Nah, some people are still out then (that's not "Sunday morning;" that's still just late "Saturday night!"). Make it 5:30-6 AM Sunday morning, and you've got it about right.
As a result, there are crowds of complete morons who hate math, are really bad at it, but are trying to get through a series of college math classes to get a certification that they can teach math. I happen to teach some of these classes.
Good, you're in a position to do something about it: just fail all the morons!
The fact is that the exact layout and preservation thereof during a transfer is nice to have, but not essential.
No, the fact is that the vast majority of people have no business wasting time on presentation in the first place! Just think of what a gigantic waste of time Microsoft has singlehandedly caused through Word, because everybody was messing with their fonts and shit when they could have just used plaintext instead and been done with it.
For me, Calc is completely unusable compared to Excel, because just about the only thing I use spreadsheets for is making graphs and the charting functionality of Calc sucks.
I am still waiting for the perfect (or even near-perfect) office suite. OOo is the closest, with open (if complex) code, and an open (and well-documented) file format.
It'll never happen, because "office suites" are inherently wrong. Like above, with your example of "embedding documents" -- that's wrong. The concept doesn't even make sense! Or putting content and presentation together haphazardly -- that's wrong, too. Yet that's exactly what Word is designed to do. And "macros?" Wrong! A document and an application are two different things. Documents aren't meant to be executable! Because of these things, MS Office and OpenOffice, like 'goto,' should be considered harmful.
So what's the "right" thing? XHTML, with separate content and stylesheet, is the "right" thing. TeX is the "right" thing. Writing an actual application when you need an application, instead of hacking the functionality into Word or Excel using VBA, is the "right" thing. And most importantly, realizing that the point of the document is the content, and that you shouldn't be wasting time with excessive markup in Word, is the "right" thing!
My question is what advantage will they get from plugging these coprocessors into CPU sockets, as opposed to PCIe risers?
The advantage is that it's easier to do "general purpose" stream processing on them, instead of just graphics.
Does the coprocessor realy need to be cache coherent? If it is, how do you deal with interrupt handling? Does the GPU run independant threads that are peers to CPU threads?
Right now, with DirectX 9 parts? No. With Vista and DirectX 10 and CUDA and whatnot? Absolutely!
Are you counting into this the environmental impact of allowing the hydraulic fluid to escape into the environment?
Yes, they would take all this into account. That's what "designing" means! I know at least in the U.S. something like this would require compiling a environmental impact statement first, to makes sure all this kind of stuff was considered. Presumably, Scotland and other places have similar requirements.
Anyway, it seems to me that you keep assuming all these engineers are idiots are something. My whole point in bringing this up is that this is part of their job, and chances are, they know what they're doing!
Let me put it this way: are you competent at whatever it is you do for a living? Yes? Then perhaps you should consider the possibility that they might be competent too!
I heard an interesting interview on NPR today with a vice-president from some telecom anti-regulatory outfit. Everytime the interviewer (Brooke Gladstone from "On the Media") asked him why we can't get call-timers or non-crippled Bluetooth on our cellular phones, he just kept chanting "Free Market, Free Market, Free Market". He referred to the telecom industry as one of the most competitive of all.
Sounds like the Chewbacca Defense to me. After all, since when was anything about the cellular market even slightly free?
Also, while it would be nice to just refuse to use that address, it's simply not practical to practice. Official University information is sent to it, including communication from professors to their classes, and that system won't change.
It'll change if enough people protest by refusing to use their accounts! My university gives out official email addresses for official communication, and protesting through "email disobedience" is exactly what I'd do if it tried to pull this kind of shit with me.
...I do know they run WebCT, but I don't know much about it, though I hear grumbling from those who have to use it now and again.
Tell those people to demand a switch to Sakai. It's written by universities for universities -- you can't go wrong with that!
I just wish Google would add an "x-google-labels" header to messages downloaded with POP, so that I could sort them into Mail.app Smart Folders (or whatever the Thunderbird equivalent is called). And yes, IMAP would be nice too.
Obviously, he's worried because he'd have to switch to Windows to read his mail. Once he does that, he will be vulnerable.
Personally, if my uni were doing this, I wouldn't stand for it. Although I wouldn't do something as drastic as switching schools, I would absolutely refuse to use that address anymore (whether it's "required" or not), and set it up to auto-reply explaining such to anyone sending mail to it.
