The only people claiming climate doesn't change naturally are the Hockey-Stickers with their nice flat temperature line until EVIL SUVs came along and ruined everything.
The rest of the world is well aware that things don't actually stay the same all the time.
Either that or it means that data are only available for 100 years.
You're not the sharpest tool in the box, son.
If the data is only available for the last hundred years, how can they claim this is anything unusual? That's about 0.000002% of the life of the planet.
Maybe not. Emergency Oxygen had been turned on by Judy Resnik, and nothing after that point was outside the bounds of human survivabilty, except the impact, of course.
Except, again, the emergency oxygen packs weren't capable of keeping them conscious at that altitude. That's why they started wearing SR71 pressure suits on later missions.
Analysis of the wreckage showed that at least a few of them survived long enough to activate emergency oxygen systems and flip some switches in an attempt to regain control.
Yes, but none of them were conscious. The emergency oxygen couldn't keep them conscious at altitude, and the oxygen use rates were consistent with them being unconscious.
If I remember correctly, the computer model predicted nothing much bad was going to happen, so they did nothing when they might have had a small chance of saving the crew. Then, later, someone pointed out that the computer model was based on much smaller impacts, and they had no data from such a powerful impact on the wing. By then it was too late to do anything.
That's like saying sarcastically that someone's main complaint about a dump truck is that it isn't a Ferrari.
Uh, yes. If you adopted all their suggestions, you'd basically end up with Java. Except maybe running native code, rather than byte code.
C++ sucks, it's as simple as that
Every language sucks if you try to use it to do the wrong things.
But if you're writing e.g. a commodity GUI or backend server app then Java (or even vastly superior to Java - C#/.NET) are incredibly much better in just about every way other than the above.
Ever used Eclipse? Its suckitude is primarily due to being written in Java rather than C++.
It is an example of one of the 'problems' with MOST open source projects. Doing because you can, not because you should.
How's that any different from many closed source projects? I've read plenty of stories about the brain-dead misfeatures in Windows which were added just because someone thought it was a good idea.
Windows XP has been out since 2001. Vista came out in 2006. So people have had roughly 8 to 13 years to plan out the purchase of a new computer. They can't have expected it to last forever.
Which part of 'people were still buying new PCs with XP installed only three or four years ago' is proving so hard for people like you to understand? Why should they have to buy a new PC today after only getting three to four years' use out of the old one?
Microsoft has gone way beyond what any other OS vendor has ever done, excepting perhaps IBM with some of their ancient AIX boxes.
No-one cares when Microsoft started selling XP. They care about when Microsoft STOPPED selling XP, which was only a few years ago. There are a ton of XP machines only three or four years old that work fine and are deliberately being made obsolete just so Microsoft can make money.
On the plus side, at least some of those forced to upgrade will dump Windows completely and go for a different operating system.
It's been over a decade and they've updated & supported it.
That's odd. I didn't buy my netbook with XP installed 'over a decade' ago.
That's still working perfectly fine after three years, yet if I hadn't wiped XP and installed Linux a couple of years ago it would now be obsolete solely because Microsoft say so.
Somehow you dont hear so much derision about the "upgrade treadmill" from Linux / Mac users. Wonder why that is, particularly if their choice OS is so perfect as to never need an upgrade.
Because, uh, Linux upgrades are free, and generally automated? There's a big difference between leaving a machine running overnight to upgrade to the new release, and having to pay $100+ for a new Windows disk, and hope all your hardware is still supported under the new version. Even worse if the upgrade fails and you have to reinstall from scratch and then reinstall all your software too.
You don't 'have enough nuclear weapons on hand to destroy the world'. That would take a fsckload more than we had even at the peak of the Cold War. That's why the anti-nukes had to invent 'nuclear winter' to make nukes seem scarier.
A nuclear war with the current stockpiles would be a really bad day, but nothing even approaching 'destroying the world'.
Forgive my rudeness, but that appears to be a bit of a non-sequitur.
Not to me. The 'Doomsday Clock' was invented as a means to push for nuclear disarmament; arguably a good idea, but unarguably a political agenda.
Now we've eliminated the majority of nuclear weapons, it's become irrelevant, but, like all such things, they're unable to say 'job done, let's go home', and have to find a new mission. Hence it's now become about pushing 'carbon emission reduction' and eliminating drones.
Cite one historical example of a free market existing, and working as advertised.
A free market is what people do when no-one holds a gun to their head forcing them to do something else.
And I don't see what your rant has to do with my point, that corporations themselves wouldn't exist in a free market. Big business exists because of big government, and neither could exist without the other.
Statists demand bigger and more powerful government, then complain when that results in bigger and more powerful corporations. This just proves they're not very smart.
How can it not suppress wages? Do you really think Joe Programmer will earn less if three other companies want to hire him, or if those three companies collude together to not hire each others' employees?
Slashdot Mirror
If so then they are likely in non complience with the licenses involved.
I am shocked that the Chinese government would not comply with software licenses.
The only people claiming climate doesn't change naturally are the Hockey-Stickers with their nice flat temperature line until EVIL SUVs came along and ruined everything.
The rest of the world is well aware that things don't actually stay the same all the time.
Either that or it means that data are only available for 100 years.
You're not the sharpest tool in the box, son.
If the data is only available for the last hundred years, how can they claim this is anything unusual? That's about 0.000002% of the life of the planet.
Feinstein is probably amping up legislation to keep drones out of the hands of hobbyists and the general public.
Well, duh. Politicians love drones when they're spying on the proles, but let the proles spy on them... never.
