I *completely* agree space exploration is worth the money. BUT: asking people from NASA and "David M. Livingston, host of The Space Show" - WTF?
Let's ask Pol Pot, Adolf Hitler, Stalin, and Attila the Hun if Genocide is |
Why not ask some people whose mortgages and careers are not so completely ied up in the venture. What a dumb article. I guess it's just our wonderful News Media coughing up blood and not able to get it up anymore.... as usual...
The fundamental problem is personal high speed transportation. Yes, it is fun. Yes, it has its uses. Yes, it has also created "greatest misallocation of resources in history" (Kunstler). The problem isn't the fuel - the problem is the consumptive lifestyle, of which the automobile is simply the object lesson thereof. Peak oil == peak asphalt, so even if we DO sacrifice the rest of the planet to starvation for the sake of filling our tanks, we're still not going to have roads to drive on.
IF there is a car of the future, it will be electric, and it will resemble something more like a curved dash olds with e dunebuggy body running on bicycle wheels, at around 30mph top speed. THAT'S the future. Ethanol isn't part of the equation. Billions of people not being replaced is.
"Waaaah. The number of Representatives isn't MATHEMATICALLY PRECISE!!!!" Waaaaaah!"
Compared to WHAT??? The SENATE??? Where Alaska gets as much representation as New York or Texas? Good Move. Oh, and then he says it favours big states...
Hello! Reality calling! The SENATE is the OTHER HALF of the legislative branch - and it favours small states - by A LOT. So, frankly, I think the TINY big state bias in the house is VERY small potatoes compared to the obscenity of the Senate.
I think the school had no business giving them static for partying. I think that's mean. But they deserve to get their butts WHIPPED for being so totally fucking stupid that they'd put pictures of their illicit activities ON FACEBOOK.
Actually Mike and I get on really really well. We have lunch together sometimes and he's a great guy. I am very useful to him, as I know more about Mac computers than he does. He's very much of a Windows and Linux guy. He thinks apple computers are pretty and seem to work nice, but they're not the majority part of his life. Most of his time is spent riding herd on the server farm, but if something blows up (as it is wont to do) we call Mike to fix it. And if it's a Mac, he'll sometimes ring me up with a question.
Example: a prof down the hall couldn't get her powerbook online for love or money. He's there fiddling with network prefs and having a Bad Day. I walk by on my way to the kitchen to get coffee.
"Hey Ralph: Mary here can't get online - somethings up with the prefs, and I've tried everything."
"Did you try making a new location?"
"Location - Ohh right - Duh. I forgot about that... I'll give it a whack. Thanks..."
A few minutes later she was surfing and Mike was, again, restored to his Godlike stature.
This allowed him to go back to his office and bury himself in setting up a new RAID for the video folks or deal with the ongoign nightmare of the online grading system which, even he agrees, is a complete POS. So we all commiserate.
We all love Mike, and we treat him VERY well. I know more than most of my cow-orkers what a tough job IT can be, and I do what I can to make sure he is always treated fairly and respectfully - he's a pro like the rest of us.
RS
balderdash. IT will scale back, but never vanish
on
Is the IT Department Dead?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
TFA:
"In the long run, the IT department is unlikely to survive, at least not in its familiar form," Carr writes. "It will have little left to do once the bulk of business computing shifts out of private data centers and into the cloud. Business units and even individual employees will be able to control the processing of information directly, without the need for legions of technical people."
Sheeeyeah- RIIIIGHT.
Wrong on SO many levels.
Little miss dolly dots who can barely operate MSWord and her email client is going to have the expertise to "Control the processing of information directly"? Fuck no. People like that couldn't spill pee out of a boot if the instructions were on the heel.
I'm in an academic environment. I work with a lot of really smart and VERY accomplished people, but that doesn't mean they know jackshit about computers. They need Mike (our I.T. god) on an almost daily basis.
A friend of mine works for a Well Known Thinktank. Nobel prize winners, genius types. Most of them wouldn't be able to distinguish a USB cable from Firewire if their lives depended on it. you could give them tutorials all day long - and all you'd be doing is wasting their time, which is REALLY expensive.
And setting up these networks? And troubleshooting it all? When the print server's on windows, but the file server's on linux and I'm on a Mac and need something to print NOW? I am I going to "Control the processing of information directly"? I could, but in fact: Fuck No. I'm gonna call Mike, the IT deity for our department and he will fix it. IT will never go away, because (not to sound snobby, just acknowledging reality) some of us have better things to do with our time.
