No, I just got into the habit of skipping the last few steps when I was young and never got back out of it, then I wanted to make sure people were still close enough behind me that they could follow.
I hang out in #nethack on irc.freenode.net which has a bot with a database of things in detail named Rodney. This helps to determine how to approach things. As an added bonus, the server advertised in the channel allows others to watch, and if you're in the channel at the same time you can solicit advice from others.
In the same DVD (possibly the commentary, possibly the extras), Christopher Lee claimed or was able to produce a letter saying that Tolkien wanted him as Gandalf, but he was too old to be up to the task, so it went to Ian McKellan instead. Christopher Lee still did an absolutely brilliant job as Saruman and was perhaps the best possible casting choice.
You can't read. Right! Sit down! Sit! Sit! Sit down! Are you sitting comfortably?!? All right! Ethel the Aardvark was trotting down the lane one lovely summer day, when she saw a nice quantity surveyer...
Alternately, you can preface risky commands with your shell's comment character, so you'd start by typing #rm -f *~ in Bash, then delete the #. If you slip up, no problem, and when you're sure it's good, you can hit Home, Del, Enter.
I gather the reason they're doing that is so that they can claim that a bill in the Republican-controlled Congress is aiming to reinstitute the draft. Those awful Republicans, always up to no good.
I doubt either side seriously wants to see a draft reinstated for war waging purposes. The troops won't come with the requisite morale or skills.
Uh, sure, if you want to walk around in 45 degree Celsius temperatures (at the low end). That's 113 degrees Fahrenheit. Considering heat exhaustion starts kicking in at about 102 degrees, I wouldn't expect the effectiveness of the wearer to rise.
Now, if you can get spray-on armor at 10-15 degrees Celsius, then you're in business.
True story, as far as I know, though secondhand. I'm not surprised.
I lived in Florida for a while. I was talking to a guy one day, talking about how he went for a walk the other day. Wound up at a place that he hadn't been for two weeks, that last he knew was forest. A full subdivision had sprung up in the interim.
Uh, wasn't it just three articles ago we were talking about a GPS stalker, and it was a bad thing that one person was tracking one other person? Does many to many, instead of one to one, make it okay?
In operating systems, it's called a context switch. A processor doesn't actually run a bunch of programs simultaneously; rather, it runs one program for a few nano- (or micro-, or other small fraction of a) second, then stores the data for future reference, loads another program (and its data), runs that one for a fraction of a second, and repeats this many times over the course of a second. If the programs never wait (for user input, or sleep for no particular reason), this is wasteful; a program which had the entire processor to itself would use it, but having to share with others means cycles get spent on changing tasks.
It would be more efficient to do batch processing, where the processor finishes one task (with 100% CPU utilization), then does a second task, then a third, and so on. For most programs, there is user I/O which takes much longer than that fraction of a second spent on any given program. This is also why you, the user, can't tell this is happening. For a computer, a context switch should take on the order of nanoseconds.
For a human, it's different. It has often been said that the human brain is like a computer, and this is a useful starting point here. This computer, though, takes much, much longer to do a context switch. For example, if I decide to call the Bobs, it's going to take me about about half a second to pick up the phone, a few seconds to find them in my address book (or dial the number), a few more seconds to let it ring, possibly up to 60 seconds for a voice mail greeting, and then I can start talking to them. The only task is to talk to the Bobs. If they're across the hall from me, it will take a few seconds to get over there. If they're in the same room, calling has a higher cost than talking directly to them. (Of course, interrupting them will cause them to do a context switch to talking to me, costing their productivity.)
Doing a task all at once prevents having to context switch to or from it. If I got up, make myself a sandwich, and eat it, I have used less time on the sandwich than I would if I got up, went to the refrigerator, took out some sandwich meat, put it on the counter, came back to the computer, read some Slashdot, went to the cupboard, got bread out, came back to the computer, wrote some of a program, went to the counter, made the sandwich, turned on the television, went back to the counter, picked up the sandwich, and ate it. The time in going to the refrigerator, coming back to the computer, going to the cupboard, coming back to the computer, went to the counter, turned on the television, and going back to the counter is all wasted. It would be much more efficient to make the sandwich, eat it, read Slashdot, write the program, then watch television (not necessarily in that order).
Even if I am already where I need to be (for example, changing from IRC to Slashdot to OpenOffice), there is an overhead cost in switching. There is also an overhead cost in changing my frame of mind; how I think like when programming is nothing like how I think when talking to friends.
What I don't get is why both can't be included on the same DVD. DVDs already have chapter skipping abilities and the movies mainly have additional footage, so by skipping select chapters, the movies would be viewed identically to the original form. Just let the user select which version off one of the menus.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I just got into the habit of skipping the last few steps when I was young and never got back out of it, then I wanted to make sure people were still close enough behind me that they could follow.
I hang out in #nethack on irc.freenode.net which has a bot with a database of things in detail named Rodney. This helps to determine how to approach things. As an added bonus, the server advertised in the channel allows others to watch, and if you're in the channel at the same time you can solicit advice from others.
