After reading the "bad news" I immediately thought of how even Star Trek had already addressed this: the Bussard collectors at the front of all warp drives are designed to scoop up interstellar particles and radiation for fuel replenishment.
Obviously Trek is a work of fiction, but the collectors are based on actual theoretical Bussard ramjets/ramscoops proposed in 1960.
And yet 52 years later, with Star Trek providing at least speculative options and real-life regenerative braking on electric and hybrid cars around us, the write-up didn't even think to speculate about somehow collecting and using that energy.
I'm wondering why the Obama administration hasn't turned this right back on these candidates. Asking them why they don't believe in free market principles would make an excellent soundbite and demonstrate the hypocrisy in their words at the same time.
That's pretty shortsighted. It's like everyone betting piling on against Apple--sure, they can't stay on top forever, but neither will they be easily toppled. And like most companies that ruled their market for a long time, they can ride their momentum for years even if everything starts going wrong for them (Myspace itself is an example of this).
Social networking has a "low barrier to entry" only as far as stereotypical geeks can understand: the technology. It's like the *social* half of that buzzphrase is totally ignored. Unless and until you have a critical mass of people, upstart social networks will remain a niche market. Diaspora is a great example of "technology there, people aren't". Google last year tried capitalizing on the anti-Facebook sentiment that was growing fast, but shot themselves repeatedly in the feet. If it were that easy to get people to dump them, someone would have developed that service by now, and yet there's nothing out there now that looks like a viable replacement.
I drive manual. All the times I've stalled it by accident when learning (and the occasional stall now) will surely have caused more engine wear than stopping and restarting an engine on purpose.
My dad also does this, on a auto-trans Ford minivan from 1998. It isn't doing great after 14 years, but it's obvious the constant on-road startups haven't reduced the overall lifespan much at all, though of course there's been routine maintenance and parts replaced through normal wear and tear in a climate that can see +35C in summer and -30C in winter.
Just one more reason I turn my car off instead of idling gas away when I know I'll be stopped for more than 30 seconds--stopped at a red light, waiting for someone, etc. The break even point (idling vs. gas used when re-starting car and offsetting battery drain) is around 10 seconds, I'd previously heard up to 20 seconds.
This makes even more sense in several US cities I've visited, where some red lights last for 1-3 minutes!
If this is too pooh-pooh environmentalist BS for you, then approach it from a selfish point of view--you're wasting gas and therefore money. If you're idling for 5 minutes a day, after a year that's 10 gallons wasted gas a year if you have a small-engine car, or 20 gallons for a V8. Do the math with your area's current gas prices, and sure, $30-$100 over one year isn't THAT much, but it's not pocket change either.
Source, which also addresses old myths that say why we should idle.
If you brought an iPhone back to 1995 they wouldn't believe you were from the future because it has an Apple logo on it, and everyone knew they were always just a few months from going out of business.
The Canadian dollar is, at the moment I'm writing this, worth more than the US dollar.
We'll keep our different-coloured bills and dollar/two-dollar coins, they are far nicer and more convenient to carry around anyway, and they don't smell like unwashed body:-P
It's fine to blame the Liberals (or the most-recent government of a different party) for laws they passed and screwed up and the current government has to fix, but stop blaming the Liberals for legislation that never passed. If the Conservatives thought it was a bad bill, they wouldn't have resurrected it.
And FYI, many Liberal supporters fought against those bills when the Liberals introduced them. Why can't Conservative supporters stop blindly supporting bills and laws just because they're backed by Conservatives? Are they that blind that they MUST unwaveringly follow their leader in all things?
C-30 was backpedaled on not because of massive public outcry, because the Harper Conservatives are used to ignoring that. What they AREN'T used to is a significant number of their base vocally and publicly turning on them. Even Sun News, the far-right news outlet that almost always supports the Conservative agenda, called Toews "an idiot" and said the bill was indefensible ("in its current form").
I eval'ed it for our company a month after release. It could play Flash content (which our legacy stuff still uses), but that was about the only real selling point for it. My 2-year old iPhone 3GS handled truly basic and small PDFs 10 times better than the Playbook did (the PB actually *froze* for seconds at a time when trying to scroll these PDFs). But the boss declared the lack of native email/contact/calendar apps to be a deal-breaker.
We are a small company and only one of us has a Blackberry, the rest were iPhones or dumb phones. RIM obviously didn't want to sell their product to small businesses like ours, we obliged by not buying it.
To be fair, though, we ought to re-evaluate it now that PBOS v2 is out and addresses that deal-breaker.
