No, he didn't prove that f(x)=0/x is continuous. He simply stated that it has a hole discontinuity (which occur when a value of a function is not defined, but a limit exists at that point), not an asymptotic one (which occur when a value of a function is undefined, and a limit is either undefined, positive or negative infinity at the point). There is one other type of discontinuity, a displaced discontinuity. For example, consider the piecewise defined function f(x)={0/x for x != 0, 1, x = 0}. The function is defined at x=0, but its value does not equal the limit at that point.
I didn't call anyone stupid; I called the analogy stupid. And I maintain that it is stupid because a bullet in a ballistics gel is a classical system. I don't know all these advanced physics topics with great levels of intricacy like you do; but I do know that quantum mechanics is based upon statistics and probabilities. When you have a sample that is so large that the statistics of that system can truly be defined as a normal, Boltzmann distribution, you have a classical system. That's why, even though the exact position of an electron in a copper wire may not be known, a current will still flow through that wire if differing voltages are applied at either end. That is one reason why your analogy was not good. I made a grievous error in my initial post by being technically incorrect; however, the message of what I was saying still stands, and it is what I clarified in my initial response.
Your analogy was stupid because it compared apples to oranges. You first make an analogy of a subatomic system to a classical system, and then you yell at me for equating the two. I did the opposite! I said it was stupid to talk about a microscopic system when talking a macroscopic system. I have no quibble with any of the facts you state*. They're all correct. But all your advanced physics knowledge and all these facts are both clouding the issue and your argument. The axions cannot use a regular electromagnetic detector because, like neutrinos (I think; as I have said before, I'm not intimately acquainted with subatomic physics), they interact very weakly with real matter (i.e. they have very little to no electromagnetic interaction, due to being not just net neutral, but fundamentally neutral). The detector that had to be used did indeed detect electromagnetic signatures (photons, I would surmise) because this axion, a fundamentally neutral particle decayed into two not neutral things and these interacted with matter, but the difference between it and the regular detectors is that the interaction site where the axions were created could exist inside the detector. Now, the electromagnetic stuff that this detector is detecting is not like the electromagnetic stuff that ballistics gel is detecting. This is detecting a photon, a packet of electromagnetic energy, an electromagnetic wave; ballistics gel is detecting a wave caused because different pieces of matter are colliding thanks to the electromagnetic force.
The two are different. Quite different. And that is another reason I didn't like your analogy. You obviously know a lot of physics. However, I am surprised that you didn't pick up the difference between an electromagnetic wave and/or photon and a wave of matter that the electromagnetic force mediates.
Now, just one last thing. What I was saying in my previous post was not that you were making things simpler, it was that you were making them more complex. As you said, the special cases (like spring constants) are made to make life simple because they are simpler than having to integrate the electromagnetic field equations over all the particles in the ballistic gel! I was complaining that you were making things way more complicated than they needed to be. That was my last quibble with your analogy.
That all said, I would be glad to hear your response, and again, sorry to have implied that you were stupid. I was complaining about the analogy.
So yes, there are 4 fundamental forces and all other forces are developed from these. However, what is the force applied to a mass suspended on a spring with spring constant K and displaced X? Well, it's -KX. Sure, the electromagnetic forces between all the atoms in the spring are what cause the force and you can even use Young's modulus and/or chemical bond theory to find what the "atomic spring" constant is...but that's senseless and pedantic. Similarly, if you want me to describe why that shockwave develops, it is because of momentum. The bullet imparts some of its momentum and energy to the gel, and causes the viscosity of the gel is what causes the wave to propagate, just like when we talk about sound waves in air, or ocean waves. I sure as hell hope you don't resort to electromagnetism to describe those. What I was saying is that using the bullet analogy is stupid because, while technically correct, its completely vacuous. And in fact, particles that have a net neutral charge only interact electromagnetically in distance scales where the separate regions of positive and negative charge are distinct (like atomic nuclei). Two neutral atoms don't interact (electromagnetically, or at all) until their two regions of negative space get close enough together that they begin to have an effect on each other. But you know, that's roughly 8 order of magnitude off of the scale of a bullet, and, again, talking about a microscopic (and quantum!) system in terms of a macroscopic problem is, as I said before, stupid.
"The wake of a bullet going through ballistics gel is due to the electromagnetic force."
And the Universe is powered by stupidity. The wake of a bullet going through ballistics gel is caused by the shockwave of the bullet's impact with the surface of the gel; a bullet is not a charged particle, nor magnetic, and it's way to big to create the ionization effects that traditional particle detectors use. I don't know how it is possible that, not only could say that a bullet causes a wake due to electromagnetic force, but that a mod actually believed that bullshit.
