Yeah, I can just see it now. He takes your advice and goes to look at "some of the most intelligent discussions I have ever read".
"Hmm, they have a link to this goatse.cx site. Does that have more on this discussion?"
I concur with another reply to this comment that you should not refer him to any Slashdot discussions if you wish to maintain any credibility to your viewpoint.
Oh, and a helpful grammar correction:
"...and the effects that VeriSign's moves has had on the Internet."
subject-verb agreement: "effects" is plural, so you need to use "have" instead of "has".
While it gets me frustrated how she could do reports on books from reading the preface and get an A, at least in me CS degree I was either right or wrong based on fact and not some underpaid bitter little man's opinion of what was right.
I had a programming class in college (got sick of them and switched to EE), where grading was done by this TA for the professor. On our programming projects, he required these long lab reports for each one, where we had to tell our method for planning the project, our coding strategy, debugging strategy, description of how the progress of coding and debugging went, etc., etc., ad nauseam. He also had a certain amount of points awarded if your program compiled sucessfully with no errors, in case you couldn't completely get it to work right. On our last project--pretty tough one--I looked at the point breakdown of the programming assignment, and I realized I could get 85% of the points without writing an actual program. I snagged the 5 points for compiling with no errors by writing two lines begin end I wrote up a very nice, descriptive lab report about how I (would have) programmed it, (would have) debugged it, etc. and walked away with my B. That seemed really sad to me that he had his grading system set up that way--assigning more weight to the aesthetic details than the actual work. Fortunately my real job isn't like that. For a school assignment, though, where the object is grades, in a course I'm not going to be using in my career, I don't have a problem playing the politics and saying what they want to hear to succeed.
My dad is a literature professor and semi-pro writer on the side, and he taught me early as I was going through school that you always have to write to your audience. The grade is given by the teacher, so if you know what kinds of papers the teacher wants, you should probably write them that way. If they have any biases or lit interpretation prejudices, use that spin when you write.
I didn't realize how far this went until I read this article. This morning about quarter til 8AM (Mountain Time) my wife and I were arriving at work, and she got a page saying that our global distribution software program (price quotes, placing orders, etc.) was inaccesible because some certificate had expired. None of our distributors could log in to our system through https. I thought it was some kind of security thing related to us, rather than "web-wide".
This sounds like the MS failure to renew DNS registration thing.
You said, "the AIM of this campain is to demonstrate that Windows has a lower TCO (total cost of operation) than Linux."
First, TCO means total cost of OWNERSHIP. Part of the problem with Microsoft comparing "ownership" of Windows vs. Linux is the fact that you have no ownership of Windows. Also, how far out are they looking at this? Wouldn't they have to figure in the cost when Microsoft stops supporting that version and makes you buy the next version at a few hundred dollars a pop?
Oh, I didn't realize they had changed that aspect about the beacons. I remembered the part about Denethor and Faramir in the crypt, and thought they portrayed Gandalf pretty similarly. I did think it was pretty shady, though, that they showed Denethor about to have a change of heart or something and then Shadowfax knocks him onto the pyre, where he lights up, instead of him jumping on there himself, like in the book.
I agree there are Oscars due, but not necessarily Best Director. I have not seen the movie yet, but it seems there is potential for Best Film, Best Effects, Score, Adapted Screenplay, etc.
On a very interesting note, I was talking with a coworker who saw it last night, and he said that he probably could have done without the Smeagol/Deagol scene just to make room to put the "breaking of Saruman's power" scene at Isengard back in. I do think that is more important. However, since I first saw in the TT special edition that they were going to be putting this Smeagol/Deagol background story in, I wondered if it was for Oscar reasons. You remember the furor fans had over Gollum not being eligible for Best Supporting Actor because he was "digital", instead of real life? By having this scene using Andy Serkis as Smeagol without the digital covering, he is automatically eligible for that award, and it lets the academy award him for his excellent work without having to break their "no-digital" rule.
