Computers only make things more efficient when the systems architects know how to do their jobs effectively and don't rely on vendors and consultants to do it for them. It's not in the interests of vendors or consultants to save their customer money. It's in their interests to make as much money from the customer as practical, and that can mean everything from selling them equipment that's overspec to selling far more equipment than necessary to excessive costs for setup and configuration that are difficult to determine at the outset of the project.
As problematic as our telephone system has been at times, at least from a bureaucracy standpoint, that Bell did basic research and development in-house and for a long time owned almost everything internally, advances were made and the system functioned very well. The Baby Bells have inherited this legacy, and the biggest cracks have only manifested as they've each independently implemented technologies post-Ma-Bell, like DSL.
If you've had to work with vendors extensively you'd realize what a bane it can be to actually achieving, especially when non-technical persons have the ultimate decision in your organization.
The fastest and easiest way to explain version control is to cite Wayne Kemp's and Johnny Cash's "One Piece At A Time" and to show pictures of the various cars people have built in homage to that song.
Your ISP doesn't have to take your resources by threat of violence, they can *gasp!* get the government to take them on their behalf.
For a lot of essential services, you may as well take out the middle-man.
Or, require there to be more than one provider. I wonder how much Woz has looked into DSL, in that one may still have to get one's line from the local phone company, but one can steer one's account to a network of a different provider. Once that's done it's not a whole lot different that dialing into one's ISP by way of the telephone company was. For a time I had a DSL account that gave me eight usable static IPs at home with full reverse resolve and everything, with everything I wanted to run my own mail, FTP, DNS, and HTTP.
Fox News is passionate, in the overflowing with emotion sense. They portray outrage at perceived injustice and express strong nonverbal approval or disapproval on topics. A lot of people seem to naturally empathize, probably as a reaction similar to what allows us to build communities in the first place, so the viewers or a portion of them become as passionate as the presenters out of empathy, even if they'd have otherwise disagreed with the positions.
Msnbc and Air America have tried this approach with some success, but it seems that more people on the left don't fall for it or have actually reasoned some of their positions more thoroughly or are turned off by the approach. I tried listening to Air America and even though I agreed with a lot of what they were talking about, I was turned off by the format. I felt that it was more analogous to the two-minutes-hate a'la 1984 than rational discussion.
...both long-term and on topics that the subjects had felt strongly enough about that they had purposefully taken a reasoned stance?
I won't disagree that lots of people can be manipulated relatively easily, as that's how marketing makes a living. I just wonder how lasting or personally important the topics were.
It's also important to note that those experienced in practicing debate often have to advocate for something they don't personally believe in, and those who practice law do the same.
The court can only order your execution after you have been convicted.
The article is not clear, but it sounds like the demand was made prior to conviction.
Very true. Also, her making light of the nature of the severe charges against her are a demonstration of contempt, hence the "Contempt of Court" decision by the judge.
Had she not posted anything about it, or at least waited until after justice had been concluded, she probably could have said whatever she wanted about the incident without ramification. But, she made light of it in a public forum while still under scrutiny.
I think our protocol is monthly, though it could be quarterly, I'm not in charge of the generator. Diesel fuel is very shelf-stable, and since there's no ignition system to futz with it's just a matter of ensuring that the starter cranks and the injector pump isn't leaking.
This isn't like a car. It doesn't move around so it doesn't suffer the abuse that the road and travelling gives, nor does it have a transmission, so there's no gearbox to wear, and since it's designed to spin the prime mover at a particular RPM to keep the generator outputting a constant Hz, it's a lot simpler than a car. Just massively bigger.
Fuel cells may be more efficient, but the diesel generators are already in place.
Existing Diesel engines can be set up dual-fuel too, where they may start using the diesel, but can switch to natural gas. That allows either municipal natural gas service lines to supply power, or tank, which can be fixed in place or installed on a truck to supply fuel. Some generators are probably built to start up and run on either fuel as well.
That would allow at least two kinds of fuel to power the generator, with multiple delivery methods.
It seems logical to me, to have a natural gas backup turbine do double duty during high electricity consumption times.
I don't know, a data center's power consumption will fluctuate some with lulls and peaks in traffic, but since the bulk of business usage is during the late morning and early afternoon, and the bulk of residential usage is from mid-afternoon to evening, I'd think that using something like solar to supplement the grid would make more sense. That wouldn't put as much wear and tear on your emergency generators as they'd be running much less often, and if proper maintenance protocols are followed then the generators should be available when needed.
It's generally not a good idea to have an office romance with someone that you spend most of your workday working closely with, regardless of the profession, but especially in working groups that are very stable and unchanging.