Not that I disagree with anything you said, and I'm loathe to defend religious institutions engaged in suppressing the rights of women, but...
Are these organizations even *allowed* to hire based on whether the candidate shares their faith? Isn't this a big legal no-no question on applications and interviews, along with race, orientation, etc? Outside of hiring for the church proper, I mean--an example was church-affiliated hospitals.
If they aren't permitted by law to discriminate based on faith, then they're in a Catch-22 situation as far hiring staff who don't share their beliefs, and therefore must cover contraception in employee plans.
(Which I totally support--just like religious pharmacists must legally dispense contraceptive medication, IIRC)
There's one way I know for sure, and one possibility. For sure: duplicate the application and launch the duplicate. This is the "user friendly" method Possible: True Mac apps are actually folders with a.app extension, and the actual UNIX executable within. It might be possible to use the command line and launch the executable directly, to get a separate instance.
In both cases, there may be preference and file locking conflicts, though for simple programs this isn't likely. Programs like iTunes, Word, and browsers would be more prone to this.
Forget the moon rocks. The best evidence that the moon landings are real was the utter lack of righteous Soviet propaganda at the time denouncing the landings as a fake.
Ah, but of course, the Soviet and the American governments were conspiring together to keep the Cold War going... rolleyes...
Both left and right try invoking emotional responses, the difference is the left typically goes for guilt, for causes benefiting the more defenseless, (children, animals, environment, developing nations, oppressed peoples, etc), and the right goes for righteous anger (you are being screwed by the morons in charge, here's how!).
In Canada, the last 6 months have seen the Conservatives in charge accuse opponents of draconian copyright and tough-on-crime legislation of being extremists or terrorists ourselves. Even Texas Republicans were too pinko socialist for them when they advised that the proposed crime and punishment legislation had already been tried in Texas and failed to achieve the desired results, at great expense.
The feather in their cap was last week, when the minister in charge of a new internet surveillance bill claimed that opponents were siding with child pornographers. That's about as emotional a charge as you can make, even more than "terrorists", and that charge blew up in their faces most spectacularly--Members of Parliament from their own party turned on them, and even the far-right Sun News, our equivalent of Fox News and could always be counted on to support the Conservative agenda, called the minister "an idiot" and denounced the bill "in its current form". The government quickly backpedaled and sent the bill back to committee before second reading. They don't care when the majority of Canadians don't support them (Canadian elections are won with a plurality, since votes are split across 4 major parties and several minor ones), but when a vocal part of their base turns on them they react FAST.
Right. So an aircraft flying low and towards your general direction but will with 99% certainty overfly you or your property.... should be shot down, with a 90% chance of crashing right on your head or property (or neighbour's house).
The OSX Dock bounce just provides confirmation that the user action was acted upon. It's not a progress indicator as such, and it stops bouncing after about 5 seconds even if the program hasn't displayed anything in its own yet.
But, it does mean the user won't try launching the program a second time, which I think this sub-thread specifically was talking about.
There's a fundamental difference: in Mac OSX, it's not a developer option. All user applications start bouncing in the Dock the moment they're launched.
If, as you say, devs on Windows 7 *can* do this, this is clearly the wrong approach, because older programs won't be re-written to support this. I just tried my work machine running Windows 7, launched Word and a video capture program. In both cases, nothing appeared in the Taskbar until the splash screen appeared or was done. This meant a delay appearing in the Taskbar of 2-5 seconds.
Also, on a Mac it's impossible to launch a second instance of a program by double-clicking it again, or clicking its icon in the Dock, etc, so it's a bit of a moot point.
I'm arguing with my boss right now over including a progress indicator when loading new modules/content in an online course. It can take between 10-20 seconds to load certain modules, during which the page is blank.
We both agree *some* indicator is needed, but he wants a progress bar while I favour the "endless loop" (spinning pinwheel, dots chasing each other in a circle, whatever), because there is no way for us to query the system to know what the real progress is and how much is left.
As much as I dislike "endless loop" animations myself, it's at least honest. A fake progress bar that goes quickly at first and then inches towards the finish line (or worse, reaches the end and then REPEATS) pisses me off. But that's me speaking as a techy, which most of our audience is not.
Then I searched for that line and from the results preview text I thought it was a clever tongue-in-cheek product from WD--April Fools joke or something. Then I visited the WD page and realized they were serious.
Then I remembered that in IT circles there's already "private clouds" and upper management loves the idea--it's *like* a cloud, but it's internal to the company so it's more secure.
So WD calling this a "personal cloud" is just an extension of that--it's *like* a private cloud, but we've made it so simple you can have one in your own home for your various devices to connect to!
