7) Japan had repeatedly announced that if we moved the battle onto Japanese land, they would torture and kill all of their POWs. A quick and decisive victory became the only sure way to save those lives.
For a lot of personality types, it's all about who does it, not what's being done. You can predict many political and social groups' response to any situation by looking at the players instead of looking at the situation itself.
Believe it or not, you can even find people who will only listen to music or read books by unpopular artists because they have an automatic bias toward the downtrodden, regardless of the artist's merits.
The study in question is generally cited as "the" definitive proof of global warming. The "hockey stick graph" with a recent uptick in temperatures was discredited when peers demonstrated that feeding even white noise or parallel downward sloping lines into the researchers' plotting program as temperature data produced graphs with a large uptick at the end. Initially the researchers withdrew the study after these findings, then reinstated the study without comment.
I don't know nearly enough to understand everything in play here, or whether the complaints against the study were subject to review as well -- they could very well be errors themselves. I do understand however why that kind of strange history, combined with the importance of the research, makes it such an attractive target.
Not that the above excuses anything like researching the scientists unless there's strong reason to believe a crime occurred!
Let's hope that putting video games on ritalin and sending them through sensitivity training isn't half as destructive to gaming as it's been to Hollywood.
I've yet to hear a good argument against the Intel switch, transition difficulties aside. It's all been emotional twitching. I'll retract that if you can back up your assertion -- can you name a single noteworthy developer who's abandoning the Mac because of the Intel switch?
I'm a developer, and I'm switching over now because I see many more people moving to Mac for many of the reasons I gave. I want in on the quick growth that's going to come when the Intel Macs are released, and I don't anticipate being magically proficient overnight.
What stopped me before was that the average Mac user had something about as powerful as a four year old PC. Not a particularly interesting playground.
"though do you 'tile vertically' windows from 2 different apps in windows? I didn't think that it was possible. The best you get is 2 windows from the same app or multiple sub windows in the same app when in MDI."
Sure, "tile vertically" is available by right-clicking on the taskbar. If one doc is in an MDI, maximize the subwindow within the MDI window.
I've been using the Mac full time for a month now. There are two things missing from Windows that drive me absolutely battyboth tied to the lack of automated window arrangement. "Tile vertically" is all I ask. 90% of the time, I'm using 2 apps side by side, and I hate constantly juggling windows.
The second thing is the lack of a maximize button. Zoom doesn't cut it. I want to make one window full-screen with a click. A few programs like Mail.App let you command-zoom to maximize. But most just maximize vertically or fit the window to the size of the data inside it.
If I really do have to keep juggling manually (is this how they sell you a Cinema 30"?) can I at least have sticky edges so windows gravitate toward screen and nearby window edges when moving and sizing?
I recently switched to Mac because of the upcoming Intel switch. MacOS has been a pretty attractive platform since OS X 10.1 or so, but for all the ranting and raving about the PowerPC, it just doesn't stack up against P4 for general purpose computing. (Altivec is nice, but only helps in "broad brush" operations. It's pointless outside of graphic processing tasks.) Going Intel will be a huge boost for general purpose computing.
Meanwhile, I'm looking ahead at Longhorn. I'm not seeing Windows maturing in the way we'd all expected --.NET was supposed to help unify the branching 64 bit architectures and foster finer-grained security controls, but MS are backing away from.NET for Longhorn. Instead of eating their own dog food and telling us it's good, they're telling third party developers "you go first" and apparently waiting to see if it's safe for THEM first. Why is skipping out on.NET so bad? Things are bad enough with wildly different Windows configurations, thanks to MS' lack of library/DLL versioning and much larger range of hardware platforms. It's impossible for a developer to test or even forsee every target configuration. And now instead of migrating to.NET with versioning and a narrowed virtual target platform, we're just going to add random combinations of DLLs from 3-4 slightly different CPU architectures in the mix.
MS' operating system lifecycle is 3 years and growing, and we're preparing to see more of the same. The current model is too fragile to do new and exciting things reliably, and so unless MS are working on a new OS in secret, Windows is going to be a pretty boring place for the next 3-5 years.
And how long will it take before a bitter spammer sends out 100 million emails including links to anti-spam sites or ISPs who have kicked them off in the past?
