all do already...
Good for Apple.
The solution is not to make the key bigger, it's to ditch it.
I'm all for getting rid of insert, delete, home, and end.
Do you use your scroll lock and break key? Lose them, too.
How many function keys do you really need? TWELVE?!?!
We should push way back to the original IBM selectric keyboard which was actually good for typing, and scrap everything that came with the IBM PC keyboard.
Old CP/M, Z-80 based Kaypros had a dynamite keyboard.
We still need to nix the caps lock key, of course.
Go to a dance instructor. You've got the money. Pay for lessons. Then go to group dance lessons. Meet people there and then get groups going to dance clubs.
All your problems will disappear.
Unless you're a girl. All the above assumes you're a boy. You're a boy, right? OK, then go learn to dance.
You're welcome. Glad I could help.
Well, I work with a few people who say that poor people shouldn't have health care if they can't afford it. "They should get jobs so they can afford it. They could but they don't because they're lazy." I paraphrase.
My coworkers don't hate poor people, they just want them to die if they can't pay for their own care. Because they're lazy and because giving them something would be unfair.
So you're right. Conservatives don't hate poor people. They just want the herd culled, which is good for everyone.
You are absolutely correct. And to add to this, those uninsured people only come in when they're critical, when it costs buckets of money to help them. They never come in for preventative care or advice. The system is designed to financially screw us and to keep them alive with lowest productivity. Perfect.
I think the important thing is that that waste is OURS. We pay for that waste. So it ought to be the people who get the waste, not the investors of a corporation.
We pay $50. We get $20 worth of healthcare. The companies waste $20 and pocket $10.
If the gov gives us $20 worth of healthcare and wastes $20, it still only costs us $40. We get to keep the $10.
I'm a little tired of paying $50 for some disposable blue paper slippers in a hospital. I want the profit on that crap to go back in my pocket.
Stop. We know you're lying.
The Canadian system doesn't work. We know that because we've been told so by our politicians , and they should know because they get a lot of contributions from the health care system and go to a lot of cocktail parties. And we've been told it so many times that we know it's true.
The approximately 20% growth health care stocks showed for at least a decade, back when I paid attention, was because they were so amazing and efficient and wonderful, not because they were siphoning off more and more of our healthcare dollars.
The paperwork is good because it generates jobs. Jobs we NEED. The American system is the best in the world. A Canadian-style system would cost us a fortune and kill us with crappy care. You won't get to choose your own doctor. You'll wait for surgery, the hospitals will fall apart and no one will ever become a doctor again. You should know all that. Haven't you been watching TV?
"I wasn't aware that the carriers were in the business of manufacturing..."
Oh, yes they ARE. Or rather, they dictate what features will be available in the handsets they sell. in particular, they dictate what the handsets WON'T do. They keep their customers from having the ability to load ringtones, download information, upload music, etc. Anything the providers think they can charge for, they keep the handsets from being able to do via any connectivity outside of communication with the carrier.
Carriers routinely tell manufacturers to cripple their offerings. The manufacturers do it, because if they didn't they'd have to look elsewhere for distribution.
I think this is actually the most obvious and non-controversial aspect of code reviews, and yet I don't see it mentioned anywhere above.
Shame. Pride. Vanity. Whatever. You know other people will look at it, so you make it look better. You take another look at it as if someone else might actually need to understand it, and you make it better before the code review.
That's an absolutely wonderful effect, even if the code review is a bunch of grunting and a rubber stamp.
Furthermore, RNs and especially doctors don't necessarily listen to the lower-class, less educated nurse-like workers, who may know that they don't know what to do, but also know that something is wrong. I've seen them report problems upward and have absolutely nothing happen.
Years ago, probably in the early 1980's, a friend of the family had to be checked into a hospital. She was on dialisys (kidney disease) and obese and had other troubles associated with the combination of those two conditions. Things went wrong for her pretty frequently.
The hospital food cart kept bringer her food that would flat out kill her: no kidneys means no ability to deal with floods of certain chemicals -- potassium, for example. She used to joke about committing "bananacide". She could just eat a few bananas and sit down to wait for the inevitable.
Day after day, meal after meal, the food cart would bring her food she couldn't eat. She was going hungry when she was sick. She would plead with the staff, but they didn't change anything.
My father went to visit her and she begged him to help her. She was getting weaker every day. He talked to the staff and pursued the problem until he got to one of the people actually choosing the meals.
The nutritionists were doing the right thing. They were picking the right foods for someone who was obese and had other problems. They were NOT considering the fact that her kidneys didn't work. Why? Because the screen they saw only had room for a few conditions. The last one on the list -- Kidney failure -- wasn't showing. There were a fixed number of lines.
Someone had to shuffle the order of the values so that the various nutritionists, with their hundreds of patients a day, could keep track of what to feed her from then on.
She died a few days later.
Was it because she'd been underfed for days? Would feeding her have helped? I don't know.
But the story illustrates how a reasonable assumption made by someone in the chain that you'd need, let's say "four" lines in that field there, could kill someone.
Surge suppression seems like a no brainer, but the people making the decisions are not always the people who should be.