It's a common fallacy in humans to assume that just because a thing has never happened, it's unlikely to happen. At this point in history it's easy to see that such attacks can happen, the only thing we don't know is whether they will happen. Given that, I think it's wise to at least research and test appropriate countermeasures, so that if (at some point in the future) this sort of attack does become common, we'll at least have a response ready to deploy on short notice. Actually spending $40 billion attaching this system to every airliner would definitely be premature at this point.
Hi!
Sorry, but you also fell into the same trap. Let's pretend that there is a 100% guarantee that say, 4 jetliners will get blown out of the sky,with 300 people on each. OK. And let's assume it's done over an inhabited area, so there's a 25% boost in casualties. So, we're looking at 1500 total dead. OK. Fine. And let's say this happens, oh, I dunno. A year from today.
If things hold, about 43,000 people will die from traffic accidents in the year passing, which is about 118 people EVERY DAY. So, every 13 days or so, enough people die in car accidents as did in the terror squad action against the airliners. Deaths in cars are preventable: ban vehicles. Barring that, you then have to "make a deal with the devil" that YOU'RE not going to be the next highway statistic, and lord knows the USgov isn't going to spend 40 BILLION dollars on preventing traffic fatalities. Given that aircraft miles are an order or two of magnitude greater per person, you stand a better chance of dying on the highway the day of the terrorist action than you do in the planes that were shot down.
I'm not talking about unlikely to happen, either - I'm assuming 100% guarantee that they blow up airliners. The SIMPLE FACTS are that you stand a much better chance of getting killed in a car than in a plane, and that includes a plane flying on a day of a terrorist action.
I highly recoomend you read this article on Risk Perception. It's very good and gives you an idea of where I'm coming from.
Let's see, 50,000 people a year in the USA die in car accidents. NONE have died from stinger missiles, but the war machine wants to keep people afraid and docile, so they'll spend billions on a defence that will likely never be needed, or if it is, will only kill a microscopic fraction of the total number of people who have ever flown.
In the meantime, they cut out all the funding for alternative energy funding in the last bill, so the USA can continue to be dependent on the oil tha sits under the homes and deserts of the people they want to defend their airliners against. Do we detect a pattern of utter stupidity here?
Am I sorry I got them (so I could catch up on a missed episode)? No.
Would I say that downloads are set to replace Discs? No.
Hi. Yeah - that's basically my point: whatever kind of DVDs come rolling down the pike, they're just part of the larger video offering system. So, yeah - you can watch SG:A is low def and get your fix, and as bandwidth increases, it'll look better and better. Yay. In the interim, there will be DVD systems providing vastly superior resolution experiences - as I said - the entertainment center is optimised for that, so if you want your gut rumbled or your eyes dazzled by the hidef SG:A, you can.
So, will online replace disks? Not completely. But it will cut casual viewing off at the knees. Who needs 7.1 1080p to watch The Daily Show? Mmmm. No one, really. But for casual SD or online viewing - sure - the Daily Show is perfect for that format, and so one would expect for low res online or SD to continue for those purposes quite some time into the future.
BlueRay, HD-DVD, whatever. The genie is out of the bag. Torrents pouring video all over the planet, used DVD sales, online video, youtube, etc. BluRay is not going to dominate anything. IT's just goign to be another niche in the panoply of video standards. The point is that with ubiquity, things get consumed in different ways by people at different times and places.
The BR/HD devices may well take over where obese supine consumers mindlessly suck the tit of the Culture Industry in their overstuffed barcaloungers in the family "Enertainment Center". There, picture quality in a darkened and directed room makes sense. But that is only one particular consumption ritual practice. There are many others. My typical practice is watching video in tiny stuttering windows online, because I can watch one thing, check my email, and work on a project at the same time, or in short sequences. A friend of mine is the same, yet he uses a video projector as his screen. Parties at his place are great - watch online video? Sure. DVD? Sure. Dance Dance Revolution? WTF? Oooh, OK - why not... Wii? OK - but only after we watch that online video of the guy's head exploding. And freak out your sister with the goatse guy.