You see this person about eight hours a day, and might even work in the same group-cubicle. If your relationship gets serious then you're likely to see them many hours a day beyond the workday too. For probably most of us, best case and the relationship goes well, one gets a little tired of the significant other after awhile, but literally can't escape because of the enforced time at work together. Worst case, the relationship ends, badly, and you're stuck with them in the same confined space but now can't stand each other.
Eight or so years ago I dated a gal for a few months that works at one of the sites I support and it's still a little awkward running into her when I go there. I can't imagine the awkwardness if we worked at the same site, let alone the same department. It would probably also complicate my subsequent marriage, as I doubt my wife would be very happy with me working closely with an old flame.
If working groups are varied and dynamic and if the organization is large enough that one doesn't constantly see the other, then it might work okay to date a coworker, but even then it has its perils, not even getting into career choices.
I'm sorry, but "shower scene" and "Dilbert" do not belong anywhere near each other.
I had an involuntary mental image that it'd be like the shower scene from Starship Troopers but with the Dilbert characters, and then I threw up a little bit...
I do not disagree with you about any one individual's personal reasons for choosing or not choosing a given platform, in fact, I share a lot of your sentiments and I spent about five years with only Linux as my operating system on my numerous computers, and even though I slipped back into closed-source to play games I still run numerous third-party and open-source programs.
No general-purpose platform can survive without third-party software. I do not like how Apple chooses to go about the installation of third-party software, but my answer to that is to not buy Apple products. On the other hand, Google's android market or whatever it's now called is full of malware, so that approach isn't exactly working so well either, though at least the installation of apps through third-party means works better if one has a secure source.
I don't have the answer to the problem that both Apple and Google have, which is to make an app repository that has both the freedom to not restrict developers while also providing the necessary means to keep malware at bay. If someone can come up with that means then all of this silliness may be resolved.
Running your own code isn't the definition of a personal computer or honestly of a computer in general, outside of a development environment. While I agree that it is important to be able to develop one's own software, I see nothing requiring it in the definition of computer.
Yes, obviously someone must write programs, but a personal computer could operate just fine with only those programs supplied by the hardware vendor. It's been done that way numerous times already.
All an iPad is, to me, is another form factor of personal computer or terminal, depending on the type of application (ie, locally-run or predominately tied to some server far away). The only differences are how it's tied to the computer network (wifi vs cabled) and the physical layout of the user interface (ie touchscreen vs keyboard).
Remember that there have been numerous form factors for computers. There have been all-in-one desktop units that were "L" shaped with integrated CRT on top, computer at the corner of the "L", and keyboard protruding, pizza-box desktop units with cabled keyboards and monitors like the 5150-cased IBM PC, square units with the monitor integrated above the motherboard like the IBM PS/2 Model 25 and the Apple Macintosh, computers integrated into the keyboard housing with plugs for external monitors like the Commodores, suitcase form factors like the first-generation Compaqs, and probably dozens of other form factors. There have even been flat computers that integrated the entire computer in the housing with the LCD monitor and had plugs for the keyboard and mouse, and some of those computers were touchscreen.
The iPad is not revolutionary in that it's just a tablet computer that doesn't fold to become a keyboard-equipped laptop like earlier tablet computers did. It's more like Star Trek's "PADD", is less versatile, and more geared as a consumer-level toy than a business machine. That doesn't mean it's a joke, but it also doesn't mean that it's going to dictate the direction of computing in the future either.
We're integrating computers or computer-like experiences into our televisions, into our telephones, into our notepads, into our music players, and into our cars. That doesn't mean that we're going to do research, read in-depth news articles, play video games, do work, or learn effectively on these platforms. When I want to actually work, my smartphone, my media center PC, even my netbook, are not really the most comfortable tools, my desktop computer, set into my workspace, is. I entertain myself on the netbook, or on the phone, or obviously with the media PC, but none of those are conducive to real work, and that's just at home. At work nothing is as practical as a real PC, and I know because we've tried other form factors and it flat-out sucks. That's why the PC is not dying.
Slashdot Mirror
Computers only make things more efficient when the systems architects know how to do their jobs effectively and don't rely on vendors and consultants to do it for them. It's not in the interests of vendors or consultants to save their customer money. It's in their interests to make as much money from the customer as practical, and that can mean everything from selling them equipment that's overspec to selling far more equipment than necessary to excessive costs for setup and configuration that are difficult to determine at the outset of the project.
As problematic as our telephone system has been at times, at least from a bureaucracy standpoint, that Bell did basic research and development in-house and for a long time owned almost everything internally, advances were made and the system functioned very well. The Baby Bells have inherited this legacy, and the biggest cracks have only manifested as they've each independently implemented technologies post-Ma-Bell, like DSL.
