That is simply not true. Google does have a monopoly in search, and leveraging it, even do destroy Microsoft would be wrong (or evil if you prefer).
Just a hint, having a monopoly doesn't mean that it is hard for competitors to appear. There is another word for that. Having a monopoly just mean that you have nearly all the market for yourself.
The efficiency of any practical hydrogen fuel cell is also around 25%. That is why people just don't care about it. Not to say that it will last just a few years, and the "injection" system is quite unusual.
Ok, the theoretical maximum efficiency is 100%, so it is a great research topic, but it just isn't viable right now.
Why so? Why should he gave examples of wonders the plugins brought to us, and not include Flash? Last time I saw it, Flash was a plugin, and a hightly usefull one (so usefull that everybody and their grandma have it installed).
Thanks, I'm in the comments just so I can avoid RTFA.
Wouldn't it be easier to just do what other languages do, and include an compiler in the runtime interpreter (the VM here)? Or Microsoft is too cool to imitate Lisp?
Send that computer into space and with huge enough radiators you'll have no ongoing spending to cool it into just above 3K. Of course, when we get anywhere near that limit somebody can spend some time thinking how to launch (or manufacture on space) such computer...
I've seen somebody cite some highter clock dependent limit. Altought I can't remember the name, neither understood where it came from when I saw it.
It is easy to handle a certain percentage of your servers failing when you can buy 3 servers at the price of 1 fully redundant one. At least when you have smart people administating them that won't cut short term costs at the expense of long term ones.
The only important variable here is how you storage and service the extra servers. If those are expensive enough, you'd better acquiring some mainframes...
Almost all distros install an MTA by defaul. Also, almost no distro set it by default in a configuration that would make that script work. On most computers setting the MTA for that isn't even a wise thing to do.
I'd be happy if the counter provided an HTTP based script. It could use the same code, just need to create a page that gets the POST data and gives it to the code that currently parses the emails.
On Brazil the copyright rent-seekers (as we all copyright holders now) succeded in getting laws that lead to jail time for offenders at the 90's. The result is that civil processes were replaced by criminal ones, and no not-for-profit infringer got punished after that.
Computers. They are a hell to make work, but you already have a working one, exclusively for you, just in front of you.
Faxes take some work to send too (altough the machine is always in a "good" state), line noises and bad confiurations create tons of problems. They are slow and unreliable (people fax and call back to know if it went through, if it was more than one page long, it didn't). Only an idiot would accept a faxed signature as any kind of evidence (altough that seems to be the common behaviour - says a lot about the average person out there), but digital signatures are to the extent of the human expertize nearly flawless.
Now, scanners also take some work to operate. Differently from the faxes, the amount of work depends on the model, the cheapest and most expensive ones being easier to use, the intermediate ones being harder. Anyway, scanned signatures are a better kind of evidence than faxed ones (because of the better quality of image), altough still not recommended.
Yes, the technological fix is called "digital signature" and differently from a hand made one can't be forged. That characteristic makes disputes much easier to resolve.
Not that I expect them to use good crypto. It seems everybody fails to do so, even when all the algorithms and code are freely available for everybody (or maybe the problem is really that the algorithms and code are freely available for everybody, some people simply like to pay for things).
Yep, that is the old problem of chossing processors that did never realy go away.
You simply can't know what you are buying before you go out and buy one of each to test. And, of course, if you are buying just one or two machines there is no reason at all to test anything.
You can read the specs and go with the processor that is more likely to fit your work, but any detail could change things.
No, if the only goal of any activity is reducing its cost, you have an easy solution, just stop doing it.
But the goal of some investiment (distributing the computers) can quite well be reducing another cost (distributing the books). Even on education it is good to have some money to spend on other things, or even to make it cheaper.
"Computers are not unchanging inanimate objects like hammers in carpentry class."
Yes, they are. Not as slow as a hammer, but they aren't as fast as you are implying. Digital computers are digital computers, they have similar behaviour that is, they emulate a subset of math (altough capabilities vary). Now assembly languages are fadding out, nowadays most people only touch assembly when working on a compiler, there you got a point. High level languages changed little from the 70's, some of the 70's languages are still on the most used set. WIMPI from the 80's, and the command line from the 50's are still strong, with no newer paradigm added. And the list goes on.
The problem here is that, as you also pointed, most computer classes are too specific. The general knowledge is quite stable, specific one is not. That said, it is easy to argue that having computer classes is already a problem.
Slashdot Mirror
So, that answers that question people were making by 2008? A bad economy is indeed good for open source.
My most recent guess was the oposite.
The efficiency of any practical hydrogen fuel cell is also around 25%. That is why people just don't care about it. Not to say that it will last just a few years, and the "injection" system is quite unusual.