Or are you trying to assert that crappy applications can only be written for the Windows platform?
The kind of people who pick a crappy operating system to run their applications also tend to write crappy applications.
Maybe not. Emergency Oxygen had been turned on by Judy Resnik, and nothing after that point was outside the bounds of human survivabilty, except the impact, of course.
Except, again, the emergency oxygen packs weren't capable of keeping them conscious at that altitude. That's why they started wearing SR71 pressure suits on later missions.
Analysis of the wreckage showed that at least a few of them survived long enough to activate emergency oxygen systems and flip some switches in an attempt to regain control.
Yes, but none of them were conscious. The emergency oxygen couldn't keep them conscious at altitude, and the oxygen use rates were consistent with them being unconscious.
Can people actually type out anything anymore?
Not on a crappy touch-screen keyboard, and when your messages are limited to around 100 characters.
It is freaky that the crew survived the explosion and floated down in the crew compartment knowing they were going to die....that's what was freaky.
Except none of them knew it, because they were unconscious within a few seconds.
If I remember correctly, the computer model predicted nothing much bad was going to happen, so they did nothing when they might have had a small chance of saving the crew. Then, later, someone pointed out that the computer model was based on much smaller impacts, and they had no data from such a powerful impact on the wing. By then it was too late to do anything.
That's like saying sarcastically that someone's main complaint about a dump truck is that it isn't a Ferrari.
Uh, yes. If you adopted all their suggestions, you'd basically end up with Java. Except maybe running native code, rather than byte code.
C++ sucks, it's as simple as that
Every language sucks if you try to use it to do the wrong things.
But if you're writing e.g. a commodity GUI or backend server app then Java (or even vastly superior to Java - C#/.NET) are incredibly much better in just about every way other than the above.
Ever used Eclipse? Its suckitude is primarily due to being written in Java rather than C++.
So, basically, your complaint is that C++ isn't Java?
It is an example of one of the 'problems' with MOST open source projects. Doing because you can, not because you should.
How's that any different from many closed source projects? I've read plenty of stories about the brain-dead misfeatures in Windows which were added just because someone thought it was a good idea.
Windows XP has been out since 2001. Vista came out in 2006. So people have had roughly 8 to 13 years to plan out the purchase of a new computer. They can't have expected it to last forever.
Which part of 'people were still buying new PCs with XP installed only three or four years ago' is proving so hard for people like you to understand? Why should they have to buy a new PC today after only getting three to four years' use out of the old one?
Microsoft has gone way beyond what any other OS vendor has ever done, excepting perhaps IBM with some of their ancient AIX boxes.
No-one cares when Microsoft started selling XP. They care about when Microsoft STOPPED selling XP, which was only a few years ago. There are a ton of XP machines only three or four years old that work fine and are deliberately being made obsolete just so Microsoft can make money.
On the plus side, at least some of those forced to upgrade will dump Windows completely and go for a different operating system.
It's been over a decade and they've updated & supported it.
That's odd. I didn't buy my netbook with XP installed 'over a decade' ago.
That's still working perfectly fine after three years, yet if I hadn't wiped XP and installed Linux a couple of years ago it would now be obsolete solely because Microsoft say so.
And you wonder why users are pissed off?
Somehow you dont hear so much derision about the "upgrade treadmill" from Linux / Mac users. Wonder why that is, particularly if their choice OS is so perfect as to never need an upgrade.
Because, uh, Linux upgrades are free, and generally automated? There's a big difference between leaving a machine running overnight to upgrade to the new release, and having to pay $100+ for a new Windows disk, and hope all your hardware is still supported under the new version. Even worse if the upgrade fails and you have to reinstall from scratch and then reinstall all your software too.
So, uh, why should 'dumb' people have to replace the operating system on a perfectly good PC just because Microsoft say so?
You don't 'have enough nuclear weapons on hand to destroy the world'. That would take a fsckload more than we had even at the peak of the Cold War. That's why the anti-nukes had to invent 'nuclear winter' to make nukes seem scarier.
A nuclear war with the current stockpiles would be a really bad day, but nothing even approaching 'destroying the world'.
Forgive my rudeness, but that appears to be a bit of a non-sequitur.
Not to me. The 'Doomsday Clock' was invented as a means to push for nuclear disarmament; arguably a good idea, but unarguably a political agenda.
Now we've eliminated the majority of nuclear weapons, it's become irrelevant, but, like all such things, they're unable to say 'job done, let's go home', and have to find a new mission. Hence it's now become about pushing 'carbon emission reduction' and eliminating drones.
Which is why most of us just laugh at it.
So, if we're doomed in 5 minutes, what does 24 hours represent? What's the scaling factor? To me, it reads as false objectivity.
One minute past midnight means we're all living in a lovely Communist utopia where everyone is happy and fluffy and nothing bad ever happens, Comrade.
Never attribute to conspiracy what can be adequately explained by a bunch of hippies desperate for attention.
Cite one historical example of a free market existing, and working as advertised.
A free market is what people do when no-one holds a gun to their head forcing them to do something else.
And I don't see what your rant has to do with my point, that corporations themselves wouldn't exist in a free market. Big business exists because of big government, and neither could exist without the other.
Statists demand bigger and more powerful government, then complain when that results in bigger and more powerful corporations. This just proves they're not very smart.
How can it not suppress wages? Do you really think Joe Programmer will earn less if three other companies want to hire him, or if those three companies collude together to not hire each others' employees?
Corporations were created by governments, so they woudln't even exist in a free market.
But don't let that spoil your rant.