DIY is frequently less expensive than paying someone else to do it. You don't have to pay for the labor in many cases and can use less expensive alternatives if you're willing to be your own maintainer.
Oh, absolutely. But in this case, paying someone else to do it gets you access to all sorts of R&D write-offs and tax incentives. Check out sites like this 914 where the owner has spent over $10k, plus the cost of car, and hasn't even really started yet.
Doing an expensive endeavor yourself is often cheaper than having someone else do it for you, even if you end up paying more for materials. But getting a $20k product for $15k doesn't make it cheap. It makes it less expensive. The GPP was making the point that if you're having a hard time coming up with a clunker car then you're probably not going to be able to afford an electric conversion. This is almost certainly true, and your attack didn't address it at all.
He didn't say that any series that is infinitely long and non-repetitive will have any possible finite series of digits, he said that Pi would.
Actually, what he said was, "since Pi is infinitely long and never repeats..." Since that was his only stated reasoning, disputing the premise by disproving the given reasons was completely valid.
Sorry to spoil what could have been a good bash-fest with, like, actual quotes and stuff though... feel free to disregard.
More to the point (although you could infer it from the "newsworthiness" of the story): he did it from memory. Although I'd be surprised if anyone had ever even read out 100,000 digits of Pi but, then again, I've been surprised by stupid people. Also from the article, "In 2002, University of Tokyo mathematicians, aided by a supercomputer, set the world record for figuring out pi to 1.24 trillion decimal places." So:
a) He's got a way to go; and b) Sagan not proven right yet, still no circle.
I'm guessing there's no girlfriend, either, but the only evidence I have supporting this is that, well, this guy memorized 100,000 digits of Pi. C'mon...
QT, $3,000 per seat vrs M$VC at $700. How many M$VC's can you get at no cost for free software distribution?
Or you can use Microsoft Empower which gives you all of the power of MSDN for $375/yr for up to five developers. Its like crack - coding for Windows is cheap at first, when you're small. And the resulting binaries are always freely distributable, no matter what license you're using.
Is the difference in price worth the platform you will have to force on your customers? No version of Windows has ever worked as well as any Linux distribution I've used.
That depends. Do your customers already run Windows? In that case, the answer is an unqualified, "Yes."
first, a startup/small company gets a 65% discount off $3300 or $1155.
And if some of the developers work on tools you plan to share source for that development station is free!
So what? If you're a small/startup company, you can go with options like Microsoft Empower for $375 a year, which gives you basically everything that MSDN does for five people, not including some of the support speed. That's OS copies, office, servers, visual studio, you name it -- all without any distribution license headaches.
Yeah. Under $80 per developer, per year, for damn near everything that MSFT puts out, as long as you promise to release a Windows program within two years. Not too shabby.
Of course, the average cost of a good developer, total to the company, is around $60-90 per hour. That's $500-750 per day. If having the latest hardware around makes them even slightly more productive, or gives them a reason to work an extra hour per week (not day, week), that pays for a new, kick-ass system every six months or so -- and that's assuming that you just shred the old hardware.
This is why even a pretty good 6MP sensor - like, say, a Nikon D50 today - can produce much better pictures than a crappy 8MP point-n-shoot camera sensor does. By better I mean cleaner, less noisy, with more realistic color, etc, etc. Even with good lenses, the tiny sensors just aren't getting the light information they need to do well.
. If priced correctly, flOw could end up an essential title similar to what Geometry Wars represents for the Xbox 360 -- a small, casual game with mass appeal sold for pure profit."
Of course, making it available for free download months in advance may - just may - reduce the number of people lining up to pay for it. But who knows, miracles can happen.
Think about the phrase, "Microsoft Owns Up To 360 Defects." Not the conversation, just the headline. Now think about the response, "Only 360? Last time I heard, they had thousands of defects..."
Now look up. No, higher. See that? That's the joke, going far, far over your head.
However, multi-head was common on Macs back in the mid 80s. This was mostly because of the built-in screens back then, but still. The vast majority of Windows users have not only never set up dual-screen on their computers, but have rarely if ever seen it on a PC.
My mistake. The link to the article wasn't in the sentence, "Ajit Jaokar over at the Open Gardens blog has an article up on a growing service called movietally." it was on the phrase tag the movies they've seen in the sentence, "The service allows users to tag the movies they've seen and receive automatic recommendations for movies they might like to see."
The GPL isn't preventing DLink from copying, modifying, or distributing. The only thing that they're preventing is DLink taking those rights from others when they use GPL'd code to make their programs.