Ok, the theoretical maximum efficiency is 100%, so it is a great research topic, but it just isn't viable right now.
Microsoft is finally "selling" Linux. Now they can fade into irrelevance while still feeling confortable because they have a revenue stream.
How long do those patents last?
Why so? Why should he gave examples of wonders the plugins brought to us, and not include Flash? Last time I saw it, Flash was a plugin, and a hightly usefull one (so usefull that everybody and their grandma have it installed).
"Okay, Okay, Oracle!"
It must stop somewhere.
Thanks, I'm in the comments just so I can avoid RTFA.
Wouldn't it be easier to just do what other languages do, and include an compiler in the runtime interpreter (the VM here)? Or Microsoft is too cool to imitate Lisp?
Send that computer into space and with huge enough radiators you'll have no ongoing spending to cool it into just above 3K. Of course, when we get anywhere near that limit somebody can spend some time thinking how to launch (or manufacture on space) such computer...
I've seen somebody cite some highter clock dependent limit. Altought I can't remember the name, neither understood where it came from when I saw it.
Would the unreliability of vacuum tubes be a good reason?
It is easy to handle a certain percentage of your servers failing when you can buy 3 servers at the price of 1 fully redundant one. At least when you have smart people administating them that won't cut short term costs at the expense of long term ones.
The only important variable here is how you storage and service the extra servers. If those are expensive enough, you'd better acquiring some mainframes...
That depends on how many millions you have to spare on extensions.
You should look at a version control system, or at rdiff-backup.
If that is the strategy, Microsoft needs a better name for its product. Windows 8 is named like a replacement for Windows 7.
Almost all distros install an MTA by defaul. Also, almost no distro set it by default in a configuration that would make that script work. On most computers setting the MTA for that isn't even a wise thing to do.
I'd be happy if the counter provided an HTTP based script. It could use the same code, just need to create a page that gets the POST data and gives it to the code that currently parses the emails.
If it is a logo it is by definition without function, and has no place in a minimalist design.
On Brazil the copyright rent-seekers (as we all copyright holders now) succeded in getting laws that lead to jail time for offenders at the 90's. The result is that civil processes were replaced by criminal ones, and no not-for-profit infringer got punished after that.
Of course, supercondutors have many uses besides a 0 resistance cable.
Computers. They are a hell to make work, but you already have a working one, exclusively for you, just in front of you.
Faxes take some work to send too (altough the machine is always in a "good" state), line noises and bad confiurations create tons of problems. They are slow and unreliable (people fax and call back to know if it went through, if it was more than one page long, it didn't). Only an idiot would accept a faxed signature as any kind of evidence (altough that seems to be the common behaviour - says a lot about the average person out there), but digital signatures are to the extent of the human expertize nearly flawless.
Now, scanners also take some work to operate. Differently from the faxes, the amount of work depends on the model, the cheapest and most expensive ones being easier to use, the intermediate ones being harder. Anyway, scanned signatures are a better kind of evidence than faxed ones (because of the better quality of image), altough still not recommended.
Yes, the technological fix is called "digital signature" and differently from a hand made one can't be forged. That characteristic makes disputes much easier to resolve.
Well, it is not. It is way easier to forge a paper document than a digitaly signed one.
Yeah, when will we have some communication protocol where attachements have no size limit and communications are always cryptographed?
If they use good crypto, it won't help at all.
Not that I expect them to use good crypto. It seems everybody fails to do so, even when all the algorithms and code are freely available for everybody (or maybe the problem is really that the algorithms and code are freely available for everybody, some people simply like to pay for things).
Yep, that is the old problem of chossing processors that did never realy go away.
You simply can't know what you are buying before you go out and buy one of each to test. And, of course, if you are buying just one or two machines there is no reason at all to test anything.
You can read the specs and go with the processor that is more likely to fit your work, but any detail could change things.
No, if the only goal of any activity is reducing its cost, you have an easy solution, just stop doing it.
But the goal of some investiment (distributing the computers) can quite well be reducing another cost (distributing the books). Even on education it is good to have some money to spend on other things, or even to make it cheaper.
Yes, they are. Not as slow as a hammer, but they aren't as fast as you are implying. Digital computers are digital computers, they have similar behaviour that is, they emulate a subset of math (altough capabilities vary). Now assembly languages are fadding out, nowadays most people only touch assembly when working on a compiler, there you got a point. High level languages changed little from the 70's, some of the 70's languages are still on the most used set. WIMPI from the 80's, and the command line from the 50's are still strong, with no newer paradigm added. And the list goes on.
The problem here is that, as you also pointed, most computer classes are too specific. The general knowledge is quite stable, specific one is not. That said, it is easy to argue that having computer classes is already a problem.