There are no more Progressive Conservatives, of course. I actually could have voted for them against the Liberals. But the PCs sold their souls for short-sighted political gain and got assimilated by the Reform/Canadian Alliance party. Otherwise I agree with your post.
Where previous governments were able to pass laws and do stuff with actual consequences, the current government and their supporters at least has some justification for claiming "we're cleaning up the mess" even if I don't agree with what they're doing.
But in this case that's a retarded stance for them to take. This was legislation started under Liberals, never enacted, and died a few times due to minority governments falling. If the Conservatives truly thought it was bad, they would have scrapped it. Instead they're resurrecting it yet again. They are therefore fully to blame for this legislation.
The Liberals may have started the ball rolling, but you can't tell me the Conservatives haven't made changes to it.
Otherwise, Vic Toews, the sponsoring Member of Parliament, has had TEN YEARS to read and understand this bill and still admits to not knowing what every single part of it contains.
I know, we got the $1 coins as change at a transit station in Boston. Problem is when they introduced the coins, the US didn't *withdraw* $1 bills from circulation like Canada and other countries did.
It's like the Apple vs PC approach: legacy support is nice, but if you don't pull the plug no one will change their habits, even if the change is for the better.
When I visited So-Cal last year, I had a few Canadian pennies mixed in with my US currency. Every time one (and only one) slipped in when I paid cash, the store rejected it. In Canada we just don't care if an American penny, nickel or even dime slips in.
It was all the more amusing because our dollar higher than the US at the time, so technically that penny was actually worth more.
$1 US bills annoy the heck out of me whenever I visit. I remember taking a bus in Vegas in 2006, it averaged 10 seconds to board each person because the fare machine would suck in each $1 bill individually, roll it back out, then suck it in a second time--I assume for verifying secondary characteristics. I think the fare was $2, at 3 seconds per bill, add in time for bills rejected because people put them in wrong. It was beyond retarded--we're not talking $20 or even $5 bills, I'd understand verifying those more carefully.
We've had $1 and $2 coins in Canada for awhile now, they just make sense.
Slashdot Mirror
After reading the "bad news" I immediately thought of how even Star Trek had already addressed this: the Bussard collectors at the front of all warp drives are designed to scoop up interstellar particles and radiation for fuel replenishment.
Obviously Trek is a work of fiction, but the collectors are based on actual theoretical Bussard ramjets/ramscoops proposed in 1960.
And yet 52 years later, with Star Trek providing at least speculative options and real-life regenerative braking on electric and hybrid cars around us, the write-up didn't even think to speculate about somehow collecting and using that energy.
I'm wondering why the Obama administration hasn't turned this right back on these candidates. Asking them why they don't believe in free market principles would make an excellent soundbite and demonstrate the hypocrisy in their words at the same time.
That's pretty shortsighted. It's like everyone betting piling on against Apple--sure, they can't stay on top forever, but neither will they be easily toppled. And like most companies that ruled their market for a long time, they can ride their momentum for years even if everything starts going wrong for them (Myspace itself is an example of this).
Social networking has a "low barrier to entry" only as far as stereotypical geeks can understand: the technology. It's like the *social* half of that buzzphrase is totally ignored. Unless and until you have a critical mass of people, upstart social networks will remain a niche market. Diaspora is a great example of "technology there, people aren't". Google last year tried capitalizing on the anti-Facebook sentiment that was growing fast, but shot themselves repeatedly in the feet. If it were that easy to get people to dump them, someone would have developed that service by now, and yet there's nothing out there now that looks like a viable replacement.
I'd argue that's negligible, though I'll happily check sources proving otherwise.
I drive manual. All the times I've stalled it by accident when learning (and the occasional stall now) will surely have caused more engine wear than stopping and restarting an engine on purpose.
My dad also does this, on a auto-trans Ford minivan from 1998. It isn't doing great after 14 years, but it's obvious the constant on-road startups haven't reduced the overall lifespan much at all, though of course there's been routine maintenance and parts replaced through normal wear and tear in a climate that can see +35C in summer and -30C in winter.
Just one more reason I turn my car off instead of idling gas away when I know I'll be stopped for more than 30 seconds--stopped at a red light, waiting for someone, etc. The break even point (idling vs. gas used when re-starting car and offsetting battery drain) is around 10 seconds, I'd previously heard up to 20 seconds.
This makes even more sense in several US cities I've visited, where some red lights last for 1-3 minutes!