Betamax and VHS were such a pitched battle because there were no other options. Now, I can't get a cup of coffee without some giant flat panel telling me how white my shirts should be, and then I go to work, and some knucklehead sends me a link to a youtube video of the longest fart EVER, or I visit my brother and his 5 jillion channels of TV pumped all over every screen in the house, etc. etc.
In the early 1980s, there were fewer options, so there was more at stake in a format. Now, it's just another fish in the sea. And with bandwidth increases and everybody and his ugly cousin getting in on the online video action thanks to Flash video, I think it may well be that BR or HD will be the LAST disk format...
The software on Linux is good, but not as good as the stuff you pay for. What he should do is cozy up to Adobe and get them to port the Creative Suite over to Linux, and then sell Adobe CS(4 or 5 or whatever) on a dedicated box running RedHat Linux.
They'd all make a fortune.
And it would give Linux the software it so desperately needs to survive.
Linux comes with a fully features graphical editing tool which is lovingly called the Graphical Image Manipulation Program. Apple and Windows are packaged with bare bones, stripped down graphical editing tools.
So?
design the graphics for a brochure in GIMP. Oh? RGB? Nice, but not close enough - you need CMYK. So much for GIMP. GIMP, like most software I have found on Linux, is for amateurs.
There's a logic error here, I think. By this logic, we should do nothing except the very highest priority thing in our life, and society should pour all of its resources into the very most important priority. For example, we should all live in a thatched hut, eat weeds and grubs, wear the untanned raw skins of animals (or just go naked), and slave 18 hours a day so all our labor and energy can go into....whatever the single highest social priority is...curing cancer, fighting war 'n' injustice, whatever.
Well,
In about 800 year's humans will be living in in thatched huts, eating weeds and grubs, and wearing very little, as the earth will be an oven by then, after the methane hydrates melt and turn the planet into a pressure cooker. So, you point is?
OK - let's do some load testing. HA! See? The test server fried. Fix that - so now it passes to other test servers. Set up? OK - run the test. See? Load OK. Good. Now config the prod servers like that, and we'll be good. Next? copy paste evil Evil EVIL hacker script into data entry on test server. Did it fail? Yes? Good. Prod server's fine then.
OK - you're dreaming that everyone is chasing you (load testing), so you pass the magic baton to someone else and the crowd runs past you. You are in a horrible argument with someone (hacker script) and you smash their brains in and feel happy about it.
Dreams as mental QA scripts. I like that! It makes a kind of "sense", and demonstrates the necessity of not only dreaming BUT PAYING FOR GOOD QA SO YOU DON'T PUT OUT A SHIT PRODUCT. Hopefully that will be heard in Redmond - but they never sleep, so they never dream...
I think a reduced copyright for recordings of music is a good thing.
but reducing it for a written song is not. If I wrote a particular piece of music, then I should be able to collect copyright fees for its publishing when I'm 90. However, a recording is just a particular instance of the expression of that piece of music, and it should not be as well protected - it's just a moment in time.
For those whose work is made IN the studio and has no live correlate or standard notation, then you need to develop a notation system for your work. If you make improvised music with no notation, then you need to hire someone to write it down for you.
was why windows was so important. I remember when Apple went from 68k to PPC, and MS FUD was "See? Do you really think any of that is going to work in 2 years? Hmmmm????" And, they were right. Remember all those CD-ROM "Multimedia" titles from the early 1990s? Try and run them today - "Sorry, but QuickTime no longer supports..."
So, I swallowed the losses. Such is life. But I did envy MS's self-compatibility. I remember helping a friend's business modernise their systems, and they had Lotus123 files on an old 386. We were able to get these files from 1983 into his Win2k machine, and use them. It wasn't exactly straightforward, but we didn't have to dick with the registry, fer chrissakes... This really is a low blow, and it is an example of MS cutting the limb its sitting on.
IT's like MS and the RIAA - they're giving us fewer and fewer reasons to bother with them.
I agree. The solution? Non anonymous moderation. You mod someone a troll? You should have to 'splain yourself.
That owuld be fine by me - it would make the rating MEAN SOMETHING REAL, and while fewer people would give "bad" mods, it would also lead to better posts, because you would have to write something worthwhile.
God ferbid.
RS
Re:NYC in 100 years will be similar but different
on
The City of the Future
·
· Score: 1
Thanks. Too bad the techno-fix blinkered mods here rated me flamebait. Too many people here think technology is everything. IT's important, but it's transient, ad it's that transience that freaks them out, so when some one says "the emperor has no clothes" they get moded flamebait or overrated or something equally nasty. Too bad. A sure sign of group think.
