That is horrible advice - sitting close to a large TV will wreak havoc on your eyes' ability to focus, as well as their actual physical shape given enough time.
Please explain how an IPS panel designed to be a television is any different from an IPS panel designed to be a monitor, when seated at the same distance from each (aside from maximum brightness, which is typically greater on a television)? This isn't the bad old days of 640x480 CRT television. I'm not advising he stick his face in the damn thing. As a matter of fact, the whole point of using a larger display at the same resolution is to make it so he doesn't HAVE to stick his face right into it to read it.
I have to second all the opinions saying "use a large TV". My only caveat would be that if you're going to sit two feet (or less) from it, you don't need the brightness all the way up. This also will reduce the heat it throws off, which can be considerable at that distance if it's CCFL-backlit LCD rather than LED -- which I actually recommend because of the better blacks. (It's still better than a similarly sized CRT though.) Also, pick something that has decent off-center performance (like an IPS panel rather than TN), so you have some freedom of movement. If you're moving your head and leaning in at times, the last thing you need is for the rest of the screen to go all wonky because you're now at the wrong angle. The closer you get, the less forgiving it's going to be.
Also, don't just use one of them if you've got the space. Use two, even if that means using the analog output on a laptop in addition to its HDMI. The more real estate you have, the less need there is to cram things into small windows. This is true even if one of them has to be much smaller than the other, in which case you may wish to have a desktop manager that will let you shuttle applications between the larger and smaller monitor easily. You can keep your primary task on the big screen and relegate the less important ones (that you still want to be able to glance at) to the smaller screen.
I personally have four monitors attached to two video cards, but this is just because that's what I happen to have. I did just fine with two. The third and fourth don't carry anything I want to read in detail, because of the pain of craning my neck all the time. They're aimed to be legible from the bed, though, so I use them as video displays. (I have four TN panels, so the aim is critical, alas.)
Thing is, she likes it. It's a ThinkPad, so I can't say I blame her for that. If there had been no replacement for 32-bit XP at the EOL for XP, she would have just gone on using it anyhow, in a defiant "why should I replace a working computer" stance. For the netbook I bought in 2009, I could deal with a switch to some flavor of Linux, but she would not.
Then what happens to people with perfectly functional machines lacking x64 support -- run an unsupported and vulnerable XP forever? I'm personally quite glad there's a 32-bit Windows 7, or my mother's laptop would be scrap.
This would kill the usefulness of Windows 10 for existing games, practically all of which are 32-bit. Without remaining a strong platform for gaming, it would be difficult (to say the least) to upsell a large portion of the existing user base. I suppose you can argue that native 32-bit versions should be discontinued, but that's a totally different argument from saying that WoW64 should be discontinued.
For firefox you'd either have to choose one of their nightly 64-bit versions or settle with Waterfox which usually lags behind a few versions.
Not so. Pale Moon, my personal choice. They deliberately lag a few versions behind on the user interface rather than accepting the broken shit Firefox foists on everyone.
I used to check out music CDs from the local library frequently, about fifteen years ago. I asked if they were concerned about them going missing, and found out that almost all of them came from the personal collections of the librarians -- who had first made CD-R copies for themselves on a machine owned by the library. (At this time CD burners were expensive but not exorbitant -- like $200, and $1 discs could be had in quantity). I would hazard a guess that most libraries do the same, even if they don't bother telling anyone about it. They may not make physical copies, but I'm reasonably sure they make some sort of archival copy. Even if they have multiple copies of the original media and withhold one, the discs are subject to physical damage over time.
As a side effect, I ended up making friends with two of the librarians (an early 20s white female who liked The Offspring, and a mid-40s black male who liked avant garde jazz) because I commented on how good the musical tastes of the donators were, not knowing the librarians were the primary contributors. There was a third with pretty good taste as well but I never got to discuss it with her. I found out they were making copies for themselves because I offered to do so, only to be told they already were. If I worked in a library and could make copies of anything I donated, I'd probably have done the same thing they did.
Done properly, it should be extremely difficult to tell incompetence from malice. The more you know about doing it right, the easier it is to lead someone wrong. Even if they ask multiple people the same question to try to weed out such answers, they're more than likely going to get multiple answers that would actually work (or at the least are slightly wrong but non-malicious), but don't look the same. Who do they trust?
Quite some time ago, I led an IRC channel called #badadvice. As you can probably gather from the name, the purpose of the channel was to give plausible-sounding but hilariously and catastrophically bad advice to submitted questions. The more the responders knew about the subject, the better they were at dispensing bad advice. We did this for free, but our raison d'être was right there in the name of the channel. Anyone taking our "advice" seriously was a moron.
Guess what? That's the quality of service the bank should be expecting from its former employees. If they have to do it for free, many lulz are going to be had.
