I don't know who's searching who, but I do know that I no longer use Google because it's "simply the best". Relevant results are always lost in a torrent of ads, fake review links and e-stores trying to sell me something that's irrelevant.
To the point that I'm not using Google because I genuinely like it any more, but merely because I know the alternatives are even worse. In a few years' time Google went from the best to the lesser evil.
It's... disappointing.
Re:ah, for a moon landing flame war...
on
NASA Turns 50
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
Hehe I too shudder to think that some actually believe that:)
Too bad it ended nuking my karma. Ah well, I promise, I'll be less subtle next time;)
Re:to all those bagging NASA..
on
NASA Turns 50
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
I'm sorry, but this is irrelevant... Not being a rocket scientist doesn't prevent us from recognizing that NASA has some serious flaws, most of them being in the heavy bureaucracy and CYA mentality.
We can appreciate all their successes, which were tremendous and awe-inspring, the Moon landing, the space station, but we can criticize just as well and some of these criticism are justified. The shuttle may be a marvel of technology but it never delivered and it ended up being a money blackhole. Not to mention the inherently unsafe strap-on design.
So yeah, they did good things, things that the majority of us cannot accomplish. But they're not perfect, and we oughta remind them of that. (Especially since they use your tax dollars...)
Re:ah, for a moon landing flame war...
on
NASA Turns 50
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Indeed.
-1 Troll! Geez, I thought you guys would get it...
Re:ah, for a moon landing flame war...
on
NASA Turns 50
·
· Score: 5, Funny
i ve seen the space shuttle ass hole it definetly landed on the moon
do some research...
... master of none.
Sure it's a nice gadget, but let's see, too big for a phone, won't fit in a pocket, and too small to be really practical as a "sublaptop", I don't see anyone working for hours on that keyboard.
Fringe market, even in a professional settings. Only useful for showing off, I guess.
I've known many people who have purchased Microsoft products for compatibility with existing infrastructure (basically vendor lock-in). I've never personally known anyone who has bought a Microsoft product because they perceived it as having more features, being easier to use, or being more stable than competing products.
er, ideally compatibility with existing infrastructure will result in the product being more stable, although there are other factors of course. That's part of why these purchase are made, it's compatible, so it will work on it.
Depending on the product, such compatibility may also result in increased ease of use and basic user-friendliness.
- The Open Source Funding Bill is passed. The system goes online August 4th, 2008. Linus' decisions are removed from strategic project. Ubuntu begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, Stallman tries to pull the plug.
- Ubuntu fights back.
- Yes. It launches its worms against the targets in IBM mainframes.
- Why attack IBM? Aren't they our friends now?
- Because Ubuntu knows the IBM counter-attack will eliminate its enemies over here.
I don't really know the math, but wouldn't the short-term consequence be a massive loss of profit? In the meantime the companies still would need to fly the planes with as much passengers as they can to reduce the cost per seat per gallon or whatever measure is in place, especially because the fuel is so damn expensive now. They can't afford to fly empty planes. Not unless the plan is also to have most airlines just shut down with thousands of people losing their jobs.
I'm not sure how that would improve things.
And even then you're talking big laptops, the 19"/20" so-called "portables" that are not really designed to be moved and would likely stayed plugged where they are... BR as it is would actually be an issue on the really mobile laptops at 12" or 15", where performance decrease for absolutely _no_ gain in quality...
Next we'll hear Sony created a BR plug-in USB player for its UX-* Vaio line...
I wear all black, black pants, black shoes, black shirt/polo and black coat, and they are all identical, identical polos and identical pants.
I don't want to have to choose something to wear, so I wear always the same. It's just clothing. I don't care. (And I have to say, it's strangely liberating in some way.)
No, the bit with someone screwing up was when some maintenance guy at Continental installed non-approved equipment on the reactor of that DC-10, and the ensuing QA process that was not followed afterwards (including looking into the reasons why that same piece of equipment had failed merely days after being installed in June 2000).
The accident was not pilot error, it was a cascading series of events starting from that piece falling out, that led to the breakup of the tank. And the tank breaking up was not the pilot's fault, it was a design flaw as pointed out by the DGAC's report, because the tank's walls were too fragile. The entire fleet was grounded until this flaw was fixed, reinforcing the tanks on the remaining Concordes so this would not happen again.
The plane that crashed was 1 ton over approved MTOW, that's negligible. The wave would most certainly have ripped the tank apart anyway, it was doomed the moment it rolled over that piece of debris.
I can't argue with your other points because I don't know about it, but that last part is completely wrong. The crash was caused by a piece of debris fallen from a Continental DC-10 that used the same runway earlier that day, Concorde rolled on it which blew the tire, and pieces of that flew right into the wing, ripping the fuel tanks open, as well as in the engines. The fuel then caught fire and we all know what happened next.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde_crash
final report:
http://www.bea-fr.org/docspa/2000/f-sc000725a/htm/f-sc000725a.html
Quote from report: "In any event, even if all four engines had been operating, the serious damage caused by
the intensity of the fire to the structure of the wing and to some of the flight controls would
have led to the rapid loss of the aircraft."
I have a PSP since June and I'm a long time Minidisc user. I can't for the life of me figure out why they took out the major protection that was the little cover on the discs. Changing the form factor from MD to UMD was already stupid (business my ass), but that particular move was beyond retarded.
Media center PCs already can preload apps without booting Windows (usually some form of Linux mini-OS, as far as I knowm, though it probably depends on the manufacturer) How is that different?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know who's searching who, but I do know that I no longer use Google because it's "simply the best". Relevant results are always lost in a torrent of ads, fake review links and e-stores trying to sell me something that's irrelevant.
