A terrorist training camp spontaneously starting up because of some youtube videos would be just as likely as me starting my personal army based on 'Call Of Duty" (the video game). I mean, the game is good, but it alone is not going to convince me that war is the new cool thing to do.
That being said Google is free to do whatever it wants; this is just politics (as an above poster already pointed out).
There are a lot of plants that move. I don't know what you mean by move around. Light has a lot of energy in it, photosynthesis is just very inefficient (5%). Chloroplasts don't even try to make energy from the most common color in visible light: green!
It's the same thing over and over coming out of the gaming industry.... Doom3 was a rocky start... I guess that's the best we can hope for these days; a departure from the norm.:\
I'm sorry every game doesn't blow your mind.
Return to Castle Wolfenstein had the best AI enemies I had seen at the time which made the FPS much more interesting. Enemies would lure you into ambushes, right after they had blow a clip on you and then gone around the corner to reload so you couldn't take advantage of it.
Doom3 is the first FPS to ever consistently make me jump as I played it at night, with the sound up.
Just because it didn't blow my mind like Homeworld, doesn't mean the gaming industry is failing us.
And I fail to see how you, linking to _your-own-post_, about how your video card was under powered and you didn't know it before hand by your own admitted failed assumption, constitutes a "rocky start" for doom3. According to your post, you were in line the day it came out. If you buy a game, pushing a new graphics engine, on the day it comes out, your aging video card might not be good enough.
...If nuclear power produces that much more power, in a more confined area, for less money, and produces negligible amounts of pollution whats the problem?
That is a big 'if'. It has been 2 years since I was reading about it, but then, the problem with nuclear power was what do with the used radioactive(bad for the environment) fuel.
And the parent was rightly mod'ed troll, the article is about solar panels and he basically sneared "nuclear is better." While what he said is accurate, there is a LOT more to energy production than energy density per square meter. For instance, with enough advancement in solar panels we have the ability to distribute our power generation, and by ALL accounts, the transmission of electricity is a huge headache and power loss due to the fact that our transmission lines are not super conductors. And because noone wants a nuclear powerplant in their back yard, this centralized power generation will has huge transmission losses.
I kept all my mp3s on an NTFS partition, and it made amarok incredibly slow for searching through files and even listing them when I wanted to expand a tree. It, of course, also was using up a ton of cpu power. Other intensive programs were causing me other problems, mostly more cpu usage quirks.
I found the default database backend slow, so switching to a better DB could be the solution. Even if your files are on NTFS, try having a postgres DB backend(on your fs of choice) and it should speed up your library searching.
You might be right (IANAE) but your examples are crap.
I create a perfect $100 bill. It is indistinguishable in every way from one printed by the government. Is there any more wealth in society from my creation? No. But there's $100 more money.
But you have caused inflation, just as a govn't does when it prints more money. So YOU are 100$ richer, but as the worth of the country hasn't changed, so everyone's dollers are worth.00000001% less to compensate.
I create food. Food obviously has value, as it sustains us. There is more wealth in society from my creation. Is there any more money? No.
There is more money if you export that food to china and they pay you with something that you can use to buy other stuff (yen/dollars). Like any product, it is 'worth' whatever someone is willing to trade/buy it for.
world Economics is very interrelated; I know still have a lot to learn [too].
"According to this article at CNN: Police arrested a man they said tracked his ex-girlfriend's whereabouts by attaching a global positioning system to her car. Police said Gabrielyan attached a cellular phone to the woman's car on August 16 with a motion switch that turned on when the car moved, transmitting a signal each minute to a satellite. Information was then sent to a Web site that allowed Gabrielyan to monitor the woman's location." A ruling last year stated that police need a warrant to track individuals in a similar fashion.
Not saying something is not telling a lie by anyones standards.
Misleading someone by not telling the whole truth is called a lie by omission http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie In science this is a big problem. When people do one test, and show some graph that everything works. But when they didn't show all the data that proves its bad, it is a lie by omission.
Does that mean that when someone is wrongfully convicted, they are always guilty?
No, and I certainly didn't mean to imply as such, and I definitly didn't say that. I was stating the facts and it shows that the jury agreed with the facts presented.
Because I know someone who was railroaded by an ignorant jury...
that sucks, my condolences. But that has nothing to do with FoxNews, telling the truth, or this case.
