If your wearable camera is always on... you're not going to miss any moments, but you're also going to get a load of junk
Who'da thought that? That if you leave your camera on you'd not miss anything. And also realizing that you'd get a lot of junk. It's amazing how perceptive these research people are. And how smart the/. editors are for picking such a prize quote. I can only dream of maybe one day working in research and producing such profound statements as these.
I don't think it's just about drivers. The hardware I use at work is pretty locked down in terms of hardware but these W2K PCs just get slower and slower as time goes on. Every so often (approx. once a year) I have to reimage my hard drive to clear out whatever it is that makes things run slow. Even my wife's PC, on which we install next to nothing beyond what it came with, is beginning to get annoying after only 4 or 5 months.
deallocating the middle third of it and still being able to access the data at either end
Really! That's cool!
How about a language that lets you specify row or column major order for array storage
Sweet! I'll have to add that into my own matrix C++ classes.
Then there's the use of the semi-colon as a statement separator
Ah! So much more logical. ';' is the binary operator for sequencing. I never understood the concept of ';' as a postfix operator that somehow didn't actually do anything but was needed to disambiguate the clearly incorrectly designed grammar.
Where do I get it?
PS Brainfuck is much overrated. It's just a straightforward register machine. I much prefer combinatory logic.
I guess I can see someone's reasoning. Someone somewhere has probably plotted a graph of water level over time and that data makes this whole topic 'scientific'.
Your reading of the publications on this subject is very simplistic. If the number of deaths due to radiation caused cancer were, say, 100, it would be buried under random noise. But they'd still be deaths.
...could be adapted to identify fingerprints making the iPod useless to anyone who stole it. Hmmm...then again this just might result in a black market trade in iPods with fingers.
I'm not sure anyone cares about the preciseness of these definitions. Every IP lawyer I have spoken to describes IP laws as granting the holders a monopoly and yet I found this article criticizing that point of view. The fact is, in these discussions people are arguing over words like 'steal' and 'piracy' because of their pejorative force. Unfortunately, in court, the judge probably has a pretty clear idea of what these terms really mean and whether you call it 'stealing', 'infringement' or 'piracy' is going to make little difference to your sentence.
Despite the fact that anyone pointing out that MS is evil is getting slammed for simply stating the/. party line.
Microsoft can only make money, with free hardware, if the box is locked down to prevent it running software that isn't authorized by Microsoft. It's not hard to see that this is precisely MS's strategy. The Xbox is just the tip of the iceberg. Fortunately MS are not too hot with security and for at least a few years we can expect PCs to still be hackable even when supposedly locked down. But eventually MS will learn, as they always do. And then we'll all be screwed.
The price of the average "IBM" PC sold has dropped by roughly 400%
Er...that would mean they cost minus 3 times what they used to cost. You might want to rephrase that. Trouble is, I'm not sure exactly what you were trying to say so I can't help you.
Just look at what happens when we allow people to make an infinite number of choices. You suddenly find that they can chop up a sphere and rebuild it as two. That's not right!
They didn't mean anything. It was CNN. They switch of their brains the moment a news story contains scientific terminology like "miles per hour" or has too many figures in it.
No. A simpler theory that gets accurate results is often much better than a more accurate theory that's more complex. This is true for two reasons.
(1) The simple practical reason that a simpler theory is often more practical.
(2) If the theory becomes drastically more simple, at the cost of a little accuracy, it may be pointing to a deeper insight into the problem. For example Ptolemaic astronomy could be made to fit planetary orbits as accurately as you like by adding enough epicycles. Initially Keplerian theory appeared to be less accurate, not more. Yet Keplerian theory was ultimately the way to go. In fact, this situation is common in everyday work. It's easy to fit a curve accurately to any amount of data by adding lots of terms but it's often the simple fitted expression that actually does a better job of interpolating correctly between the data points.
Slashdot Mirror
Any opinion you like, as long as it's capitalist extremism.
I don't think it's just about drivers. The hardware I use at work is pretty locked down in terms of hardware but these W2K PCs just get slower and slower as time goes on. Every so often (approx. once a year) I have to reimage my hard drive to clear out whatever it is that makes things run slow. Even my wife's PC, on which we install next to nothing beyond what it came with, is beginning to get annoying after only 4 or 5 months.
But killing companies is legal. In fact, it can be good business practice...
...a lot funnier if you make them actually convincing enough to fool some people. Otherwise they're just pointless crap.
And I thought exactly the same happened in Germany except that it remained at 220V.
Nice one!
Ah! So much more logical. ';' is the binary operator for sequencing. I never understood the concept of ';' as a postfix operator that somehow didn't actually do anything but was needed to disambiguate the clearly incorrectly designed grammar.
Where do I get it?
PS Brainfuck is much overrated. It's just a straightforward register machine. I much prefer combinatory logic.
Years ago I worked at IBM and had to write software in Pascal.
What kind of design tools did you use? And don't say pen and paper.
VHDL, Verilog, something else entirely?
Jacques Verges seems appropriate for an evil terrorist like this.
...my modding down anyone who points it out.
...black people than a KKK-fest.
I guess I can see someone's reasoning. Someone somewhere has probably plotted a graph of water level over time and that data makes this whole topic 'scientific'.
...could be adapted to identify fingerprints making the iPod useless to anyone who stole it. Hmmm...then again this just might result in a black market trade in iPods with fingers.
I'm not sure anyone cares about the preciseness of these definitions. Every IP lawyer I have spoken to describes IP laws as granting the holders a monopoly and yet I found this article criticizing that point of view. The fact is, in these discussions people are arguing over words like 'steal' and 'piracy' because of their pejorative force. Unfortunately, in court, the judge probably has a pretty clear idea of what these terms really mean and whether you call it 'stealing', 'infringement' or 'piracy' is going to make little difference to your sentence.
Microsoft can only make money, with free hardware, if the box is locked down to prevent it running software that isn't authorized by Microsoft. It's not hard to see that this is precisely MS's strategy. The Xbox is just the tip of the iceberg. Fortunately MS are not too hot with security and for at least a few years we can expect PCs to still be hackable even when supposedly locked down. But eventually MS will learn, as they always do. And then we'll all be screwed.
Just look at what happens when we allow people to make an infinite number of choices. You suddenly find that they can chop up a sphere and rebuild it as two. That's not right!
You meant "moral of the story" but you probably already knew that.
They didn't mean anything. It was CNN. They switch of their brains the moment a news story contains scientific terminology like "miles per hour" or has too many figures in it.
(1) The simple practical reason that a simpler theory is often more practical.
(2) If the theory becomes drastically more simple, at the cost of a little accuracy, it may be pointing to a deeper insight into the problem. For example Ptolemaic astronomy could be made to fit planetary orbits as accurately as you like by adding enough epicycles. Initially Keplerian theory appeared to be less accurate, not more. Yet Keplerian theory was ultimately the way to go. In fact, this situation is common in everyday work. It's easy to fit a curve accurately to any amount of data by adding lots of terms but it's often the simple fitted expression that actually does a better job of interpolating correctly between the data points.
I suppose stock markets aren't about trade either.