If this is too pooh-pooh environmentalist BS for you, then approach it from a selfish point of view--you're wasting gas and therefore money. If you're idling for 5 minutes a day, after a year that's 10 gallons wasted gas a year if you have a small-engine car, or 20 gallons for a V8. Do the math with your area's current gas prices, and sure, $30-$100 over one year isn't THAT much, but it's not pocket change either.
Source, which also addresses old myths that say why we should idle.
Nah, better than that.
If you brought an iPhone back to 1995 they wouldn't believe you were from the future because it has an Apple logo on it, and everyone knew they were always just a few months from going out of business.
The Canadian dollar is, at the moment I'm writing this, worth more than the US dollar.
We'll keep our different-coloured bills and dollar/two-dollar coins, they are far nicer and more convenient to carry around anyway, and they don't smell like unwashed body :-P
It's fine to blame the Liberals (or the most-recent government of a different party) for laws they passed and screwed up and the current government has to fix, but stop blaming the Liberals for legislation that never passed. If the Conservatives thought it was a bad bill, they wouldn't have resurrected it.
And FYI, many Liberal supporters fought against those bills when the Liberals introduced them. Why can't Conservative supporters stop blindly supporting bills and laws just because they're backed by Conservatives? Are they that blind that they MUST unwaveringly follow their leader in all things?
C-30 was backpedaled on not because of massive public outcry, because the Harper Conservatives are used to ignoring that. What they AREN'T used to is a significant number of their base vocally and publicly turning on them. Even Sun News, the far-right news outlet that almost always supports the Conservative agenda, called Toews "an idiot" and said the bill was indefensible ("in its current form").
Yep. About as stupid as managers evaluating developers based on the quantity of code they produce, rather than quality.
I eval'ed it for our company a month after release. It could play Flash content (which our legacy stuff still uses), but that was about the only real selling point for it. My 2-year old iPhone 3GS handled truly basic and small PDFs 10 times better than the Playbook did (the PB actually *froze* for seconds at a time when trying to scroll these PDFs). But the boss declared the lack of native email/contact/calendar apps to be a deal-breaker.
We are a small company and only one of us has a Blackberry, the rest were iPhones or dumb phones. RIM obviously didn't want to sell their product to small businesses like ours, we obliged by not buying it.
To be fair, though, we ought to re-evaluate it now that PBOS v2 is out and addresses that deal-breaker.
Not that I disagree with anything you said, and I'm loathe to defend religious institutions engaged in suppressing the rights of women, but...
Are these organizations even *allowed* to hire based on whether the candidate shares their faith? Isn't this a big legal no-no question on applications and interviews, along with race, orientation, etc? Outside of hiring for the church proper, I mean--an example was church-affiliated hospitals.
If they aren't permitted by law to discriminate based on faith, then they're in a Catch-22 situation as far hiring staff who don't share their beliefs, and therefore must cover contraception in employee plans.
(Which I totally support--just like religious pharmacists must legally dispense contraceptive medication, IIRC)
There's one way I know for sure, and one possibility. .app extension, and the actual UNIX executable within. It might be possible to use the command line and launch the executable directly, to get a separate instance.
For sure: duplicate the application and launch the duplicate. This is the "user friendly" method
Possible: True Mac apps are actually folders with a
In both cases, there may be preference and file locking conflicts, though for simple programs this isn't likely. Programs like iTunes, Word, and browsers would be more prone to this.
Forget the moon rocks. The best evidence that the moon landings are real was the utter lack of righteous Soviet propaganda at the time denouncing the landings as a fake.
Ah, but of course, the Soviet and the American governments were conspiring together to keep the Cold War going... rolleyes...
Both left and right try invoking emotional responses, the difference is the left typically goes for guilt, for causes benefiting the more defenseless, (children, animals, environment, developing nations, oppressed peoples, etc), and the right goes for righteous anger (you are being screwed by the morons in charge, here's how!).
In Canada, the last 6 months have seen the Conservatives in charge accuse opponents of draconian copyright and tough-on-crime legislation of being extremists or terrorists ourselves. Even Texas Republicans were too pinko socialist for them when they advised that the proposed crime and punishment legislation had already been tried in Texas and failed to achieve the desired results, at great expense.
The feather in their cap was last week, when the minister in charge of a new internet surveillance bill claimed that opponents were siding with child pornographers. That's about as emotional a charge as you can make, even more than "terrorists", and that charge blew up in their faces most spectacularly--Members of Parliament from their own party turned on them, and even the far-right Sun News, our equivalent of Fox News and could always be counted on to support the Conservative agenda, called the minister "an idiot" and denounced the bill "in its current form". The government quickly backpedaled and sent the bill back to committee before second reading. They don't care when the majority of Canadians don't support them (Canadian elections are won with a plurality, since votes are split across 4 major parties and several minor ones), but when a vocal part of their base turns on them they react FAST.