There is a reason there are appeals...
I agree. And the appeals court was correct based on current law. The sad/angering part is why Fox (and the 4 other news companies that petitioned the court along side) won the appeal. They didn't want to be held accountable for being wrong. That messed up to me.
I guess your just a believer and the world is flat no matter what. It doesn't matter much to me, anyone who follows your links will know the real story.
I've based my opinion on the things I've read. I tried to go through the court document itself, but I didn't really learn anything new as I couldn't find the appeals document. I really only want the truth, weather is pissed me off or not. This story is kind of the nail in the coffin, from what I consider bad and one sided, reporting across the board from Fox News (my dad watches it, so I've seen enough).
Glad you are familiar with it, but permit me to disagree with your interpretation of it
You can actually read this statement as they don't have to tell every last piece of information just because it might be true. Obviously if they misrepresent the situations they report on, they are open to slander suits and so on so they have to be at least factually correct but a dog shitting in the woods doesn't need to be a story on their stations even if it is true. And that is really what the statement was about, they don't have to report something just because it is true. Otherwise, they would have to report our little exchange here because it is true, we talked about this.
That is not it at all. The two reporters sued under whistle blower status because they were fired in retaliation for refusing to lie on the news. They won initially.
The reporters lost in appeals court because fox claimed that it was not illegal to lie on the news, and therefor whistleblower status didn't apply.
In my opinion, they went too far for their corporate bottom line. They went to court to defend their name and $$$, and their argument was, 'it is ok for us to lie on the news'.
I didn't cite it, because I even though I waste time reading/., I don't keep newspaper clippings in my back pocket. Although, I guess requesting bigger proof than my own conjecture is prudent.
I only scanned these before posting them. I googled for "milk fox news court". I may have first heard about it in the movie "the corporation" (more than 1/2 way through) but I can't be sure.
Really, in terms of the universe, EVERYTHING is rare....
If that is serious statement, then you are missing the point. What article means is: Given that there is a randomly chosen solar system in front of us, it would be rare for this solar system to look like ours.
In other terms "For all solar systems S, P{S_1 is an element of the set of systems_looking_like_ours} $RARE_PERCENT"
FoxNews went to court to prove that they had no legal responsibility to tell the truth. That sealed the deal for me. FoxNews is not allowed to be watched in my house, and I will laugh at anyone using it as a reference.
Also, if a critical driver fails (such as a keyboard driver - and for this, it doesn't need to crash), the stability of the core operating system is moot for most people, since they need to reboot the system to get the driver working again. (I experienced this with an OEM "Multimedia keyboard" driver, and know how to correct it.) The same applies to the display driver - if you don't see anything on the screen, you can't do much with your system.
I don't know one single person who is using Vista as their home OS.
Well, I know a lot of people who do (including most people who have bought a new PC or laptop in the last year or whatever), so what does that prove either way?
Were you seriously trying to extrapolate from your personal experience that there were literally no people at all using Vista?
You extrapolated from the quote when it was unnecessary to do so. [s]he said,
"there is no way I'm going to believe that Vista is at a 20% adaptation rate, at least not in this major Midwesten metropolitan area. Absolutely not."
So in answer to your question. No, the Parent was NOT trying to say that there are literally no people using vista.
Take his experience for what it is: real statistics from a small sample set.
Slashdot Mirror
Damn, whoever mod'ed you troll was having a bad day. Redundant maybe...
Is this what you want?:
http://www.mini-itx.com/store/
They have full systems like:
http://www.mini-itx.com/store/configure.asp?sid=HUSH-B1
Why the hell does a public organization have patents?
I think we need to go to the window and scream, "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it any more."
Seriously though, I'ld like a good answer to that question.
Can't you already do that in the US? Donate money to Non-profit organizations and have the money knocked off your taxable income.
Is saying 'your welcome' allowed on /., or is that considered evil like karma whoring or 'pulling a twitter'?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-x9BucfUYCE
Right in the beginning, 0:05 or so.
A terrorist training camp spontaneously starting up because of some youtube videos would be just as likely as me starting my personal army based on 'Call Of Duty" (the video game). I mean, the game is good, but it alone is not going to convince me that war is the new cool thing to do.
