You'd need to mix near a hundred different types of LEDs, with different currents going into each of them. Also, some of those LEDs you must mix aren't currently made by anybody.
The spectrum from a LED bulb is better than florescent.
That is not a certainty. Some LEDs have a better spectrum than some fluorescents, with other models, it's the other way around.
The spectrum depends basicaly on the selection of phosphour on both lamps. Fluorescent are better tested, thus the cheaper ones are usualy better than the cheaper LEDs. When you get into the expensive ones, only God knows.
The problem with that rationale is that the set of developers that make systems that crash often is hightly correlated with the set of developers that make FSs that corrupt data often.
The sole example where it works is when you have the policy and budget to replace anything that takes an error.
Ok, forgetting that ECC also corrects random errors that happen on functional hardware... WTF? Of course detecting problems is only usefull if you have the 'policy' of correcting them somehow.
That's because we killed all of them, using the tools inteligence gave us.
You *hardly* need intelligence to survive.
Well, we need it. Other species have other survival strategies, we have inteligence. And it is a great strategy, proof of that is that for terrestrial milticelular organisms, the second best strategy today is being tasty for us. The mistery is, it being such a great strategy, why didn't more species develop inteligence?
it's highly improbable that you and I would happen to be in the first ~0.05% of human history
Of course it is. Also, the probability that we happen to be exactly in the X% of the human history we actualy are is zero. That doesn't bring any information about the longevity of our species.
One doesn't make rapid prototypes. Really, nobody does. Some people expect to do, even write documents saying they'll do, but they never stay prototypes. So, let's be realists, and forget that concept for once. (I tought everybody did already move to non-functional prototypes by now.)
Now, with that said, Python is a great choice everywhere you won't need performance. I'd enforce the GP's option.
The moral of this story is FUCK THE GOVERNMENTS and instead simply make as good a product as you can to fit a price point.
To put that lesson in a more educative way, when you want to make the life of people better, if you need money, you'd better get the money directly from them, and not use the government as a proxy.
Are you easily hurst, or just celebrating political correctness?
If one writes a book for alfabetizing kids, he wouldn't recommend it for gratuate students, as he wouldn't recommend a book about the mathematical fundamentals of superstrings for those first kids.
They are also doing it to MPEG, and DVD, and MS is behind both. They're being quite fair here: less money to all the trolls, including Microsoft.
That's great both ways. As you said, it is less money for the trolls, also, it levels the playing field with free software. I just don't have any idea how Microsoft benefits. In another time I'd have said that they must benefit somehow, since Microsft doesn't do anything without a complex insidious plan that will surface later... But nowadays, I'm not sure they'll benefit. The most probable explanation is that they see that as a requisite for making W8 tablets and phones competitible.
Well, codecs are a special case of that, because they cost something. Now, if MS starts to charge for every functionality of Windows they... Oh, wait, they already to that. It is not like Windows actualy does something out of the box.
Think about it this way: There are options A and B, those are mutualy exclusive, and you must choose one of them. Now, half the people wants you to do A, and the other half wants you to do B. How can you do something that won't be criticized?
That's the craziest part. By 1995 I was traveling (yeah, physicaly, by car) into my to be ISP's office expecting to get out of it with a bunch of 3 1/2 floppies with the installer of Netscape Navigator. I was surprized (and a bit suspicious) when they gave me an Internet Explorer installer, as I've never heard about it. That was only 17 years ago.
If you look at how much time it takes to install Linux compared to Windows and reinstall everytime there's an update, you are really not truly saving any money.
Are you just missinformed, right? You are repeating MS's propaganda just because it is the only thing you ever readed, right?
The point is, you don't reinstall Linux. When a new version comes out, you upgrade (that means, you log as root and type aptitude dist-upgrade, or whatever applies to your distro - I know, Windows users have a differenet meaning for the word "upgrade"), when you change your hardware, you simply put your disk on the new machine, when you replace your disk, you simply copy the contents to the new disk.
I can think about 2 exceptions. When Linux switched to 2.6 a few distros didn't upgrade clearly, and when people started to adopt 64 bit distros it was easier to reinstall than to switch everything. Compare that with Windows, that still self destructs after a few months.
Slashdot Mirror
The rocks have a sense of humor.
By the way, you seem to be lacking one.
You are right. We must destroy that idea that we should get out and destroy ideas!
There was a time when XP could run on 64MB of RAM. I normaly use a 1GB computer that can barely run it nowadays.