Of course, that kind of thing would never happen at my school. Our various IT departments actually "get it" and provide services for Windows, Mac, and assorted *nix. In fact, we're actually improving by switching away from WebCT (proprietary, run by an evil company) to Sakai (Free Software).
Everyone who buys a big LCD monitor without looking at the wattage is not doing the power grid a favour. The best value in an LCD monitor seems to be the 19" screen -- anything bigger is a hog at the trough, regardless of who makes it. Philips makes a 19" LCD monitor that only uses 34 watts.
You know, I've been wondering -- why the heck do desktop LCD monitors take that much power? And, for that matter, why are they so damn thick? You go to the store and look at laptops, and even the 17" screens are only 1/4" thick, with power consumption on the order of 34 watts for the whole laptop, not just the screen. So why can't they just make a stand-alone laptop-style LCD? It shouldn't be that hard!
Next... your video cards need special processors and fans if you want the latest glitzy effects. Do you really need this stuff? Fanless video cards and integrated video may not give your Beryl, Spaces, or Aero, but I haven't seen anything in these features that is essential to fun and productive computing.
That's not true -- all those things will still run even on (newer) integrated video. In fact, Beryl probably runs best on the Intel GMA950, because it's probably the fastest thing with Free Software (that is, not buggy and difficult to install) 3D drivers.
But if you have a car that gets even 17 MPG it will take you literally longer than you will probably be driving to reach the point where you've saved enough fuel to make up for the energy that went into producing a hybrid, let alone something that gets say 35 MPG.
WTF?! Regular cars get 35 MPG easily, and if you're really trying to save money you can always get an older non-hybrid that'll get over 50 MPG. If you're talking about a hybrid, you should be looking for mileage on the order of 60 MPG, not 35!
No it wouldn't; it would have to be let flow downstream or else you aren't getting any power out of the mills. In fact, because of that you realistically couldn't approach using "100%" of the energy in the river anyway. The only real consequence would be that you slowed down the river, which would cause sediment to build up and eventually turn it into a meandering river with a flood plain.
Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it. Do you know why coastlines look the way they do? Because they get fucking pounded on a regular basis. And there is nowhere that is safe. If it's not storms that come around every few years to a decade and wash the coast clean, then it's a place with tropical storms, or tsunamis, etc etc. Consequently nothing built on the surface or shore of the ocean can exist indefinitely even as that term is typically used by people, which is to say "around longer than me".
Knowing that, wouldn't they just design it to withstand moderate storms? I mean, it doesn't have to last "indefinately;" just long enough to get a decent return on the investment. If a freak storm (the kind that only happens once in X years, where X is longer than the design life of the system) destroys it you just install a new one -- simple.
No, old windmills kill too many birds. They keep making the newer ones bigger and bigger, which not only is more efficient, but also causes them to spin slower which, in turn, allows the birds to avoid them.
See, that's what I don't get: what's so ugly about a wind farm? Now, I've never actually seen one in person, but they look pretty nice in the pictures...
Slashdot Mirror
Nah, some people are still out then (that's not "Sunday morning;" that's still just late "Saturday night!"). Make it 5:30-6 AM Sunday morning, and you've got it about right.
Good, you're in a position to do something about it: just fail all the morons!
Conveniently, most kids don't get taught enough math to understand why getting a 15-year loan for a car is a bad idea anyway!
No, the fact is that the vast majority of people have no business wasting time on presentation in the first place! Just think of what a gigantic waste of time Microsoft has singlehandedly caused through Word, because everybody was messing with their fonts and shit when they could have just used plaintext instead and been done with it.
For me, Calc is completely unusable compared to Excel, because just about the only thing I use spreadsheets for is making graphs and the charting functionality of Calc sucks.
It'll never happen, because "office suites" are inherently wrong. Like above, with your example of "embedding documents" -- that's wrong. The concept doesn't even make sense! Or putting content and presentation together haphazardly -- that's wrong, too. Yet that's exactly what Word is designed to do. And "macros?" Wrong! A document and an application are two different things. Documents aren't meant to be executable! Because of these things, MS Office and OpenOffice, like 'goto,' should be considered harmful.