I think that is long overdue since he did such an excellent job in Two Towers. Besides he did have a very small non-digital part in TT. In the TT special edition section about how they did Gollum, they show how Gollum spits in expressing to Sam what he thinks of his idea of fish and chips. (following "What's taters, Precious?") Andy's approximate quote from memory on that: "That's my own spit there. My own, my precious gobs of spit."
See there! What was the academy thinking? That spit should have won Best Supporting Actor!:)
"I've often wondered why this isn't done already, and I'm pretty sure it's because of the cooling factor;"
I work at a semiconductor company, and the main reason is complexity/cost. It already takes a long time and a lot of processing to do one layer of transistors with all their interconnects, routing, etc. If we were to try to make another set of transistors above that and the vertical connections to it, the cost of the chips would go up quite a bit--probably a lot more than the smaller chip size could offset. Simplicity is our friend, and we would rather try to shrink our process technology than add complexity.
Repeated change in temperatures is also very stressful on electronic components, so heating/cooling/heating/cooling... will cause that expansion and contraction to break some things after a while.
The most we can do, other than switching companies, is get them to stop advertising the service as "unlimited", and possibly apply a "truth in advertising" type fine. That's not a very big win, IMO.
What?! That would be a great win. In fact, that is what most of us are saying we want on this forum. Companies lie about what service they are offering, and then the customer gets screwed when they find out its not what they paid for. I would be totally satisfied if we could just have honest advertising, so we could see that this provider offers real unlimited for $60 a month and that one provides up to 10GB download/month for $25. That is giving freedom and choice to the consumer.
I think it is high time that people started reporting these ISPs to the Better Business Bureau. That really is false advertising if they have a transfer cap. I can understand bandwith usage varying up and down somewhat because of high load at certain times, but if someone wants to download or upload a lot of data, they can arrange to have it run through the night or whatever, so it will get done.
Terms like "a lot" "much" or "many" are subjective and can be defined differently by different groups and in different situations. "Unlimited", however, is like "infinite" and "zero". It has a very specific, mathematically defined, meaning, and attempting to change the meaning makes it something else, which cannot be called by that name. People should have the BBB all over these companies for misrepresenting their services.
I am not a massive bandwidth hog, and have never been capped, so I don't really have a complaint. I have even downloaded several CD ISOs in the past couple months and haven't heard anything about it.
First on my list though is that it has in the past and still today been determined that for ordinary traffic driving helmets are unsafe and impairing to the operator. Hence why it is illegal in all 50 states to operate a passenger car, bus or truck while wearing one!
I am concerned for you, so that is why I want to talk about this helmet issue. There are two factors to consider when talking about motorcycle accidents, and you are focusing on only one--particularly the one that is generally less important. There are 1) The potential to be in a wreck, and 2) Survival/injury potential in a wreck. When you mention helmets being "unsafe and impairing", you are focusing on the significance (about a 1 out of 10) of the vision/hearing impairment, as opposed to the significance (about 9 out of 10) of a helmet's ability to keep you alive in an accident. There are not many cases where a helmet causes significant vision impairment. If it does, maybe check some other helmets because most are wide enough in their visor opening to give you almost all of the peripheral vision you can use. It doesn't feel as open as no helmet, but that doesn't constitute much risk. The biggest thing you should think about is what share of accidents can you really avoid by a 1 or 2 % increase in peripheral vision? A patch of ice on the road, a little gravel or sand in that turn you go into, the car coming toward you that turns right in front of you(just happened to a guy I know). A lot of accidents are caused by cars just not seeing the bike. Many more by the rider not having the know-how or time to respond to a situation. There are probably very few where it was because the rider couldn't see because of his helmet.
The thing is, most motorcycle riders will be in at least one accident at some point in their riding careers. Do you want that to be your only one because you die or are disabled? Instead, I ride with people who wear the protective gear--helmet, jacket, chaps, boots--and many of them have been in accidents and been OK because they were protected.