If you've had to work with vendors extensively you'd realize what a bane it can be to actually achieving, especially when non-technical persons have the ultimate decision in your organization.
If they come out to change the meter housing you really won't have a choice. You realize this, right?
It's either smart meter or else no service.
I am tired of the use of characteristics that don't seem to apply being applied by marketing staff.
Clearly "smart" doesn't apply.
I started with Slackware on CD... 2.0.0 kernel, distributed in '96.
Then Redhat 5.1 and 5.2, then SuSE, then Debian, where I've been for many, many years since.
I still have a soft spot for slack though...
The fastest and easiest way to explain version control is to cite Wayne Kemp's and Johnny Cash's "One Piece At A Time" and to show pictures of the various cars people have built in homage to that song.
Your ISP doesn't have to take your resources by threat of violence, they can *gasp!* get the government to take them on their behalf.
For a lot of essential services, you may as well take out the middle-man.
Or, require there to be more than one provider. I wonder how much Woz has looked into DSL, in that one may still have to get one's line from the local phone company, but one can steer one's account to a network of a different provider. Once that's done it's not a whole lot different that dialing into one's ISP by way of the telephone company was. For a time I had a DSL account that gave me eight usable static IPs at home with full reverse resolve and everything, with everything I wanted to run my own mail, FTP, DNS, and HTTP.
Fox News is passionate, in the overflowing with emotion sense. They portray outrage at perceived injustice and express strong nonverbal approval or disapproval on topics. A lot of people seem to naturally empathize, probably as a reaction similar to what allows us to build communities in the first place, so the viewers or a portion of them become as passionate as the presenters out of empathy, even if they'd have otherwise disagreed with the positions.
Msnbc and Air America have tried this approach with some success, but it seems that more people on the left don't fall for it or have actually reasoned some of their positions more thoroughly or are turned off by the approach. I tried listening to Air America and even though I agreed with a lot of what they were talking about, I was turned off by the format. I felt that it was more analogous to the two-minutes-hate a'la 1984 than rational discussion.
...both long-term and on topics that the subjects had felt strongly enough about that they had purposefully taken a reasoned stance?
I won't disagree that lots of people can be manipulated relatively easily, as that's how marketing makes a living. I just wonder how lasting or personally important the topics were.
It's also important to note that those experienced in practicing debate often have to advocate for something they don't personally believe in, and those who practice law do the same.
The court can only order your execution after you have been convicted.
The article is not clear, but it sounds like the demand was made prior to conviction.
Very true. Also, her making light of the nature of the severe charges against her are a demonstration of contempt, hence the "Contempt of Court" decision by the judge.
Had she not posted anything about it, or at least waited until after justice had been concluded, she probably could have said whatever she wanted about the incident without ramification. But, she made light of it in a public forum while still under scrutiny.
You got some problem with Indonesia or something?
Ah, you have this thing called "Winter". I've heard of it. Rain falling from the sky in a solid form... weird...
...only takes 1.21 gigawatts...
I thought that it was a cup of tea, not a donut, that led to FTL travel...
Weekly? Seriously?
I think our protocol is monthly, though it could be quarterly, I'm not in charge of the generator. Diesel fuel is very shelf-stable, and since there's no ignition system to futz with it's just a matter of ensuring that the starter cranks and the injector pump isn't leaking.
This isn't like a car. It doesn't move around so it doesn't suffer the abuse that the road and travelling gives, nor does it have a transmission, so there's no gearbox to wear, and since it's designed to spin the prime mover at a particular RPM to keep the generator outputting a constant Hz, it's a lot simpler than a car. Just massively bigger.
Fuel cells may be more efficient, but the diesel generators are already in place.
Existing Diesel engines can be set up dual-fuel too, where they may start using the diesel, but can switch to natural gas. That allows either municipal natural gas service lines to supply power, or tank, which can be fixed in place or installed on a truck to supply fuel. Some generators are probably built to start up and run on either fuel as well.
That would allow at least two kinds of fuel to power the generator, with multiple delivery methods.
It seems logical to me, to have a natural gas backup turbine do double duty during high electricity consumption times.
I don't know, a data center's power consumption will fluctuate some with lulls and peaks in traffic, but since the bulk of business usage is during the late morning and early afternoon, and the bulk of residential usage is from mid-afternoon to evening, I'd think that using something like solar to supplement the grid would make more sense. That wouldn't put as much wear and tear on your emergency generators as they'd be running much less often, and if proper maintenance protocols are followed then the generators should be available when needed.
...not to shit where they eat.
You've obviously never met the dog that we had when I was a kid...
