Just 10%? At the first try? I don't know if you are making the story more belivable (by reducing the error) or if you are simply missremembering things.
At my first try I got a bit more than 20m/s^2. I've never seen somebody get it within a 10% error.
What: People. We expcet to be able to put/usr on a different partition, thus boot scripts can't expect that to be on the same partition as/.
Where: Wherever a network installation makes sense. That means, where you want to have the same installation available on a serie of networked computers.
Wich decade: This decade, and each one since the 70's. Network installations didn't go away, except where people switched to Windows, that can't do network installs, and thus needs a series of different tools (and nanning) for simulating that "let's install this software for everybody" feature.
I'm certain Microsoft has only good intentions with this... I mean, they've never did anything wrong in the past, and all...
But even so, it is still DRM. That means, you'll still be prohibited to use your computer in any unauthorized way, you won't be able to transmit data to unauthorizes devices or computers, you won't be able to communicate with anybody that isn't using Windows, and the government will still be able to force the central controller to delete any data you have that they don't want you to (did you record that time a cop asked you a bribe? forget, it's gone). That is the way DRM works, there is no way around it.
The mounting schema changed upwards on Debian. It is a saner option, not being subject to some obscure hardware bugs, and being more stable when your hardware changes (what with pen drivers happen daily for normal users). The "only" incovenience is that it is a pitta to manualy set anything.
Now, there are two ways you can deal with that inconvenience. You can simply ignore it, if you are root the old way still works (I realise nobody is root at Unbuntu) and you can just do things that way, bugs included of course. Alternatively, you can label your disks (with "e2label whatever_label/dev/your_device" if my memory insn't tricking me, I'm on Windows, and can't check now) and refer to the label instead of the device by "mount LABEL=whatever_label/mountpoint/path" I'd even recommend you to change/etc/fstab to that schema, so that you can replace disks later without further configuration.
Great, take a look at the pharmaceutical industry and you'll see that nearly all of their R&D is done with the single objective of circunvention patents. Anyway, that cost could be severely reduced by changes in government's policies. (Also, R&D is orders of magnitude smaller than marketing... That may be an important point, I'm not certain.)
"But you forget that in each step, someone is trading a good/service to get the money from someone who already has the money, via the bank. Surely this means more people are working and more goods/services are supplied? If the bank couldn't multiply money, only the guy who made the original 1K would have a job."
That's not what it means. The only difference the bank made (ignoring the entire "making lending eaiser" thing) is changing the destinatary of the wealth. If it didn't go to the bank, it would stay with somebody else, and everybody but the bank would be richer.
You can make "clean-room" reverse engineering while (somebody is) looking at the code. The only requirement is that the person writting your software dosen't touch the foreign code.
You are probably confusing it with "black box" reverse engenireeng.
Only if you don't need to understand the big picture. Java makes a good job making personal stiles (good or bad) less relevant, that point is yours. But it also obfuscates the overall architecture of any system that isn't small.
"It was originally based on the idea that the rich landowner would naturally distribute his goods among his tenants, or else risk the material wealth going to waste. After all, he could only personally benefit from a small portion of it."
Really? There was a long time since I read it, but I simply don't remember anything about that in Wealth of the Nations. Are you talking about another of his books? Also, he did say a lot of different things (sometimes even contradictory), most are just marginally related to the core of the book (the Invisible Hand and the division of labor), some aren't even related at all. How does that idea classify?
The GP would also like to know that at Bolivia (where the study was made) it's also written 13.000,00; Just like Europe, or nearly any place that isn't the US.
I quita liked it when they integrateed an IP stack...
But, anyway, integrating IE seems completely irrelevant nowadays. It looks more like "just another (boring) GUI toolkit", and less like "stuff people will use".
Well, if Apple gout out of their garage, they have people like us to thank.
Yeah, nowadays they are focused on a different segment. They just forgot that, no they aren't... As another famous Steve once said, "Developpers, developpers, developpers". A plataform simply can't live without them.
Not less valuable, but less marketeable, as the article says. Both are different things. Also, I don't belive it. But the working environment around here (that I've already jumped out of) may be unusual.
TFA sounds absurd, as it claims that markeability depends on the specific version of softwre you have experience. Like if somebody would hire a person that knows JSF 3.1* (it claims that small numbers aren't as important, but puts some importance on them) but not 3.2*.
Have you ever seen a CV that tells versions of plataforms?
* Really, I have no idea what version JSF is in. Please, don't complain about the numbers.
Well, it may not be the best term, but it is the standard one, decided upon by the time Linux devs still had a sense of humor.
Your polliticaly correct options are crap and would taint the language. 'Critical' means that it can not break, 'serious' well, I've never seen a place where that word would fit for software, you mean, it is not funny? It is really commited? Now 'unstable' just means that the software has a specific kind of problem, it says nothing about the overall quality.
Slashdot Mirror
Just 10%? At the first try? I don't know if you are making the story more belivable (by reducing the error) or if you are simply missremembering things.
At my first try I got a bit more than 20m/s^2. I've never seen somebody get it within a 10% error.
What: People. We expcet to be able to put /usr on a different partition, thus boot scripts can't expect that to be on the same partition as /.