If I could summarize my most useful advice here short and sweet, it would be please wear a helmet at night at least. Bikes are practically invisible to car drivers then, and it's extremely dangerous.
Yes, the AC gave a very good correction. I wish he had posted with a username, so he could have started with a higher rating on his post. I'm afraid his correct explanation is not going to be noticed, while the incorrect original (ridier accelerates!) is already modded INFORMATIVE--unfortunate.
From article: "He designed a pouch a driver can store the card in, blocking the signal when not in the toll lane." Or, for hardcore Slashdotters, just put it under your hat.
So Boies, et al and now Kevin McBride have represented SCO. I wonder if the payout agreement is generically worded enough that SCO's "legal representatives" get that fat 20% check. This could be a lucrative revolving door.
"Hello, I am Darl McBride's next door neighbor. I'll be representing SCO in today's hearing." "I am Darl McBride's barber..." "I am Darl's smirking revenge."...oops, sorry. (If you haven't seen the movie, you ought to.)
Our company (10,000+ employees) is currently in an upgrade process from NT4 to XP. They really milked the life of NT4, which was a good system. I am pleased that MS supported it as long as they did. We didn't get told to upgrade to Win2K when that came out.
Those are alternatives for a home user--not for a company. Companies buy Red Hat because they provide support for companies using their distro.
Re:and if you do...
on
PC Annoyances
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
You were doing so well shooting down his arguments, but then you got greedy, trying to come up with an answer for every one.
"not being able to play commercial games" "You mean like Neverwinter Nights? Oh wait..."
What if people prefer, um, anything other than that game? This is a point you can't disprove by mentioning one of very few exceptions. I think the fault is on the game developers' side, rather than Linux, but the fact remains that it is currently a weakness.
Windows Update only on WinXP and up??!!? The first poster is clueless on that. It's been there since Win95. You are in the same boat for not realizing he was wrong.
This 35mm film you speak of--is that like a tape drive in the camera? I'll bet that could store a lot more images than the flash cards they put in digital cameras nowadays. I wonder if I could upgrade my camera to use one of these film drives you're talking about. I'd probably have to buy a film reader for my computer, though, unless it has a USB cable.
huh? As a software "comsumer" I just install and run what I want to use. If there's a fork I just run the one I want or the predicted winner.
You are saying this from the perspective of a single consumer. Sure one machine--not that big a deal to change applications. What people were referring to is business' hesitation to adopt OSS because they have hundreds/thousands of machines to manage. They cannot necessarily just switch. There are requirements of testing before they can put it out in the production environments. I work at a company that has about 10,000 employees worldwide, and they are pretty strict about how software is handled. Having to make a software change would be quite a problem for them. Even a version change of a software has to be thoroughly tested because you never know what it will break.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I can just see it now. He takes your advice and goes to look at "some of the most intelligent discussions I have ever read".
"Hmm, they have a link to this goatse.cx site. Does that have more on this discussion?"
I concur with another reply to this comment that you should not refer him to any Slashdot discussions if you wish to maintain any credibility to your viewpoint.
Oh, and a helpful grammar correction:
"...and the effects that VeriSign's moves has had on the Internet."
subject-verb agreement: "effects" is plural, so you need to use "have" instead of "has".
begin
end
I wrote up a very nice, descriptive lab report about how I (would have) programmed it, (would have) debugged it, etc. and walked away with my B. That seemed really sad to me that he had his grading system set up that way--assigning more weight to the aesthetic details than the actual work. Fortunately my real job isn't like that. For a school assignment, though, where the object is grades, in a course I'm not going to be using in my career, I don't have a problem playing the politics and saying what they want to hear to succeed.
My dad is a literature professor and semi-pro writer on the side, and he taught me early as I was going through school that you always have to write to your audience. The grade is given by the teacher, so if you know what kinds of papers the teacher wants, you should probably write them that way. If they have any biases or lit interpretation prejudices, use that spin when you write.