To be polite about it, the dog was kind of confused as to what was food and what was not food...
It's generally not a good idea to have an office romance with someone that you spend most of your workday working closely with, regardless of the profession, but especially in working groups that are very stable and unchanging.
You see this person about eight hours a day, and might even work in the same group-cubicle. If your relationship gets serious then you're likely to see them many hours a day beyond the workday too. For probably most of us, best case and the relationship goes well, one gets a little tired of the significant other after awhile, but literally can't escape because of the enforced time at work together. Worst case, the relationship ends, badly, and you're stuck with them in the same confined space but now can't stand each other.
Eight or so years ago I dated a gal for a few months that works at one of the sites I support and it's still a little awkward running into her when I go there. I can't imagine the awkwardness if we worked at the same site, let alone the same department. It would probably also complicate my subsequent marriage, as I doubt my wife would be very happy with me working closely with an old flame.
If working groups are varied and dynamic and if the organization is large enough that one doesn't constantly see the other, then it might work okay to date a coworker, but even then it has its perils, not even getting into career choices.
Ever contemplate how much pizza you really eat, by volume?
Let "a" be the thickness of the crust, and let "z" be the radius.
So, the volume of your slice, depending on how it's cut, is a fraction of pi*z*z*a.
DNWTFV...
I'm sorry, but "shower scene" and "Dilbert" do not belong anywhere near each other.
I had an involuntary mental image that it'd be like the shower scene from Starship Troopers but with the Dilbert characters, and then I threw up a little bit...
I'm not a programmer and I know what a buffer overflow is...
It's when you use too much polishing compound on your buffer and it squirts out everywhere and ruins the paint on the car, right?
I do not disagree with you about any one individual's personal reasons for choosing or not choosing a given platform, in fact, I share a lot of your sentiments and I spent about five years with only Linux as my operating system on my numerous computers, and even though I slipped back into closed-source to play games I still run numerous third-party and open-source programs.
No general-purpose platform can survive without third-party software. I do not like how Apple chooses to go about the installation of third-party software, but my answer to that is to not buy Apple products. On the other hand, Google's android market or whatever it's now called is full of malware, so that approach isn't exactly working so well either, though at least the installation of apps through third-party means works better if one has a secure source.
I don't have the answer to the problem that both Apple and Google have, which is to make an app repository that has both the freedom to not restrict developers while also providing the necessary means to keep malware at bay. If someone can come up with that means then all of this silliness may be resolved.
Running your own code isn't the definition of a personal computer or honestly of a computer in general, outside of a development environment. While I agree that it is important to be able to develop one's own software, I see nothing requiring it in the definition of computer.
Yes, obviously someone must write programs, but a personal computer could operate just fine with only those programs supplied by the hardware vendor. It's been done that way numerous times already.
All an iPad is, to me, is another form factor of personal computer or terminal, depending on the type of application (ie, locally-run or predominately tied to some server far away). The only differences are how it's tied to the computer network (wifi vs cabled) and the physical layout of the user interface (ie touchscreen vs keyboard).
Remember that there have been numerous form factors for computers. There have been all-in-one desktop units that were "L" shaped with integrated CRT on top, computer at the corner of the "L", and keyboard protruding, pizza-box desktop units with cabled keyboards and monitors like the 5150-cased IBM PC, square units with the monitor integrated above the motherboard like the IBM PS/2 Model 25 and the Apple Macintosh, computers integrated into the keyboard housing with plugs for external monitors like the Commodores, suitcase form factors like the first-generation Compaqs, and probably dozens of other form factors. There have even been flat computers that integrated the entire computer in the housing with the LCD monitor and had plugs for the keyboard and mouse, and some of those computers were touchscreen.
The iPad is not revolutionary in that it's just a tablet computer that doesn't fold to become a keyboard-equipped laptop like earlier tablet computers did. It's more like Star Trek's "PADD", is less versatile, and more geared as a consumer-level toy than a business machine. That doesn't mean it's a joke, but it also doesn't mean that it's going to dictate the direction of computing in the future either.
We're integrating computers or computer-like experiences into our televisions, into our telephones, into our notepads, into our music players, and into our cars. That doesn't mean that we're going to do research, read in-depth news articles, play video games, do work, or learn effectively on these platforms. When I want to actually work, my smartphone, my media center PC, even my netbook, are not really the most comfortable tools, my desktop computer, set into my workspace, is. I entertain myself on the netbook, or on the phone, or obviously with the media PC, but none of those are conducive to real work, and that's just at home. At work nothing is as practical as a real PC, and I know because we've tried other form factors and it flat-out sucks. That's why the PC is not dying.
You Bastard! Now Uniloc will know who else to sue!