If you click the (ajc.com) link right next to the title, you'll find yourself looking at the article, as if by magic!
Magic indeed. I suppose this is the fault of the style sheet designer rather than the submitter or editor, but (ajc.com) is not underlined, is not a button, and is not part of a menu, so it never occurred to me that it was a link.
And with this submission, we start a new chapter in the history of/.
Reading the article has long been optional and even disparaged, but now not reading the article is made mandatory by not even linking it in the first place, saving the precious feels of those who might have been the least bit guilty about rushing in to post without a clue.
I've met a fair number of Late Heavy Bombardments, but can't say it occurred to me to date them. Have they tried rolling it in flour and going for the wet spot?
They're not going to attempt to continue the work in Syria.
The seeds are being planted at new facilities in Lebanon and Morocco, allowing scientists to resume the important research they've been doing for decades, away from the barrel bombs of Aleppo.
This just lets them continue somewhere else, even though they can't get their existing stock back. Presumably, their cross-breeding experiments will be set back somewhat, but it probably won't take as long to replicate as it did to do the first time around. (I assume someone remembers most, if not all, of the critical details.)
This is a good position for the Doomsday Vault to take. "Send us samples for both the protection of our entire planet, and whatever area they came from originally, because we can always send them back." This is one of those uncommon cases where there is a clear benefit at every level for being altruistic. I just hope they don't return all of them, lest there be another loss and then nobody has any.
What about something that doesn't surround a star but instead orbits in the same manner as a planet -- yet still has a great deal more surface area than a planet. Say, an Orbital. I haven't done the math, but Banks said this took the material of a single planet, not the material of multiple star systems.
Not only that, but most home HVAC systems aren't capable of cooling a house to 40 degrees below ambient. 20 is more typical, and you can improve on that some with good insulation and recirculation, but the heat flowing from the environment into the cooler house is still going to increase proportionally to the temperature difference. Heating, as you pointed out, costs much less in direct terms (though it requires burning a carbon-based fuel) because it doesn't have to move heat and dump it somewhere else, it actually creates it out of an energy source directly.
Slashdot Mirror
That is horrible advice - sitting close to a large TV will wreak havoc on your eyes' ability to focus, as well as their actual physical shape given enough time.
Please explain how an IPS panel designed to be a television is any different from an IPS panel designed to be a monitor, when seated at the same distance from each (aside from maximum brightness, which is typically greater on a television)? This isn't the bad old days of 640x480 CRT television. I'm not advising he stick his face in the damn thing. As a matter of fact, the whole point of using a larger display at the same resolution is to make it so he doesn't HAVE to stick his face right into it to read it.
I have to second all the opinions saying "use a large TV". My only caveat would be that if you're going to sit two feet (or less) from it, you don't need the brightness all the way up. This also will reduce the heat it throws off, which can be considerable at that distance if it's CCFL-backlit LCD rather than LED -- which I actually recommend because of the better blacks. (It's still better than a similarly sized CRT though.) Also, pick something that has decent off-center performance (like an IPS panel rather than TN), so you have some freedom of movement. If you're moving your head and leaning in at times, the last thing you need is for the rest of the screen to go all wonky because you're now at the wrong angle. The closer you get, the less forgiving it's going to be.
Also, don't just use one of them if you've got the space. Use two, even if that means using the analog output on a laptop in addition to its HDMI. The more real estate you have, the less need there is to cram things into small windows. This is true even if one of them has to be much smaller than the other, in which case you may wish to have a desktop manager that will let you shuttle applications between the larger and smaller monitor easily. You can keep your primary task on the big screen and relegate the less important ones (that you still want to be able to glance at) to the smaller screen.
I personally have four monitors attached to two video cards, but this is just because that's what I happen to have. I did just fine with two. The third and fourth don't carry anything I want to read in detail, because of the pain of craning my neck all the time. They're aimed to be legible from the bed, though, so I use them as video displays. (I have four TN panels, so the aim is critical, alas.)
Who you are doesn't matter. What matters is your plan.
What, crashing a plane with no survivors? I can put it past CIA, but I wouldn't put it past Bane.
Thing is, she likes it. It's a ThinkPad, so I can't say I blame her for that. If there had been no replacement for 32-bit XP at the EOL for XP, she would have just gone on using it anyhow, in a defiant "why should I replace a working computer" stance. For the netbook I bought in 2009, I could deal with a switch to some flavor of Linux, but she would not.
Then what happens to people with perfectly functional machines lacking x64 support -- run an unsupported and vulnerable XP forever? I'm personally quite glad there's a 32-bit Windows 7, or my mother's laptop would be scrap.
This would kill the usefulness of Windows 10 for existing games, practically all of which are 32-bit. Without remaining a strong platform for gaming, it would be difficult (to say the least) to upsell a large portion of the existing user base. I suppose you can argue that native 32-bit versions should be discontinued, but that's a totally different argument from saying that WoW64 should be discontinued.