Right. So an aircraft flying low and towards your general direction but will with 99% certainty overfly you or your property.... should be shot down, with a 90% chance of crashing right on your head or property (or neighbour's house).
Brilliant.
The OSX Dock bounce just provides confirmation that the user action was acted upon. It's not a progress indicator as such, and it stops bouncing after about 5 seconds even if the program hasn't displayed anything in its own yet.
But, it does mean the user won't try launching the program a second time, which I think this sub-thread specifically was talking about.
There's a fundamental difference: in Mac OSX, it's not a developer option. All user applications start bouncing in the Dock the moment they're launched.
If, as you say, devs on Windows 7 *can* do this, this is clearly the wrong approach, because older programs won't be re-written to support this. I just tried my work machine running Windows 7, launched Word and a video capture program. In both cases, nothing appeared in the Taskbar until the splash screen appeared or was done. This meant a delay appearing in the Taskbar of 2-5 seconds.
Also, on a Mac it's impossible to launch a second instance of a program by double-clicking it again, or clicking its icon in the Dock, etc, so it's a bit of a moot point.
I'm arguing with my boss right now over including a progress indicator when loading new modules/content in an online course. It can take between 10-20 seconds to load certain modules, during which the page is blank.
We both agree *some* indicator is needed, but he wants a progress bar while I favour the "endless loop" (spinning pinwheel, dots chasing each other in a circle, whatever), because there is no way for us to query the system to know what the real progress is and how much is left.
As much as I dislike "endless loop" animations myself, it's at least honest. A fake progress bar that goes quickly at first and then inches towards the finish line (or worse, reaches the end and then REPEATS) pisses me off. But that's me speaking as a techy, which most of our audience is not.
I really did laugh when I first read that.
Then I searched for that line and from the results preview text I thought it was a clever tongue-in-cheek product from WD--April Fools joke or something. Then I visited the WD page and realized they were serious.
Then I remembered that in IT circles there's already "private clouds" and upper management loves the idea--it's *like* a cloud, but it's internal to the company so it's more secure.
So WD calling this a "personal cloud" is just an extension of that--it's *like* a private cloud, but we've made it so simple you can have one in your own home for your various devices to connect to!
Not so funny anymore. Sigh...
There are no more Progressive Conservatives, of course. I actually could have voted for them against the Liberals. But the PCs sold their souls for short-sighted political gain and got assimilated by the Reform/Canadian Alliance party. Otherwise I agree with your post.
Where previous governments were able to pass laws and do stuff with actual consequences, the current government and their supporters at least has some justification for claiming "we're cleaning up the mess" even if I don't agree with what they're doing.
But in this case that's a retarded stance for them to take. This was legislation started under Liberals, never enacted, and died a few times due to minority governments falling. If the Conservatives truly thought it was bad, they would have scrapped it. Instead they're resurrecting it yet again. They are therefore fully to blame for this legislation.
The Liberals may have started the ball rolling, but you can't tell me the Conservatives haven't made changes to it.
Otherwise, Vic Toews, the sponsoring Member of Parliament, has had TEN YEARS to read and understand this bill and still admits to not knowing what every single part of it contains.
I know, we got the $1 coins as change at a transit station in Boston. Problem is when they introduced the coins, the US didn't *withdraw* $1 bills from circulation like Canada and other countries did.
It's like the Apple vs PC approach: legacy support is nice, but if you don't pull the plug no one will change their habits, even if the change is for the better.
Catch-22 if IE10 loads those pages faster than anyone else:
Microsoft will be ridiculed for finishing the task too quickly.
When I visited So-Cal last year, I had a few Canadian pennies mixed in with my US currency. Every time one (and only one) slipped in when I paid cash, the store rejected it. In Canada we just don't care if an American penny, nickel or even dime slips in.
It was all the more amusing because our dollar higher than the US at the time, so technically that penny was actually worth more.
$1 US bills annoy the heck out of me whenever I visit. I remember taking a bus in Vegas in 2006, it averaged 10 seconds to board each person because the fare machine would suck in each $1 bill individually, roll it back out, then suck it in a second time--I assume for verifying secondary characteristics. I think the fare was $2, at 3 seconds per bill, add in time for bills rejected because people put them in wrong. It was beyond retarded--we're not talking $20 or even $5 bills, I'd understand verifying those more carefully.
We've had $1 and $2 coins in Canada for awhile now, they just make sense.