You had nomads slitting each others' throats to steal their food, furs and women. Or you had local warlords - be they priests or kings - creating tiers of people who benefited under the warlord's charge. The upper echelon shared agreements with the top as to how they divvied up the enslaved population in exchange for protection from aggressors and the warlord himself.
Nonsense. Germany has worker protection and their 3rd quarter is better than our 3rd quarter.
Germany's unemployment rate is currently about 12%. Germany's second quintile disposable income for 2004 was about 19k Euros, roughly half the US disposable income for the same group. Further, a much smaller percentage of them own homes and businesses.
technological improvements overwhelm differences in distribution of wealth. You need to subtract technology off and to do that you need to look at their wealth relative to the wealth of their society.
One needs to look long and hard to find quality of life improvements that didn't start in or become affordable through corporations.
And comparing CEOs and shareholders to kings? Precious few kings ever brought the seed capital to create their kingdoms or funded quarterly losses in anticipation of future payback.
And the CEOs and shareholders of HP did do that?
Compare recent years' earnings to your average money market account. In quarters where they haven't lost money, they'd still have been better off with their money in the local bank. Shareholders who didn't sell and finalize a bigger loss still are continuing to eat it.
A community of corporations acting as social institutions instead of economic institutions would starve. Good intentions and warm feelings alone never created anyone dinner and a house to live in.
I'd be far more willing to listen to your Japanese CEO if most Japanese business weren't back to relying on the same style of loans that dashed their economy into the ground just a decade ago. With their government manipulating the economy with artificially low long-term interest rates, the rules are very different there. Government banking owns most of the country because of hyperinflation and most everything has to be done on credit. Quality of life and personal ownership are very different there -- people are taking out "generational loans" where they're promising their grandkids will finish paying for their houses, property transfer taxes are upward of 50%, and it all comes tumbling down any time the economy can't sustain double digit growth. And when companies fail there, as thousands do every month, it's the taxpayers who eat the loss through more inflation and taxes, not the shareholders.
Coaching it in terms of wealth "relative to the wealth of their countries" is about the least useful comparison you could make. The second highest quarter in any nation without a US style economy are worse off than our bottom quarter. If you're going to compare any two periods, look at people's quality of life, not their wage compared to their neighbors'.
Regarding wages stabilizing relative to employees' worth, what you say would only be true without external interference.
And comparing CEOs and shareholders to kings? Precious few kings ever brought the seed capital to create their kingdoms or funded quarterly losses in anticipation of future payback.
"Starting this year, HP will strive to build every one of our consumer devices to respect digital rights."
Man. Now if only HP would respect my rights. I'll take the right to working PSC 2175 drivers for Tiger for one thing, or the right to scanner software that doesn't require an XP admin account. (Hello, vulnerability!) And here's hoping 99% of those layoffs come from the printer-scanner-copier division and the remainder consists of whoever team chose the jet engine for the ZD7000 notebook fan.
Going on previous layoff stories, I give it about 30 seconds before the first "see how evil corporations are?" reply. However, not a one of the detractors has ever addressed the question of where these people would have gotten a similar job without companies like HP. And they condemn the CEOs and shareholders who created all these jobs for taking profits when the times are good, but would never accept the alternative -- advocating sacrifice from the employees when times are bad. And they certainly won't celebrate the 150,000 people who still *do* have jobs created by the likes of HP.
Slashdot Mirror
7) Japan had repeatedly announced that if we moved the battle onto Japanese land, they would torture and kill all of their POWs. A quick and decisive victory became the only sure way to save those lives.
Sony bought SN Systems, makers of ProDG. ProDG is GCC and a proprietary debugger.
It's not. (Which is too bad, because I liked CodeWarrior for PS2 and GC quite a bit.)
FWIW, I was playing a word game with "not going anywhere," not making comment about the technology.
And the Gamecube isn't going anywhere either. *nod*
Believe it or not, you can even find people who will only listen to music or read books by unpopular artists because they have an automatic bias toward the downtrodden, regardless of the artist's merits.
It's good for a discussion, and Slashdot has continued to grow over the years so some might not be as familiar with the alternate free unices.
They aren't asking for the personal financial records. The WaPo article is in error. Read today's follow-ups.