RS
NYC in 100 years will be similar but different
on
The City of the Future
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
It will still be a huge city, but a much poorer city. Think something more like Rio or Lagos. there will be very rich areas, but many incredibley poor areas. The sky scrapers will be largely empty, as no one is willing to climb more than 10 stories. The trains will have stopped running some 10 years earlier. The exurbs in Jersey were plowed back into farmland in the 2070s, and the Satellite cities are filled with industrial mire. Many of the residents will have left to Pennsylvania and Maryland and New Jersey to engage as farmers. The natural gas gave out decades ago, so heating is done with wood and what little coal is left. There is some electricity that comes from some few solar panels and a light water breeder reactor (one of the few that was built before the collapse and depression of the 2020s and 2030s). America pissed its wealth away on bullshit back in the late 20th and early 21st century, and in the 22nd century it no longer has the resources to feed itself much less build gyroscopic trains.
This doesn't mean disaster - it just means "poorer" by our standards. People will still live rich colourful lives. But they'll do it on 2000 calories a day, if that.
I installed it, and then had Little Snitch block it for ever. Everytime I start up an Adobe app,the "Adobe Updater" app comes on. You don't notice it, and it stays on, because I blocked it. I'm on a Mac and so when I opt/apple/esc it's there in the list of running apps. I go to the far right of my Dock, and there's the icon for the app with an X. I click on it and it bitches at me,
"No Internet Connection. Please check your internet settings and or firewall."
Right, we should cooperate with countries like Saudi Arabia... Oops, nope, that's exactly what got Bin Laden and most of the 9/11 hijackers angry at the US in the first place.
Correct. Trade with them all, and NOT HAVE TROOPS ON THEIR SOIL. Bin Laden nailed us because we had troops in the holy land and we diretly and militarily supported the house of Saud, of whom he is a dedicated enemy. So OF COURSE he attacked us, you moron.
One of the founding father's (Jefferson?) suggested we avoid "foreign entanglements". Ding. Works for me. Bring ALL American troops home. Let the world be the world, but trade with it. Japan did FINE with almost ZERO military. Abandon unipolar empire. Do it now, while you can do it in an orderly and intelligent way. Or, continue "business as usual" and let geology kick your ass.
1. convince the American sheeple think that the.gov is actually doing something about terrorism
2. instill fear in the sheeple so they continue making poor risk assessments re: terrorism, and thus support wingnuttery like the TSA.
The TSA hasn't done jack shit to prevent terrorism. Terrorism is defeated by police work and good intelligence, not invading far off countries. Terrorism is not defeated militarily. It is defeated politically and socially: politically through a practice of non-intervention and socially through a process of co-operative engagement. To put it in more common terms: respect others and trade with them. Don't invade and steal resources. Present yourself as something to emulate. Over time, people will leave you the hell alone, because you leave them the hell alone.
The TSA is a crime of an agency, and should be disbanded. Airport security is one thing. Tin horn fascist fear mongering is another.
he company said that during the next five years, a "wave of connectivity" between vehicles and roadways will help keep traffic flowing smoothly, drive down pollution and get you to your destination easier, "without the stress."
This will be accomplished through "intelligent" traffic systems that automatically adjust light patterns and shift traffic to alternative routes, as well as cars that exhibit "reflexes" thanks to communication with other vehicles and roadside sensors, according to IBM.
Utter and catastrophic bullshit. Those features MIGHT be available in 5 years, but the stupid bint up the street who just bought tha gas guzzling Caddilac SUV is NOT going to be getting one in five years. She will likely still be driving the gas guzzling POS Caddy. And I will DEFINITELY still be driving my Prius. And my brother is going tobe buying a new car next year, and it will likely be a used Ford. He ALWAYS buys used Fords.
Essentially, for that technology to have ANY penetration in 5 years, it needs to have been made available last year or the year before. It takes an average of 10 years to replace 75% of the car fleet. This does NOT bode well given the petroleum situation....
Slashdot Mirror
Let's ask Pol Pot, Adolf Hitler, Stalin, and Attila the Hun if Genocide is | Why not ask some people whose mortgages and careers are not so completely ied up in the venture. What a dumb article. I guess it's just our wonderful News Media coughing up blood and not able to get it up anymore.... as usual...