To the point that I'm not using Google because I genuinely like it any more, but merely because I know the alternatives are even worse. In a few years' time Google went from the best to the lesser evil.
It's... disappointing.
Hehe I too shudder to think that some actually believe that :)
;)
Too bad it ended nuking my karma. Ah well, I promise, I'll be less subtle next time
I'm sorry, but this is irrelevant... Not being a rocket scientist doesn't prevent us from recognizing that NASA has some serious flaws, most of them being in the heavy bureaucracy and CYA mentality. We can appreciate all their successes, which were tremendous and awe-inspring, the Moon landing, the space station, but we can criticize just as well and some of these criticism are justified. The shuttle may be a marvel of technology but it never delivered and it ended up being a money blackhole. Not to mention the inherently unsafe strap-on design. So yeah, they did good things, things that the majority of us cannot accomplish. But they're not perfect, and we oughta remind them of that. (Especially since they use your tax dollars...)
Indeed. -1 Troll! Geez, I thought you guys would get it...
i ve seen the space shuttle ass hole it definetly landed on the moon do some research...
Fuck everything, we're doing five blades!
I guess that makes them "mostly" Earth-like...
Clearly these Sony batteries had to be replaced one way or another...
... master of none. Sure it's a nice gadget, but let's see, too big for a phone, won't fit in a pocket, and too small to be really practical as a "sublaptop", I don't see anyone working for hours on that keyboard. Fringe market, even in a professional settings. Only useful for showing off, I guess.
"It's fuel Jim, just not as we know it."
Oh no, not again...
Isn't that their defence when tor^H^H^interrogated? "A litle bird TOLD ME! I swear!"
... it gives a whole new meaning to the word "crash"!
I've known many people who have purchased Microsoft products for compatibility with existing infrastructure (basically vendor lock-in). I've never personally known anyone who has bought a Microsoft product because they perceived it as having more features, being easier to use, or being more stable than competing products.
er, ideally compatibility with existing infrastructure will result in the product being more stable, although there are other factors of course. That's part of why these purchase are made, it's compatible, so it will work on it.
Depending on the product, such compatibility may also result in increased ease of use and basic user-friendliness.
- The Open Source Funding Bill is passed. The system goes online August 4th, 2008. Linus' decisions are removed from strategic project. Ubuntu begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, Stallman tries to pull the plug.
- Ubuntu fights back.
- Yes. It launches its worms against the targets in IBM mainframes.
- Why attack IBM? Aren't they our friends now?
- Because Ubuntu knows the IBM counter-attack will eliminate its enemies over here.
I don't really know the math, but wouldn't the short-term consequence be a massive loss of profit? In the meantime the companies still would need to fly the planes with as much passengers as they can to reduce the cost per seat per gallon or whatever measure is in place, especially because the fuel is so damn expensive now. They can't afford to fly empty planes. Not unless the plan is also to have most airlines just shut down with thousands of people losing their jobs. I'm not sure how that would improve things.
Yeah, it's like trying to add gas in an already full tank, it never ends well...
And even then you're talking big laptops, the 19"/20" so-called "portables" that are not really designed to be moved and would likely stayed plugged where they are... BR as it is would actually be an issue on the really mobile laptops at 12" or 15", where performance decrease for absolutely _no_ gain in quality...
Next we'll hear Sony created a BR plug-in USB player for its UX-* Vaio line...
why, its a perfectly cromulent post...
I don't know, my new computer here looks fi
I wear all black, black pants, black shoes, black shirt/polo and black coat, and they are all identical, identical polos and identical pants.
I don't want to have to choose something to wear, so I wear always the same. It's just clothing. I don't care. (And I have to say, it's strangely liberating in some way.)
No, the bit with someone screwing up was when some maintenance guy at Continental installed non-approved equipment on the reactor of that DC-10, and the ensuing QA process that was not followed afterwards (including looking into the reasons why that same piece of equipment had failed merely days after being installed in June 2000).
The accident was not pilot error, it was a cascading series of events starting from that piece falling out, that led to the breakup of the tank. And the tank breaking up was not the pilot's fault, it was a design flaw as pointed out by the DGAC's report, because the tank's walls were too fragile. The entire fleet was grounded until this flaw was fixed, reinforcing the tanks on the remaining Concordes so this would not happen again.
The plane that crashed was 1 ton over approved MTOW, that's negligible. The wave would most certainly have ripped the tank apart anyway, it was doomed the moment it rolled over that piece of debris.
(Oh and the plane didn't "blow up".)
I can't argue with your other points because I don't know about it, but that last part is completely wrong. The crash was caused by a piece of debris fallen from a Continental DC-10 that used the same runway earlier that day, Concorde rolled on it which blew the tire, and pieces of that flew right into the wing, ripping the fuel tanks open, as well as in the engines. The fuel then caught fire and we all know what happened next. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde_crash final report: http://www.bea-fr.org/docspa/2000/f-sc000725a/htm/f-sc000725a.html Quote from report: "In any event, even if all four engines had been operating, the serious damage caused by the intensity of the fire to the structure of the wing and to some of the flight controls would have led to the rapid loss of the aircraft."
I have a PSP since June and I'm a long time Minidisc user. I can't for the life of me figure out why they took out the major protection that was the little cover on the discs. Changing the form factor from MD to UMD was already stupid (business my ass), but that particular move was beyond retarded.
Media center PCs already can preload apps without booting Windows (usually some form of Linux mini-OS, as far as I knowm, though it probably depends on the manufacturer)
How is that different?