I think they changed that to MS Bob Nukem (and his sidekick Kid Klippy!)
I didn't realize how far this went until I read this article. This morning about quarter til 8AM (Mountain Time) my wife and I were arriving at work, and she got a page saying that our global distribution software program (price quotes, placing orders, etc.) was inaccesible because some certificate had expired. None of our distributors could log in to our system through https. I thought it was some kind of security thing related to us, rather than "web-wide".
This sounds like the MS failure to renew DNS registration thing.
You said, "the AIM of this campain is to demonstrate that Windows has a lower TCO (total cost of operation) than Linux."
First, TCO means total cost of OWNERSHIP. Part of the problem with Microsoft comparing "ownership" of Windows vs. Linux is the fact that you have no ownership of Windows. Also, how far out are they looking at this? Wouldn't they have to figure in the cost when Microsoft stops supporting that version and makes you buy the next version at a few hundred dollars a pop?
Oh, I didn't realize they had changed that aspect about the beacons. I remembered the part about Denethor and Faramir in the crypt, and thought they portrayed Gandalf pretty similarly. I did think it was pretty shady, though, that they showed Denethor about to have a change of heart or something and then Shadowfax knocks him onto the pyre, where he lights up, instead of him jumping on there himself, like in the book.
So you don't like that they stayed with the book.
Hmm, I've seen people arguing on both sides of this, but usually not in their own head.
I do agree that I could do without long doses of Liv. That deserves some skippage there to make room for better stuff--like Saruman.
I agree there are Oscars due, but not necessarily Best Director. I have not seen the movie yet, but it seems there is potential for Best Film, Best Effects, Score, Adapted Screenplay, etc.
:)
On a very interesting note, I was talking with a coworker who saw it last night, and he said that he probably could have done without the Smeagol/Deagol scene just to make room to put the "breaking of Saruman's power" scene at Isengard back in. I do think that is more important. However, since I first saw in the TT special edition that they were going to be putting this Smeagol/Deagol background story in, I wondered if it was for Oscar reasons. You remember the furor fans had over Gollum not being eligible for Best Supporting Actor because he was "digital", instead of real life? By having this scene using Andy Serkis as Smeagol without the digital covering, he is automatically eligible for that award, and it lets the academy award him for his excellent work without having to break their "no-digital" rule.
I think that is long overdue since he did such an excellent job in Two Towers. Besides he did have a very small non-digital part in TT. In the TT special edition section about how they did Gollum, they show how Gollum spits in expressing to Sam what he thinks of his idea of fish and chips. (following "What's taters, Precious?") Andy's approximate quote from memory on that: "That's my own spit there. My own, my precious gobs of spit."
See there! What was the academy thinking? That spit should have won Best Supporting Actor!
"I've often wondered why this isn't done already, and I'm pretty sure it's because of the cooling factor;"
I work at a semiconductor company, and the main reason is complexity/cost. It already takes a long time and a lot of processing to do one layer of transistors with all their interconnects, routing, etc. If we were to try to make another set of transistors above that and the vertical connections to it, the cost of the chips would go up quite a bit--probably a lot more than the smaller chip size could offset. Simplicity is our friend, and we would rather try to shrink our process technology than add complexity.
Repeated change in temperatures is also very stressful on electronic components, so heating/cooling/heating/cooling... will cause that expansion and contraction to break some things after a while.
For some it's more than a hobby!
I think it is high time that people started reporting these ISPs to the Better Business Bureau. That really is false advertising if they have a transfer cap. I can understand bandwith usage varying up and down somewhat because of high load at certain times, but if someone wants to download or upload a lot of data, they can arrange to have it run through the night or whatever, so it will get done.