That being said Google is free to do whatever it wants; this is just politics (as an above poster already pointed out).
You are misinterpreting "either card failing" to mean: 'if you were to pick a random card, what are the chances of it failing.' Sure, lets assume 20%.
That is not the probability in question. It should be translated to: Given N cards, what is the probability that 1 or more have failed.
The answers can be found from p_f = 1 - (.8)^n
So for one card: 20%
Two cards: 36%
Three cards: 48.8%
infinite amount of cards: 100%
How many plants move around?
There are a lot of plants that move. I don't know what you mean by move around. Light has a lot of energy in it, photosynthesis is just very inefficient (5%). Chloroplasts don't even try to make energy from the most common color in visible light: green!
It's the same thing over and over coming out of the gaming industry. ... ... :\
Doom3 was a rocky start
I guess that's the best we can hope for these days; a departure from the norm.
I'm sorry every game doesn't blow your mind.
Return to Castle Wolfenstein had the best AI enemies I had seen at the time which made the FPS much more interesting. Enemies would lure you into ambushes, right after they had blow a clip on you and then gone around the corner to reload so you couldn't take advantage of it.
Doom3 is the first FPS to ever consistently make me jump as I played it at night, with the sound up.
Just because it didn't blow my mind like Homeworld, doesn't mean the gaming industry is failing us.
And I fail to see how you, linking to _your-own-post_, about how your video card was under powered and you didn't know it before hand by your own admitted failed assumption, constitutes a "rocky start" for doom3. According to your post, you were in line the day it came out. If you buy a game, pushing a new graphics engine, on the day it comes out, your aging video card might not be good enough.
They, [Microsoft], know that their draconian tactics of old aren't going to work anymore.
What do you base that on?!
Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice...
...If nuclear power produces that much more power, in a more confined area, for less money, and produces negligible amounts of pollution whats the problem?
That is a big 'if'. It has been 2 years since I was reading about it, but then, the problem with nuclear power was what do with the used radioactive(bad for the environment) fuel.
And the parent was rightly mod'ed troll, the article is about solar panels and he basically sneared "nuclear is better." While what he said is accurate, there is a LOT more to energy production than energy density per square meter. For instance, with enough advancement in solar panels we have the ability to distribute our power generation, and by ALL accounts, the transmission of electricity is a huge headache and power loss due to the fact that our transmission lines are not super conductors. And because noone wants a nuclear powerplant in their back yard, this centralized power generation will has huge transmission losses.
He wasn't insightful, that is a "NOSHIT-SHERLOCK"
I kept all my mp3s on an NTFS partition, and it made amarok incredibly slow for searching through files and even listing them when I wanted to expand a tree. It, of course, also was using up a ton of cpu power. Other intensive programs were causing me other problems, mostly more cpu usage quirks.
I found the default database backend slow, so switching to a better DB could be the solution. Even if your files are on NTFS, try having a postgres DB backend(on your fs of choice) and it should speed up your library searching.
deflation...I can only imagine.
That is this young American's wet dream.
You might be right (IANAE) but your examples are crap.
I create a perfect $100 bill. It is indistinguishable in every way from one printed by the government. Is there any more wealth in society from my creation? No. But there's $100 more money.
But you have caused inflation, just as a govn't does when it prints more money. So YOU are 100$ richer, but as the worth of the country hasn't changed, so everyone's dollers are worth .00000001% less to compensate.
I create food. Food obviously has value, as it sustains us. There is more wealth in society from my creation. Is there any more money? No.
There is more money if you export that food to china and they pay you with something that you can use to buy other stuff (yen/dollars). Like any product, it is 'worth' whatever someone is willing to trade/buy it for.
world Economics is very interrelated; I know still have a lot to learn [too].
Would you trust /.?
Ha-ha, no.
I should have seen that coming. :-P
Would you trust /.?
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/09/05/1730239
"According to this article at CNN: Police arrested a man they said tracked his ex-girlfriend's whereabouts by attaching a global positioning system to her car. Police said Gabrielyan attached a cellular phone to the woman's car on August 16 with a motion switch that turned on when the car moved, transmitting a signal each minute to a satellite. Information was then sent to a Web site that allowed Gabrielyan to monitor the woman's location." A ruling last year stated that police need a warrant to track individuals in a similar fashion.
found this too: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2334039
Not saying something is not telling a lie by anyones standards.