Not at all. Precondition: you have some GPLd code. You decide to release a product based on that code. How on earth does DLink releasing a closed-source product also based on this code in any way reduce your ability to do likewise? Or anyone else's, for that matter? What you seem to be saying is that DLink is stopping you from piggy-backing off of their code. Which is true, and also forbidden under the terms of the GPL (which they chose to license their base code), which is why they're being shut down.
The BSD license is actually designed to promote true freedom. Freedom, as in "Do what you want to with this, whether or not I approve of it." Not that the GPL doesn't provide for some great ideas, but its hardly a freedom-loving license.
Actually, structural concrete construction is probably one of the nicest, strongest, and relatively cheap methods available today. One of the nicer methods uses styrofoam forms for the concrete that are left in place, becoming additional insulation, and then covered with a thin layer of stucco. Pretty sweet, and installable well by relatively unskilled labor (unlike traditional brick construction).
It helps that a surprisingly large number of houses don't have proper attachments with the rafters, which actually contributes an awful lot to the problem. We really do build disposable housing here in the US.
Well, the way we should adapt is directly dependent on why it is changing. There is no clear scientific proof of to what extent humans are responsible for this and to what extent complete removal of any human CO2 emission could change the situation. I saw the Inconbenient Truth - there were not a single word about to what extent we are responsible for current global warming.
Er, so what? I mean, let's say that we agree that global warming is happening. Now let's say that we agree that a lot of its effects are going to be bad for us, or at least annoying as all hell.
Who cares if we're chiefly responsible? I mean, isn't it worth trying to cut down on our emissions to reduce the rate of global warming purely from a self-interest standpoint?
You may have been joking, but as far as I know Americans are pretty much unique in their desire to build a stick-frame house and glue a thin layer of brick onto the outside. When we moved here from England in 1984 it actually took quite a while for our realtor to make us understand that no, in fact, none of the houses we were looking at were actually "brick" houses. In England, when you have a brick house, its a real brick house made with real structural bricks.
Of course, in the US, everyone's totally chuffed if you live in a "historic" house. You know, like one from the 1920s.
It gets worse. What you have here, is a bad idea. However, the people pushing and benefiting from the bad idea are effectively "buying off" their nosiest critics. Selective enforcement is just plain wrong. All it basically says is that software patents are meaningless... unless we don't like you, in which case we can shut you down. Kinda like (although not as bad as) traffic rules that everyone knows won't ever be enforced... unless you're a minority from out of town. But hey, its legal, they're on the books, right?
Slashdot Mirror
DIY is frequently less expensive than paying someone else to do it. You don't have to pay for the labor in many cases and can use less expensive alternatives if you're willing to be your own maintainer.
Oh, absolutely. But in this case, paying someone else to do it gets you access to all sorts of R&D write-offs and tax incentives. Check out sites like this 914 where the owner has spent over $10k, plus the cost of car, and hasn't even really started yet.
Doing an expensive endeavor yourself is often cheaper than having someone else do it for you, even if you end up paying more for materials. But getting a $20k product for $15k doesn't make it cheap. It makes it less expensive. The GPP was making the point that if you're having a hard time coming up with a clunker car then you're probably not going to be able to afford an electric conversion. This is almost certainly true, and your attack didn't address it at all.
Sorry to spoil what could have been a good bash-fest with, like, actual quotes and stuff though... feel free to disregard.
So, you're saying that he probably does have a girlfriend?
22/7. Not pi, but an incredible simulation... for a fraction, at least.
More to the point (although you could infer it from the "newsworthiness" of the story): he did it from memory. Although I'd be surprised if anyone had ever even read out 100,000 digits of Pi but, then again, I've been surprised by stupid people. Also from the article, "In 2002, University of Tokyo mathematicians, aided by a supercomputer, set the world record for figuring out pi to 1.24 trillion decimal places." So:
a) He's got a way to go; and
b) Sagan not proven right yet, still no circle.
I'm guessing there's no girlfriend, either, but the only evidence I have supporting this is that, well, this guy memorized 100,000 digits of Pi. C'mon...
QT, $3,000 per seat vrs M$VC at $700. How many M$VC's can you get at no cost for free software distribution?
Or you can use Microsoft Empower which gives you all of the power of MSDN for $375/yr for up to five developers. Its like crack - coding for Windows is cheap at first, when you're small. And the resulting binaries are always freely distributable, no matter what license you're using.
Is the difference in price worth the platform you will have to force on your customers? No version of Windows has ever worked as well as any Linux distribution I've used.
That depends. Do your customers already run Windows? In that case, the answer is an unqualified, "Yes."
first, a startup/small company gets a 65% discount off $3300 or $1155.
And if some of the developers work on tools you plan to share source for that development station is free!