Yes, how do I contribute as well? I have oil in my cupboard.
I don't know nearly enough to understand everything in play here, or whether the complaints against the study were subject to review as well -- they could very well be errors themselves. I do understand however why that kind of strange history, combined with the importance of the research, makes it such an attractive target.
Not that the above excuses anything like researching the scientists unless there's strong reason to believe a crime occurred!
Let's hope that putting video games on ritalin and sending them through sensitivity training isn't half as destructive to gaming as it's been to Hollywood.
I've yet to hear a good argument against the Intel switch, transition difficulties aside. It's all been emotional twitching. I'll retract that if you can back up your assertion -- can you name a single noteworthy developer who's abandoning the Mac because of the Intel switch?
What stopped me before was that the average Mac user had something about as powerful as a four year old PC. Not a particularly interesting playground.
Sure, "tile vertically" is available by right-clicking on the taskbar. If one doc is in an MDI, maximize the subwindow within the MDI window.
The second thing is the lack of a maximize button. Zoom doesn't cut it. I want to make one window full-screen with a click. A few programs like Mail.App let you command-zoom to maximize. But most just maximize vertically or fit the window to the size of the data inside it.
If I really do have to keep juggling manually (is this how they sell you a Cinema 30"?) can I at least have sticky edges so windows gravitate toward screen and nearby window edges when moving and sizing?
Mac Many.
Meanwhile, I'm looking ahead at Longhorn. I'm not seeing Windows maturing in the way we'd all expected -- .NET was supposed to help unify the branching 64 bit architectures and foster finer-grained security controls, but MS are backing away from .NET for Longhorn. Instead of eating their own dog food and telling us it's good, they're telling third party developers "you go first" and apparently waiting to see if it's safe for THEM first. Why is skipping out on .NET so bad? Things are bad enough with wildly different Windows configurations, thanks to MS' lack of library/DLL versioning and much larger range of hardware platforms. It's impossible for a developer to test or even forsee every target configuration. And now instead of migrating to .NET with versioning and a narrowed virtual target platform, we're just going to add random combinations of DLLs from 3-4 slightly different CPU architectures in the mix.
MS' operating system lifecycle is 3 years and growing, and we're preparing to see more of the same. The current model is too fragile to do new and exciting things reliably, and so unless MS are working on a new OS in secret, Windows is going to be a pretty boring place for the next 3-5 years.
And how long will it take before a bitter spammer sends out 100 million emails including links to anti-spam sites or ISPs who have kicked them off in the past?
You had nomads slitting each others' throats to steal their food, furs and women. Or you had local warlords - be they priests or kings - creating tiers of people who benefited under the warlord's charge. The upper echelon shared agreements with the top as to how they divvied up the enslaved population in exchange for protection from aggressors and the warlord himself.
A community of corporations acting as social institutions instead of economic institutions would starve. Good intentions and warm feelings alone never created anyone dinner and a house to live in.
I'd be far more willing to listen to your Japanese CEO if most Japanese business weren't back to relying on the same style of loans that dashed their economy into the ground just a decade ago. With their government manipulating the economy with artificially low long-term interest rates, the rules are very different there. Government banking owns most of the country because of hyperinflation and most everything has to be done on credit. Quality of life and personal ownership are very different there -- people are taking out "generational loans" where they're promising their grandkids will finish paying for their houses, property transfer taxes are upward of 50%, and it all comes tumbling down any time the economy can't sustain double digit growth. And when companies fail there, as thousands do every month, it's the taxpayers who eat the loss through more inflation and taxes, not the shareholders.
Regarding wages stabilizing relative to employees' worth, what you say would only be true without external interference.
And comparing CEOs and shareholders to kings? Precious few kings ever brought the seed capital to create their kingdoms or funded quarterly losses in anticipation of future payback.
Going on previous layoff stories, I give it about 30 seconds before the first "see how evil corporations are?" reply. However, not a one of the detractors has ever addressed the question of where these people would have gotten a similar job without companies like HP. And they condemn the CEOs and shareholders who created all these jobs for taking profits when the times are good, but would never accept the alternative -- advocating sacrifice from the employees when times are bad. And they certainly won't celebrate the 150,000 people who still *do* have jobs created by the likes of HP.