RS
The fundamental problem is personal high speed transportation. Yes, it is fun. Yes, it has its uses. Yes, it has also created "greatest misallocation of resources in history" (Kunstler). The problem isn't the fuel - the problem is the consumptive lifestyle, of which the automobile is simply the object lesson thereof. Peak oil == peak asphalt, so even if we DO sacrifice the rest of the planet to starvation for the sake of filling our tanks, we're still not going to have roads to drive on.
IF there is a car of the future, it will be electric, and it will resemble something more like a curved dash olds with e dunebuggy body running on bicycle wheels, at around 30mph top speed. THAT'S the future. Ethanol isn't part of the equation. Billions of people not being replaced is.
RS
"Waaaah. The number of Representatives isn't MATHEMATICALLY PRECISE!!!!" Waaaaaah!"
Compared to WHAT??? The SENATE??? Where Alaska gets as much representation as New York or Texas? Good Move. Oh, and then he says it favours big states...
Hello! Reality calling! The SENATE is the OTHER HALF of the legislative branch - and it favours small states - by A LOT. So, frankly, I think the TINY big state bias in the house is VERY small potatoes compared to the obscenity of the Senate.
senate. SENATE! Ha! WTF is this? Rome?
RS
What a bunch of MORONS.
Heck - i'd expel them for something that dumb.
RS
Example: a prof down the hall couldn't get her powerbook online for love or money. He's there fiddling with network prefs and having a Bad Day. I walk by on my way to the kitchen to get coffee.
"Hey Ralph: Mary here can't get online - somethings up with the prefs, and I've tried everything."
"Did you try making a new location?"
"Location - Ohh right - Duh. I forgot about that... I'll give it a whack. Thanks..."
A few minutes later she was surfing and Mike was, again, restored to his Godlike stature.
This allowed him to go back to his office and bury himself in setting up a new RAID for the video folks or deal with the ongoign nightmare of the online grading system which, even he agrees, is a complete POS. So we all commiserate.
We all love Mike, and we treat him VERY well. I know more than most of my cow-orkers what a tough job IT can be, and I do what I can to make sure he is always treated fairly and respectfully - he's a pro like the rest of us.
RS
"In the long run, the IT department is unlikely to survive, at least not in its familiar form," Carr writes. "It will have little left to do once the bulk of business computing shifts out of private data centers and into the cloud. Business units and even individual employees will be able to control the processing of information directly, without the need for legions of technical people."
Sheeeyeah- RIIIIGHT.
Wrong on SO many levels.
Little miss dolly dots who can barely operate MSWord and her email client is going to have the expertise to "Control the processing of information directly"? Fuck no. People like that couldn't spill pee out of a boot if the instructions were on the heel.
I'm in an academic environment. I work with a lot of really smart and VERY accomplished people, but that doesn't mean they know jackshit about computers. They need Mike (our I.T. god) on an almost daily basis.
A friend of mine works for a Well Known Thinktank. Nobel prize winners, genius types. Most of them wouldn't be able to distinguish a USB cable from Firewire if their lives depended on it. you could give them tutorials all day long - and all you'd be doing is wasting their time, which is REALLY expensive.
And setting up these networks? And troubleshooting it all? When the print server's on windows, but the file server's on linux and I'm on a Mac and need something to print NOW? I am I going to "Control the processing of information directly"? I could, but in fact: Fuck No. I'm gonna call Mike, the IT deity for our department and he will fix it. IT will never go away, because (not to sound snobby, just acknowledging reality) some of us have better things to do with our time.
RS
It's a common fallacy in humans to assume that just because a thing has never happened, it's unlikely to happen. At this point in history it's easy to see that such attacks can happen, the only thing we don't know is whether they will happen. Given that, I think it's wise to at least research and test appropriate countermeasures, so that if (at some point in the future) this sort of attack does become common, we'll at least have a response ready to deploy on short notice. Actually spending $40 billion attaching this system to every airliner would definitely be premature at this point.
Hi!
Sorry, but you also fell into the same trap. Let's pretend that there is a 100% guarantee that say, 4 jetliners will get blown out of the sky,with 300 people on each. OK. And let's assume it's done over an inhabited area, so there's a 25% boost in casualties. So, we're looking at 1500 total dead. OK. Fine. And let's say this happens, oh, I dunno. A year from today.