So what? If you're a small/startup company, you can go with options like Microsoft Empower for $375 a year, which gives you basically everything that MSDN does for five people, not including some of the support speed. That's OS copies, office, servers, visual studio, you name it -- all without any distribution license headaches.
Yeah. Under $80 per developer, per year, for damn near everything that MSFT puts out, as long as you promise to release a Windows program within two years. Not too shabby.
I'd be happy to take it off your hands and free up some rack space...
Of course, the average cost of a good developer, total to the company, is around $60-90 per hour. That's $500-750 per day. If having the latest hardware around makes them even slightly more productive, or gives them a reason to work an extra hour per week (not day, week), that pays for a new, kick-ass system every six months or so -- and that's assuming that you just shred the old hardware.
Oh, yes she should. Not that she ever wore a skirt but, hey, who's counting?
This is why even a pretty good 6MP sensor - like, say, a Nikon D50 today - can produce much better pictures than a crappy 8MP point-n-shoot camera sensor does. By better I mean cleaner, less noisy, with more realistic color, etc, etc. Even with good lenses, the tiny sensors just aren't getting the light information they need to do well.
Of course, making it available for free download months in advance may - just may - reduce the number of people lining up to pay for it. But who knows, miracles can happen.
Sigh.
Think about the phrase, "Microsoft Owns Up To 360 Defects." Not the conversation, just the headline. Now think about the response, "Only 360? Last time I heard, they had thousands of defects..."
Now look up. No, higher. See that? That's the joke, going far, far over your head.
Oh, never mind.
Last time I heard, they had thousands of defects...
I dunno... doing the same thing that other people have done, but with blog-pr and rounded corners? Sounds pretty much like web 2.0 to me...
However, multi-head was common on Macs back in the mid 80s. This was mostly because of the built-in screens back then, but still. The vast majority of Windows users have not only never set up dual-screen on their computers, but have rarely if ever seen it on a PC.
My mistake. The link to the article wasn't in the sentence, "Ajit Jaokar over at the Open Gardens blog has an article up on a growing service called movietally." it was on the phrase tag the movies they've seen in the sentence, "The service allows users to tag the movies they've seen and receive automatic recommendations for movies they might like to see."
/. wonders why I don't bother to subscribe...
Silly me.
And
Since the summary doesn't see fit to actually post a link to the FA: enjoy.
Not at all. Precondition: you have some GPLd code. You decide to release a product based on that code. How on earth does DLink releasing a closed-source product also based on this code in any way reduce your ability to do likewise? Or anyone else's, for that matter? What you seem to be saying is that DLink is stopping you from piggy-backing off of their code. Which is true, and also forbidden under the terms of the GPL (which they chose to license their base code), which is why they're being shut down.
The BSD license is actually designed to promote true freedom. Freedom, as in "Do what you want to with this, whether or not I approve of it." Not that the GPL doesn't provide for some great ideas, but its hardly a freedom-loving license.
Actually, structural concrete construction is probably one of the nicest, strongest, and relatively cheap methods available today. One of the nicer methods uses styrofoam forms for the concrete that are left in place, becoming additional insulation, and then covered with a thin layer of stucco. Pretty sweet, and installable well by relatively unskilled labor (unlike traditional brick construction).
It helps that a surprisingly large number of houses don't have proper attachments with the rafters, which actually contributes an awful lot to the problem. We really do build disposable housing here in the US.
I'd heard the same line, but the number in question was "50." Still just as true.
Er, so what? I mean, let's say that we agree that global warming is happening. Now let's say that we agree that a lot of its effects are going to be bad for us, or at least annoying as all hell.
Who cares if we're chiefly responsible? I mean, isn't it worth trying to cut down on our emissions to reduce the rate of global warming purely from a self-interest standpoint?
You may have been joking, but as far as I know Americans are pretty much unique in their desire to build a stick-frame house and glue a thin layer of brick onto the outside. When we moved here from England in 1984 it actually took quite a while for our realtor to make us understand that no, in fact, none of the houses we were looking at were actually "brick" houses. In England, when you have a brick house, its a real brick house made with real structural bricks.
Of course, in the US, everyone's totally chuffed if you live in a "historic" house. You know, like one from the 1920s.
It gets worse. What you have here, is a bad idea. However, the people pushing and benefiting from the bad idea are effectively "buying off" their nosiest critics. Selective enforcement is just plain wrong. All it basically says is that software patents are meaningless... unless we don't like you, in which case we can shut you down. Kinda like (although not as bad as) traffic rules that everyone knows won't ever be enforced... unless you're a minority from out of town. But hey, its legal, they're on the books, right?