In the same DVD (possibly the commentary, possibly the extras), Christopher Lee claimed or was able to produce a letter saying that Tolkien wanted him as Gandalf, but he was too old to be up to the task, so it went to Ian McKellan instead. Christopher Lee still did an absolutely brilliant job as Saruman and was perhaps the best possible casting choice.
If you've enjoyed Fluxx, you might also enjoy Nomic. Dave Sirlin recommended both in the same article, and I trust his judgement.
So, in other words, you're skilled at writing in English?
What on Earth are you doing on Slashdot? (Tongue-in-cheek) Did you loose your way?
You can't read. Right! Sit down! Sit! Sit! Sit down! Are you sitting comfortably?!? All right! Ethel the Aardvark was trotting down the lane one lovely summer day, when she saw a nice quantity surveyer...
That's okay, it gives me a perfectly good excuse not to stand up.
Alternately, you can preface risky commands with your shell's comment character, so you'd start by typing #rm -f *~ in Bash, then delete the #. If you slip up, no problem, and when you're sure it's good, you can hit Home, Del, Enter.
This was the first thing that came to mind.
"Hahahaha! Oh, wait, you're serious. Let me laugh even harder. AHAHAHAHAHAHA!"
Really? I'd heard TriOptimum.
I gather the reason they're doing that is so that they can claim that a bill in the Republican-controlled Congress is aiming to reinstitute the draft. Those awful Republicans, always up to no good.
I doubt either side seriously wants to see a draft reinstated for war waging purposes. The troops won't come with the requisite morale or skills.
Uh, sure, if you want to walk around in 45 degree Celsius temperatures (at the low end). That's 113 degrees Fahrenheit. Considering heat exhaustion starts kicking in at about 102 degrees, I wouldn't expect the effectiveness of the wearer to rise.
Now, if you can get spray-on armor at 10-15 degrees Celsius, then you're in business.
True story, as far as I know, though secondhand. I'm not surprised.
I lived in Florida for a while. I was talking to a guy one day, talking about how he went for a walk the other day. Wound up at a place that he hadn't been for two weeks, that last he knew was forest. A full subdivision had sprung up in the interim.
How big of a monkey?
See, this is what I get for not RTFAing. I interpreted the calling out to people as recognizing them.
Uh, wasn't it just three articles ago we were talking about a GPS stalker, and it was a bad thing that one person was tracking one other person? Does many to many, instead of one to one, make it okay?
It's actually very easy. You just define the universe to be the computer.
In operating systems, it's called a context switch. A processor doesn't actually run a bunch of programs simultaneously; rather, it runs one program for a few nano- (or micro-, or other small fraction of a) second, then stores the data for future reference, loads another program (and its data), runs that one for a fraction of a second, and repeats this many times over the course of a second. If the programs never wait (for user input, or sleep for no particular reason), this is wasteful; a program which had the entire processor to itself would use it, but having to share with others means cycles get spent on changing tasks.
It would be more efficient to do batch processing, where the processor finishes one task (with 100% CPU utilization), then does a second task, then a third, and so on. For most programs, there is user I/O which takes much longer than that fraction of a second spent on any given program. This is also why you, the user, can't tell this is happening. For a computer, a context switch should take on the order of nanoseconds.
For a human, it's different. It has often been said that the human brain is like a computer, and this is a useful starting point here. This computer, though, takes much, much longer to do a context switch. For example, if I decide to call the Bobs, it's going to take me about about half a second to pick up the phone, a few seconds to find them in my address book (or dial the number), a few more seconds to let it ring, possibly up to 60 seconds for a voice mail greeting, and then I can start talking to them. The only task is to talk to the Bobs. If they're across the hall from me, it will take a few seconds to get over there. If they're in the same room, calling has a higher cost than talking directly to them. (Of course, interrupting them will cause them to do a context switch to talking to me, costing their productivity.)
Doing a task all at once prevents having to context switch to or from it. If I got up, make myself a sandwich, and eat it, I have used less time on the sandwich than I would if I got up, went to the refrigerator, took out some sandwich meat, put it on the counter, came back to the computer, read some Slashdot, went to the cupboard, got bread out, came back to the computer, wrote some of a program, went to the counter, made the sandwich, turned on the television, went back to the counter, picked up the sandwich, and ate it. The time in going to the refrigerator, coming back to the computer, going to the cupboard, coming back to the computer, went to the counter, turned on the television, and going back to the counter is all wasted. It would be much more efficient to make the sandwich, eat it, read Slashdot, write the program, then watch television (not necessarily in that order).
Even if I am already where I need to be (for example, changing from IRC to Slashdot to OpenOffice), there is an overhead cost in switching. There is also an overhead cost in changing my frame of mind; how I think like when programming is nothing like how I think when talking to friends.
I'm sure they'll be perfectly happy To Serve Man.
Brings to mind this apocryphal story linked to from Snopes.
What I don't get is why both can't be included on the same DVD. DVDs already have chapter skipping abilities and the movies mainly have additional footage, so by skipping select chapters, the movies would be viewed identically to the original form. Just let the user select which version off one of the menus.
No, but KISS Meets the Phantom of the Park is a real movie and is famously bad.
Really? All I saw was red.
You're thinking of, or the sci-fi book was referring to, Charles Fort, who said, "It steam engines when it's steam engine time."
Don't kount on it.