If things hold, about 43,000 people will die from traffic accidents in the year passing, which is about 118 people EVERY DAY. So, every 13 days or so, enough people die in car accidents as did in the terror squad action against the airliners. Deaths in cars are preventable: ban vehicles. Barring that, you then have to "make a deal with the devil" that YOU'RE not going to be the next highway statistic, and lord knows the USgov isn't going to spend 40 BILLION dollars on preventing traffic fatalities. Given that aircraft miles are an order or two of magnitude greater per person, you stand a better chance of dying on the highway the day of the terrorist action than you do in the planes that were shot down.
I'm not talking about unlikely to happen, either - I'm assuming 100% guarantee that they blow up airliners. The SIMPLE FACTS are that you stand a much better chance of getting killed in a car than in a plane, and that includes a plane flying on a day of a terrorist action.
I highly recoomend you read this article on Risk Perception. It's very good and gives you an idea of where I'm coming from.
cheers,
RS
In the meantime, they cut out all the funding for alternative energy funding in the last bill, so the USA can continue to be dependent on the oil tha sits under the homes and deserts of the people they want to defend their airliners against. Do we detect a pattern of utter stupidity here?
RS
Am I sorry I got them (so I could catch up on a missed episode)? No. Would I say that downloads are set to replace Discs? No.
Hi. Yeah - that's basically my point: whatever kind of DVDs come rolling down the pike, they're just part of the larger video offering system. So, yeah - you can watch SG:A is low def and get your fix, and as bandwidth increases, it'll look better and better. Yay. In the interim, there will be DVD systems providing vastly superior resolution experiences - as I said - the entertainment center is optimised for that, so if you want your gut rumbled or your eyes dazzled by the hidef SG:A, you can.
So, will online replace disks? Not completely. But it will cut casual viewing off at the knees. Who needs 7.1 1080p to watch The Daily Show? Mmmm. No one, really. But for casual SD or online viewing - sure - the Daily Show is perfect for that format, and so one would expect for low res online or SD to continue for those purposes quite some time into the future.
cheers,
RS
The BR/HD devices may well take over where obese supine consumers mindlessly suck the tit of the Culture Industry in their overstuffed barcaloungers in the family "Enertainment Center". There, picture quality in a darkened and directed room makes sense. But that is only one particular consumption ritual practice. There are many others. My typical practice is watching video in tiny stuttering windows online, because I can watch one thing, check my email, and work on a project at the same time, or in short sequences. A friend of mine is the same, yet he uses a video projector as his screen. Parties at his place are great - watch online video? Sure. DVD? Sure. Dance Dance Revolution? WTF? Oooh, OK - why not... Wii? OK - but only after we watch that online video of the guy's head exploding. And freak out your sister with the goatse guy.
Betamax and VHS were such a pitched battle because there were no other options. Now, I can't get a cup of coffee without some giant flat panel telling me how white my shirts should be, and then I go to work, and some knucklehead sends me a link to a youtube video of the longest fart EVER, or I visit my brother and his 5 jillion channels of TV pumped all over every screen in the house, etc. etc.
In the early 1980s, there were fewer options, so there was more at stake in a format. Now, it's just another fish in the sea. And with bandwidth increases and everybody and his ugly cousin getting in on the online video action thanks to Flash video, I think it may well be that BR or HD will be the LAST disk format...
RS
They'd all make a fortune.
And it would give Linux the software it so desperately needs to survive.
RS
So?
design the graphics for a brochure in GIMP. Oh? RGB? Nice, but not close enough - you need CMYK. So much for GIMP. GIMP, like most software I have found on Linux, is for amateurs.
RS
Well,
In about 800 year's humans will be living in in thatched huts, eating weeds and grubs, and wearing very little, as the earth will be an oven by then, after the methane hydrates melt and turn the planet into a pressure cooker. So, you point is?
RS
RS
(age: 48)
OK - let's do some load testing. HA! See? The test server fried. Fix that - so now it passes to other test servers. Set up? OK - run the test. See? Load OK. Good. Now config the prod servers like that, and we'll be good. Next? copy paste evil Evil EVIL hacker script into data entry on test server. Did it fail? Yes? Good. Prod server's fine then.