So what's the "right" thing? XHTML, with separate content and stylesheet, is the "right" thing. TeX is the "right" thing. Writing an actual application when you need an application, instead of hacking the functionality into Word or Excel using VBA, is the "right" thing. And most importantly, realizing that the point of the document is the content, and that you shouldn't be wasting time with excessive markup in Word, is the "right" thing!
The advantage is that it's easier to do "general purpose" stream processing on them, instead of just graphics.
Right now, with DirectX 9 parts? No. With Vista and DirectX 10 and CUDA and whatnot? Absolutely!
I wonder if there's a similar local movement in Georgia, and how I join it if there is?
Yes, they would take all this into account. That's what "designing" means! I know at least in the U.S. something like this would require compiling a environmental impact statement first, to makes sure all this kind of stuff was considered. Presumably, Scotland and other places have similar requirements.
Anyway, it seems to me that you keep assuming all these engineers are idiots are something. My whole point in bringing this up is that this is part of their job, and chances are, they know what they're doing!
Let me put it this way: are you competent at whatever it is you do for a living? Yes? Then perhaps you should consider the possibility that they might be competent too!
Sounds like the Chewbacca Defense to me. After all, since when was anything about the cellular market even slightly free?
Massachusetts, Minnesota, Texas, California... anywhere else? I'm (happily) beginning to lose count!
Without a POP interface I can't back up the mail. Because of that, it's as good as useless. Period.
It'll change if enough people protest by refusing to use their accounts! My university gives out official email addresses for official communication, and protesting through "email disobedience" is exactly what I'd do if it tried to pull this kind of shit with me.
Tell those people to demand a switch to Sakai. It's written by universities for universities -- you can't go wrong with that!
I just wish Google would add an "x-google-labels" header to messages downloaded with POP, so that I could sort them into Mail.app Smart Folders (or whatever the Thunderbird equivalent is called). And yes, IMAP would be nice too.
Obviously, he's worried because he'd have to switch to Windows to read his mail. Once he does that, he will be vulnerable.
Personally, if my uni were doing this, I wouldn't stand for it. Although I wouldn't do something as drastic as switching schools, I would absolutely refuse to use that address anymore (whether it's "required" or not), and set it up to auto-reply explaining such to anyone sending mail to it.
Of course, that kind of thing would never happen at my school. Our various IT departments actually "get it" and provide services for Windows, Mac, and assorted *nix. In fact, we're actually improving by switching away from WebCT (proprietary, run by an evil company) to Sakai (Free Software).
You know, I've been wondering -- why the heck do desktop LCD monitors take that much power? And, for that matter, why are they so damn thick? You go to the store and look at laptops, and even the 17" screens are only 1/4" thick, with power consumption on the order of 34 watts for the whole laptop, not just the screen. So why can't they just make a stand-alone laptop-style LCD? It shouldn't be that hard!
That's not true -- all those things will still run even on (newer) integrated video. In fact, Beryl probably runs best on the Intel GMA950, because it's probably the fastest thing with Free Software (that is, not buggy and difficult to install) 3D drivers.
WTF?! Regular cars get 35 MPG easily, and if you're really trying to save money you can always get an older non-hybrid that'll get over 50 MPG. If you're talking about a hybrid, you should be looking for mileage on the order of 60 MPG, not 35!
Yeah, I don't know what's wrong with me -- I've stopped making "normal" typos and started making use-the-wrong-homophone typos instead. : (
Seems to me there are too good solutions for the customer:
I wonder how effective these would be as breakwaters?
No it wouldn't; it would have to be let flow downstream or else you aren't getting any power out of the mills. In fact, because of that you realistically couldn't approach using "100%" of the energy in the river anyway. The only real consequence would be that you slowed down the river, which would cause sediment to build up and eventually turn it into a meandering river with a flood plain.
Knowing that, wouldn't they just design it to withstand moderate storms? I mean, it doesn't have to last "indefinately;" just long enough to get a decent return on the investment. If a freak storm (the kind that only happens once in X years, where X is longer than the design life of the system) destroys it you just install a new one -- simple.
No, old windmills kill too many birds. They keep making the newer ones bigger and bigger, which not only is more efficient, but also causes them to spin slower which, in turn, allows the birds to avoid them.
See, that's what I don't get: what's so ugly about a wind farm? Now, I've never actually seen one in person, but they look pretty nice in the pictures...