Terms like "a lot" "much" or "many" are subjective and can be defined differently by different groups and in different situations. "Unlimited", however, is like "infinite" and "zero". It has a very specific, mathematically defined, meaning, and attempting to change the meaning makes it something else, which cannot be called by that name. People should have the BBB all over these companies for misrepresenting their services.
I am not a massive bandwidth hog, and have never been capped, so I don't really have a complaint. I have even downloaded several CD ISOs in the past couple months and haven't heard anything about it.
There are 1) The potential to be in a wreck, and 2) Survival/injury potential in a wreck. When you mention helmets being "unsafe and impairing", you are focusing on the significance (about a 1 out of 10) of the vision/hearing impairment, as opposed to the significance (about 9 out of 10) of a helmet's ability to keep you alive in an accident.
There are not many cases where a helmet causes significant vision impairment. If it does, maybe check some other helmets because most are wide enough in their visor opening to give you almost all of the peripheral vision you can use. It doesn't feel as open as no helmet, but that doesn't constitute much risk. The biggest thing you should think about is what share of accidents can you really avoid by a 1 or 2 % increase in peripheral vision? A patch of ice on the road, a little gravel or sand in that turn you go into, the car coming toward you that turns right in front of you(just happened to a guy I know). A lot of accidents are caused by cars just not seeing the bike. Many more by the rider not having the know-how or time to respond to a situation. There are probably very few where it was because the rider couldn't see because of his helmet.
The thing is, most motorcycle riders will be in at least one accident at some point in their riding careers. Do you want that to be your only one because you die or are disabled? Instead, I ride with people who wear the protective gear--helmet, jacket, chaps, boots--and many of them have been in accidents and been OK because they were protected.
If I could summarize my most useful advice here short and sweet, it would be please wear a helmet at night at least. Bikes are practically invisible to car drivers then, and it's extremely dangerous.
Yes, the AC gave a very good correction. I wish he had posted with a username, so he could have started with a higher rating on his post. I'm afraid his correct explanation is not going to be noticed, while the incorrect original (ridier accelerates!) is already modded INFORMATIVE--unfortunate.
From article:
"He designed a pouch a driver can store the card in, blocking the signal when not in the toll lane."
Or, for hardcore Slashdotters, just put it under your hat.
So Boies, et al and now Kevin McBride have represented SCO. I wonder if the payout agreement is generically worded enough that SCO's "legal representatives" get that fat 20% check. This could be a lucrative revolving door.
...oops, sorry. (If you haven't seen the movie, you ought to.)
"Hello, I am Darl McBride's next door neighbor. I'll be representing SCO in today's hearing."
"I am Darl McBride's barber..."
"I am Darl's smirking revenge."
I've got Win98SE, and it's always been right there in the start menu. I thought it was in 95, too.
Our company (10,000+ employees) is currently in an upgrade process from NT4 to XP. They really milked the life of NT4, which was a good system. I am pleased that MS supported it as long as they did. We didn't get told to upgrade to Win2K when that came out.
Those are alternatives for a home user--not for a company. Companies buy Red Hat because they provide support for companies using their distro.
You were doing so well shooting down his arguments, but then you got greedy, trying to come up with an answer for every one.
"not being able to play commercial games"
"You mean like Neverwinter Nights? Oh wait..."
What if people prefer, um, anything other than that game? This is a point you can't disprove by mentioning one of very few exceptions. I think the fault is on the game developers' side, rather than Linux, but the fact remains that it is currently a weakness.
Windows Update only on WinXP and up??!!? The first poster is clueless on that. It's been there since Win95. You are in the same boat for not realizing he was wrong.
This 35mm film you speak of--is that like a tape drive in the camera? I'll bet that could store a lot more images than the flash cards they put in digital cameras nowadays. I wonder if I could upgrade my camera to use one of these film drives you're talking about. I'd probably have to buy a film reader for my computer, though, unless it has a USB cable.
Careful of using those DDR specs. Rambus is the SCO of the DRAM world, and they will sue you because they think they own it all.