OK - you're dreaming that everyone is chasing you (load testing), so you pass the magic baton to someone else and the crowd runs past you. You are in a horrible argument with someone (hacker script) and you smash their brains in and feel happy about it.
Dreams as mental QA scripts. I like that! It makes a kind of "sense", and demonstrates the necessity of not only dreaming BUT PAYING FOR GOOD QA SO YOU DON'T PUT OUT A SHIT PRODUCT. Hopefully that will be heard in Redmond - but they never sleep, so they never dream...
RS
but reducing it for a written song is not. If I wrote a particular piece of music, then I should be able to collect copyright fees for its publishing when I'm 90. However, a recording is just a particular instance of the expression of that piece of music, and it should not be as well protected - it's just a moment in time.
For those whose work is made IN the studio and has no live correlate or standard notation, then you need to develop a notation system for your work. If you make improvised music with no notation, then you need to hire someone to write it down for you.
RS
So, I swallowed the losses. Such is life. But I did envy MS's self-compatibility. I remember helping a friend's business modernise their systems, and they had Lotus123 files on an old 386. We were able to get these files from 1983 into his Win2k machine, and use them. It wasn't exactly straightforward, but we didn't have to dick with the registry, fer chrissakes... This really is a low blow, and it is an example of MS cutting the limb its sitting on.
IT's like MS and the RIAA - they're giving us fewer and fewer reasons to bother with them.
RS
What can I do with this? Lots of stuff. Surf the web. Email. Run a word processor. Maybe even edit a picture or two.
Works for me.
RS
That owuld be fine by me - it would make the rating MEAN SOMETHING REAL, and while fewer people would give "bad" mods, it would also lead to better posts, because you would have to write something worthwhile.
God ferbid.
RS
RS
This doesn't mean disaster - it just means "poorer" by our standards. People will still live rich colourful lives. But they'll do it on 2000 calories a day, if that.
RS
"No Internet Connection. Please check your internet settings and or firewall."
I just click "Cancel" and it goes away.
Adobe sucks.
RS
Correct. Trade with them all, and NOT HAVE TROOPS ON THEIR SOIL. Bin Laden nailed us because we had troops in the holy land and we diretly and militarily supported the house of Saud, of whom he is a dedicated enemy. So OF COURSE he attacked us, you moron.
One of the founding father's (Jefferson?) suggested we avoid "foreign entanglements". Ding. Works for me. Bring ALL American troops home. Let the world be the world, but trade with it. Japan did FINE with almost ZERO military. Abandon unipolar empire. Do it now, while you can do it in an orderly and intelligent way. Or, continue "business as usual" and let geology kick your ass.
RS
1. convince the American sheeple think that the .gov is actually doing something about terrorism
2. instill fear in the sheeple so they continue making poor risk assessments re: terrorism, and thus support wingnuttery like the TSA.
The TSA hasn't done jack shit to prevent terrorism. Terrorism is defeated by police work and good intelligence, not invading far off countries. Terrorism is not defeated militarily. It is defeated politically and socially: politically through a practice of non-intervention and socially through a process of co-operative engagement. To put it in more common terms: respect others and trade with them. Don't invade and steal resources. Present yourself as something to emulate. Over time, people will leave you the hell alone, because you leave them the hell alone.
The TSA is a crime of an agency, and should be disbanded. Airport security is one thing. Tin horn fascist fear mongering is another.
RS
he company said that during the next five years, a "wave of connectivity" between vehicles and roadways will help keep traffic flowing smoothly, drive down pollution and get you to your destination easier, "without the stress."
This will be accomplished through "intelligent" traffic systems that automatically adjust light patterns and shift traffic to alternative routes, as well as cars that exhibit "reflexes" thanks to communication with other vehicles and roadside sensors, according to IBM.
Utter and catastrophic bullshit. Those features MIGHT be available in 5 years, but the stupid bint up the street who just bought tha gas guzzling Caddilac SUV is NOT going to be getting one in five years. She will likely still be driving the gas guzzling POS Caddy. And I will DEFINITELY still be driving my Prius. And my brother is going tobe buying a new car next year, and it will likely be a used Ford. He ALWAYS buys used Fords.
Essentially, for that technology to have ANY penetration in 5 years, it needs to have been made available last year or the year before. It takes an average of 10 years to replace 75% of the car fleet. This does NOT bode well given the petroleum situation....
RS