Misleading someone by not telling the whole truth is called a lie by omission
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie
In science this is a big problem. When people do one test, and show some graph that everything works. But when they didn't show all the data that proves its bad, it is a lie by omission.
Does that mean that when someone is wrongfully convicted, they are always guilty?
No, and I certainly didn't mean to imply as such, and I definitly didn't say that. I was stating the facts and it shows that the jury agreed with the facts presented.
Because I know someone who was railroaded by an ignorant jury...
that sucks, my condolences. But that has nothing to do with FoxNews, telling the truth, or this case.
There is a reason there are appeals...
I agree. And the appeals court was correct based on current law. The sad/angering part is why Fox (and the 4 other news companies that petitioned the court along side) won the appeal. They didn't want to be held accountable for being wrong. That messed up to me.
I guess your just a believer and the world is flat no matter what. It doesn't matter much to me, anyone who follows your links will know the real story.
I've based my opinion on the things I've read. I tried to go through the court document itself, but I didn't really learn anything new as I couldn't find the appeals document. I really only want the truth, weather is pissed me off or not. This story is kind of the nail in the coffin, from what I consider bad and one sided, reporting across the board from Fox News (my dad watches it, so I've seen enough).
Glad you are familiar with it, but permit me to disagree with your interpretation of it
You can actually read this statement as they don't have to tell every last piece of information just because it might be true. Obviously if they misrepresent the situations they report on, they are open to slander suits and so on so they have to be at least factually correct but a dog shitting in the woods doesn't need to be a story on their stations even if it is true. And that is really what the statement was about, they don't have to report something just because it is true. Otherwise, they would have to report our little exchange here because it is true, we talked about this.
That is not it at all. The two reporters sued under whistle blower status because they were fired in retaliation for refusing to lie on the news. They won initially.
The reporters lost in appeals court because fox claimed that it was not illegal to lie on the news, and therefor whistleblower status didn't apply.
In my opinion, they went too far for their corporate bottom line. They went to court to defend their name and $$$, and their argument was, 'it is ok for us to lie on the news'.
How can I trust a news station that does that?
I didn't cite it, because I even though I waste time reading /., I don't keep newspaper clippings in my back pocket. Although, I guess requesting bigger proof than my own conjecture is prudent.
I only scanned these before posting them. I googled for "milk fox news court".
I may have first heard about it in the movie "the corporation" (more than 1/2 way through) but I can't be sure.
http://www.foxbghsuit.com/
http://www.everything2.com/title/FOX%2520News
http://www.organicconsumers.org/rbgh/fox-news.cfm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto
http://www.netfeed.com/~jhill/RupertMurdoch.htm
Really, in terms of the universe, EVERYTHING is rare....
If that is serious statement, then you are missing the point. What article means is:
Given that there is a randomly chosen solar system in front of us, it would be rare for this solar system to look like ours.
In other terms "For all solar systems S, P{S_1 is an element of the set of systems_looking_like_ours} $RARE_PERCENT"
FoxNews went to court to prove that they had no legal responsibility to tell the truth. That sealed the deal for me. FoxNews is not allowed to be watched in my house, and I will laugh at anyone using it as a reference.
Also, if a critical driver fails (such as a keyboard driver - and for this, it doesn't need to crash), the stability of the core operating system is moot for most people, since they need to reboot the system to get the driver working again. (I experienced this with an OEM "Multimedia keyboard" driver, and know how to correct it.) The same applies to the display driver - if you don't see anything on the screen, you can't do much with your system.
ssh (secure shell) F.T.W.
Well, I know a lot of people who do (including most people who have bought a new PC or laptop in the last year or whatever), so what does that prove either way?
Were you seriously trying to extrapolate from your personal experience that there were literally no people at all using Vista?
You extrapolated from the quote when it was unnecessary to do so. [s]he said,
"there is no way I'm going to believe that Vista is at a 20% adaptation rate, at least not in this major Midwesten metropolitan area. Absolutely not."
So in answer to your question. No, the Parent was NOT trying to say that there are literally no people using vista.
Take his experience for what it is: real statistics from a small sample set.
Well, when you put it that way, I agree with you 110%.