For firefox you'd either have to choose one of their nightly 64-bit versions or settle with Waterfox which usually lags behind a few versions.
Not so. Pale Moon, my personal choice. They deliberately lag a few versions behind on the user interface rather than accepting the broken shit Firefox foists on everyone.
I believe you may be conflating the KKK with Aryan Nation, which did have to give up its compound as the result of a court case.
o All programs will be required to check their privileges before running.
Wait, isn't there a movie about this already?
You've totally lost me.
Deformed troll.
I used to check out music CDs from the local library frequently, about fifteen years ago. I asked if they were concerned about them going missing, and found out that almost all of them came from the personal collections of the librarians -- who had first made CD-R copies for themselves on a machine owned by the library. (At this time CD burners were expensive but not exorbitant -- like $200, and $1 discs could be had in quantity). I would hazard a guess that most libraries do the same, even if they don't bother telling anyone about it. They may not make physical copies, but I'm reasonably sure they make some sort of archival copy. Even if they have multiple copies of the original media and withhold one, the discs are subject to physical damage over time.
As a side effect, I ended up making friends with two of the librarians (an early 20s white female who liked The Offspring, and a mid-40s black male who liked avant garde jazz) because I commented on how good the musical tastes of the donators were, not knowing the librarians were the primary contributors. There was a third with pretty good taste as well but I never got to discuss it with her. I found out they were making copies for themselves because I offered to do so, only to be told they already were. If I worked in a library and could make copies of anything I donated, I'd probably have done the same thing they did.
Ralph pls go.
Done properly, it should be extremely difficult to tell incompetence from malice. The more you know about doing it right, the easier it is to lead someone wrong. Even if they ask multiple people the same question to try to weed out such answers, they're more than likely going to get multiple answers that would actually work (or at the least are slightly wrong but non-malicious), but don't look the same. Who do they trust?
Quite some time ago, I led an IRC channel called #badadvice. As you can probably gather from the name, the purpose of the channel was to give plausible-sounding but hilariously and catastrophically bad advice to submitted questions. The more the responders knew about the subject, the better they were at dispensing bad advice. We did this for free, but our raison d'être was right there in the name of the channel. Anyone taking our "advice" seriously was a moron.
Guess what? That's the quality of service the bank should be expecting from its former employees. If they have to do it for free, many lulz are going to be had.
If you click the (ajc.com) link right next to the title, you'll find yourself looking at the article, as if by magic!
Magic indeed. I suppose this is the fault of the style sheet designer rather than the submitter or editor, but (ajc.com) is not underlined, is not a button, and is not part of a menu, so it never occurred to me that it was a link.
And with this submission, we start a new chapter in the history of /.
Reading the article has long been optional and even disparaged, but now not reading the article is made mandatory by not even linking it in the first place, saving the precious feels of those who might have been the least bit guilty about rushing in to post without a clue.
I've met a fair number of Late Heavy Bombardments, but can't say it occurred to me to date them. Have they tried rolling it in flour and going for the wet spot?
They're not going to attempt to continue the work in Syria.
The seeds are being planted at new facilities in Lebanon and Morocco, allowing scientists to resume the important research they've been doing for decades, away from the barrel bombs of Aleppo.
This just lets them continue somewhere else, even though they can't get their existing stock back. Presumably, their cross-breeding experiments will be set back somewhat, but it probably won't take as long to replicate as it did to do the first time around. (I assume someone remembers most, if not all, of the critical details.)
This is a good position for the Doomsday Vault to take. "Send us samples for both the protection of our entire planet, and whatever area they came from originally, because we can always send them back." This is one of those uncommon cases where there is a clear benefit at every level for being altruistic. I just hope they don't return all of them, lest there be another loss and then nobody has any.
"I seem to be having tremendous difficulty with my lifestyle."
Bend over and kiss your ass goodbye, people. It's the Vl'hurgs.
Or, just get a small dog.
What about something that doesn't surround a star but instead orbits in the same manner as a planet -- yet still has a great deal more surface area than a planet. Say, an Orbital. I haven't done the math, but Banks said this took the material of a single planet, not the material of multiple star systems.
Not only that, but most home HVAC systems aren't capable of cooling a house to 40 degrees below ambient. 20 is more typical, and you can improve on that some with good insulation and recirculation, but the heat flowing from the environment into the cooler house is still going to increase proportionally to the temperature difference. Heating, as you pointed out, costs much less in direct terms (though it requires burning a carbon-based fuel) because it doesn't have to move heat and dump it somewhere else, it actually creates it out of an energy source directly.
For extra fun, try searching for diesel generators, doll clothes, personal lubricant, tire chains, and jumper cables all on the same day.