Yep, the US is the one getting an easy life out of the deal.
Both countries accept it because the elites of both sites benefit, but one set of population gets an outcome that is much worse than the other.
There is a huge difference from creating a light beam that appears to be white and a beam that illuminates objects the same way white light does.
You'd need to mix near a hundred different types of LEDs, with different currents going into each of them. Also, some of those LEDs you must mix aren't currently made by anybody.
That is not a certainty. Some LEDs have a better spectrum than some fluorescents, with other models, it's the other way around.
The spectrum depends basicaly on the selection of phosphour on both lamps. Fluorescent are better tested, thus the cheaper ones are usualy better than the cheaper LEDs. When you get into the expensive ones, only God knows.
The problem with that rationale is that the set of developers that make systems that crash often is hightly correlated with the set of developers that make FSs that corrupt data often.
Ok, forgetting that ECC also corrects random errors that happen on functional hardware... WTF? Of course detecting problems is only usefull if you have the 'policy' of correcting them somehow.
No, cancer also reproduces faster than it should.
That's because we killed all of them, using the tools inteligence gave us.
Well, we need it. Other species have other survival strategies, we have inteligence. And it is a great strategy, proof of that is that for terrestrial milticelular organisms, the second best strategy today is being tasty for us. The mistery is, it being such a great strategy, why didn't more species develop inteligence?
Of course it is. Also, the probability that we happen to be exactly in the X% of the human history we actualy are is zero. That doesn't bring any information about the longevity of our species.
One doesn't make rapid prototypes. Really, nobody does. Some people expect to do, even write documents saying they'll do, but they never stay prototypes. So, let's be realists, and forget that concept for once. (I tought everybody did already move to non-functional prototypes by now.)
Now, with that said, Python is a great choice everywhere you won't need performance. I'd enforce the GP's option.
To put that lesson in a more educative way, when you want to make the life of people better, if you need money, you'd better get the money directly from them, and not use the government as a proxy.
Are you easily hurst, or just celebrating political correctness?
If one writes a book for alfabetizing kids, he wouldn't recommend it for gratuate students, as he wouldn't recommend a book about the mathematical fundamentals of superstrings for those first kids.
Is that phrase (it's literal meaning) false?
This is not about migration*, it is about a new deployment.
* Ok, it is about migration, they are migrating from Windows to Linux while doing a system reachitecture.
Yes.
Not on countries that recognize software patents.
They are also doing it to MPEG, and DVD, and MS is behind both. They're being quite fair here: less money to all the trolls, including Microsoft.
That's great both ways. As you said, it is less money for the trolls, also, it levels the playing field with free software. I just don't have any idea how Microsoft benefits. In another time I'd have said that they must benefit somehow, since Microsft doesn't do anything without a complex insidious plan that will surface later... But nowadays, I'm not sure they'll benefit. The most probable explanation is that they see that as a requisite for making W8 tablets and phones competitible.
Well, codecs are a special case of that, because they cost something. Now, if MS starts to charge for every functionality of Windows they... Oh, wait, they already to that. It is not like Windows actualy does something out of the box.
Quite so.
Think about it this way: There are options A and B, those are mutualy exclusive, and you must choose one of them. Now, half the people wants you to do A, and the other half wants you to do B. How can you do something that won't be criticized?
That's the craziest part. By 1995 I was traveling (yeah, physicaly, by car) into my to be ISP's office expecting to get out of it with a bunch of 3 1/2 floppies with the installer of Netscape Navigator. I was surprized (and a bit suspicious) when they gave me an Internet Explorer installer, as I've never heard about it. That was only 17 years ago.
On telephones and tablets, sure they will. On PCs, of course, they won't.
Are you just missinformed, right? You are repeating MS's propaganda just because it is the only thing you ever readed, right?
The point is, you don't reinstall Linux. When a new version comes out, you upgrade (that means, you log as root and type aptitude dist-upgrade, or whatever applies to your distro - I know, Windows users have a differenet meaning for the word "upgrade"), when you change your hardware, you simply put your disk on the new machine, when you replace your disk, you simply copy the contents to the new disk.
I can think about 2 exceptions. When Linux switched to 2.6 a few distros didn't upgrade clearly, and when people started to adopt 64 bit distros it was easier to reinstall than to switch everything. Compare that with Windows, that still self destructs after a few months.
From everything that MS is saying recently, the obvious conclusion is that Windows 8 is not for PCs at all.