Where: Wherever a network installation makes sense. That means, where you want to have the same installation available on a serie of networked computers.
Wich decade: This decade, and each one since the 70's. Network installations didn't go away, except where people switched to Windows, that can't do network installs, and thus needs a series of different tools (and nanning) for simulating that "let's install this software for everybody" feature.
Non-solutions are great for non-problems.
More often than not, in any country with a minimum level of development it is the middle class.
I'm certain Microsoft has only good intentions with this... I mean, they've never did anything wrong in the past, and all...
But even so, it is still DRM. That means, you'll still be prohibited to use your computer in any unauthorized way, you won't be able to transmit data to unauthorizes devices or computers, you won't be able to communicate with anybody that isn't using Windows, and the government will still be able to force the central controller to delete any data you have that they don't want you to (did you record that time a cop asked you a bribe? forget, it's gone). That is the way DRM works, there is no way around it.
Last time I tried configuring Ubuntu, I couldn't make my (yep, wired) network card work, gave up and turned back to Debian. That was in 2008.
The mounting schema changed upwards on Debian. It is a saner option, not being subject to some obscure hardware bugs, and being more stable when your hardware changes (what with pen drivers happen daily for normal users). The "only" incovenience is that it is a pitta to manualy set anything.
Now, there are two ways you can deal with that inconvenience. You can simply ignore it, if you are root the old way still works (I realise nobody is root at Unbuntu) and you can just do things that way, bugs included of course. Alternatively, you can label your disks (with "e2label whatever_label /dev/your_device" if my memory insn't tricking me, I'm on Windows, and can't check now) and refer to the label instead of the device by "mount LABEL=whatever_label /mountpoint/path" I'd even recommend you to change /etc/fstab to that schema, so that you can replace disks later without further configuration.
I don't know how it works at the US. Here at Brazil the Constitution brings limitations to the amendments, so it is not everything that can change.
Great, take a look at the pharmaceutical industry and you'll see that nearly all of their R&D is done with the single objective of circunvention patents. Anyway, that cost could be severely reduced by changes in government's policies. (Also, R&D is orders of magnitude smaller than marketing... That may be an important point, I'm not certain.)
Probably just as usefull as any normal phototransistor out there.
But this one is a transistor, and made of graphene, a material with very low electrical and thermic resistence.
That's not what it means. The only difference the bank made (ignoring the entire "making lending eaiser" thing) is changing the destinatary of the wealth. If it didn't go to the bank, it would stay with somebody else, and everybody but the bank would be richer.
So, 1984 was one power take-off later than now.
That doesn't make it wrong, just not realized yet.
You can make "clean-room" reverse engineering while (somebody is) looking at the code. The only requirement is that the person writting your software dosen't touch the foreign code.
You are probably confusing it with "black box" reverse engenireeng.
Only if you don't need to understand the big picture. Java makes a good job making personal stiles (good or bad) less relevant, that point is yours. But it also obfuscates the overall architecture of any system that isn't small.
Really? There was a long time since I read it, but I simply don't remember anything about that in Wealth of the Nations. Are you talking about another of his books? Also, he did say a lot of different things (sometimes even contradictory), most are just marginally related to the core of the book (the Invisible Hand and the division of labor), some aren't even related at all. How does that idea classify?
The GP would also like to know that at Bolivia (where the study was made) it's also written 13.000,00; Just like Europe, or nearly any place that isn't the US.
I guess the point was that there would be absolutely no breathing room, and civilization would end anyway.
There are plenty of disasters scheduled to happen on any 10,000 to 30,000 years interval.
I quita liked it when they integrateed an IP stack...
But, anyway, integrating IE seems completely irrelevant nowadays. It looks more like "just another (boring) GUI toolkit", and less like "stuff people will use".
They should be paid way more. Thousands of times more.
And prohibited to work to any cause worth supporting.
Sir, if I ever interview with you, take notice I use the version 8.5 of true and false. Except when bash 4.1.5(1)-release gets in the way.
Well, if Apple gout out of their garage, they have people like us to thank.
Yeah, nowadays they are focused on a different segment. They just forgot that, no they aren't... As another famous Steve once said, "Developpers, developpers, developpers". A plataform simply can't live without them.
Not less valuable, but less marketeable, as the article says. Both are different things. Also, I don't belive it. But the working environment around here (that I've already jumped out of) may be unusual.
TFA sounds absurd, as it claims that markeability depends on the specific version of softwre you have experience. Like if somebody would hire a person that knows JSF 3.1* (it claims that small numbers aren't as important, but puts some importance on them) but not 3.2*.
Have you ever seen a CV that tells versions of plataforms?
* Really, I have no idea what version JSF is in. Please, don't complain about the numbers.
"Preserved in stone" doe not answer the GP's question. Also, does it has feathers? And how are they?
The article makes a very nice job of explaining nothing of importance, out of the "this is the best preserved dinossaur fossil" bit.
Well, it may not be the best term, but it is the standard one, decided upon by the time Linux devs still had a sense of humor.
Your polliticaly correct options are crap and would taint the language. 'Critical' means that it can not break, 'serious' well, I've never seen a place where that word would fit for software, you mean, it is not funny? It is really commited? Now 'unstable' just means that the software has a specific kind of problem, it says nothing about the overall quality.