Of all the naturally occuring fluids that are salty, blood has to be one of the saltiest. If salt inhibited the way these (pre-existing) blood proteins worked, they wouldn't work much at all, so there would be no worries about salt inhibiting the proteins. What would affect behavior is changes from biological pH (~7.4) and temperature (37 C).
I had the same experience. I was dual-booting Ubuntu and OS X on my old powerbook when some sort of error on the hard drive prevented the OS X partition from booting. Fortunately, the Ubuntu partition would boot, and so I managed to get all the important stuff off my OS X partition and back it up.
You must have St. John the Baptist Syndrome. Just because you're some lonely voice saying something no one else does not in any way make you right. In fact, you are most likely wrong. Now, its not possible to say for sure, but let's review:
You say that Al Gore is most assuredly a bad person because he is a politician. That's a load of crock. Why that's just as bad as saying that if a man's a Jew...or African-American...or not even a man but a woman. You get full credit for Wingjob.
The environment is not just a ploy. Or was the liberation of India just a ploy for Gandhi? Or Civil Rights just a ploy for Martin Luther King? Or saving mankind a ploy for Jesus? I guess they were insincere too. Shucks, I can feel my world falling apart around me.
Dude, the man's gone on record as saying he will not be a candidate for President again. Indeed, Democrats begged him, and he said he wasn't interested. So yes, I would say he's uninterested in politics. However, I would laud you for the job. You'd make the brainless, highly opinionated but truly misguided politician that fits so snugly into your view of them! Additionally, the man knows a lot more than you. Period. He is/was a Rhodes scholar. Unlike our current leadership, he didn't get C's at Yale. He would make it in a life without politics...which is what he's been doing on the road with his presentation, "An Inconvenient Truth" (shit, I got back on topic...)
My logic is not "it's important." My logic is "Human cause is important because it is independent of whether or not there is global warming. If humans did not cause global warming, we have no need to change our habits, but if we are causing it, then we must change our habits or we will continue having the same problem." Which is...what I said in my post before. Maybe if I say it louder and slower you'll understand.
Some are more equal than others. Everyone knows this. However, two things: 1) Why do you believe that you would be paying more than he would? That's very much not true. Proportionately, you might be, but then again, maybe not. You don't know; neither does anyone else. 2) Your spiel about corporate revenues doesn't matter.
And as I started this post with: it's really inconceivably dumb to believe that popular opinion is always wrong, and even stupider to believe that in order to be right, no one else can agree with you. You'd wonder why all those scientists care about concensus...do they all want to be wrong?
God, I wish slashdot had a captcha that could catch all the idiots.
3 years go by and while that MacIntel is going to be "obsolete" it will still work. You will still have access to both it and all your files on it. Additionally, you can throw that sucker on the network and get at it with *NIX (via ssh), or windows (SAMBA, puTTY, whatever). Hell, you can even make it into a glorified FireWire external hard drive. So you can buy a whitebox and...get all your files off it! Sweet Jesus, where did all the vendor lock-in go? Now I suppose a guy like you is anal, and is going to point out that OS X is "locked-in" to Apple's hardware. But that's not vendor lock-in. You are free to move to any vendor for your hardware, and you can take your data with you. However, Apple, as a hardware vendor although throws in a very nice perk by also providing OS X with its hardware instead of Windows. That doesn't mean that its trying to "lock you in" except that OS X is nicer than Windows, so you'll want to continue to use it. But...that's what every corporation does to differentiate it from the competition. If you have a problem with that, go live in North Korea.
In case you were still wondering, the difference between Apple's behavior and Microsoft's is that...Microsoft locks down access to the filesystem so you can't access your files with anything. Microsoft also decides for you whether you can access your data. Apple does neither of those things*.
*By migrating to the x86/x64 architecture, Apple is aiding and abetting Microsoft's vendor lock-in schemes by allowing their users to also fall into the trap.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The corollary to that is: You see what you want to see.
You say you haven't made up your mind on the matter. However, you don't seem to possess the brains to made up your mind.
"Doubting everything and believing everything are two equally convenient solutions that guard us from having to think."
Henri Poincarè
You cynically "refute" everything, using anything from the ad hominem attack to the non sequitur. If you knew what Al Gore has done, and the causes he has championed, you would realize 1) that this whole environment isn't some political ploy for him and 2) that the man isn't interested in politics anymore. Furthermore, it does matter if it's natural or caused by man because if it is caused by man, then we not only need to solve the problem of returning global temperatures to "normal" but we also have to fix our habits so that this will not happen again. If it were natural, we wouldn't have to bother with the latter. Additionally, not only you and others like you be paying for this, but assholes like him will as well. I don't think anything you said had any redeeming value except to remind me of the very reason I am afraid of becoming stupid. Thank you.
Because scratching the letters off of any other keyboard doesn't let you do nearly the range of things you can do with the Optimus.
Re:Can someone explain this to me?
on
Leopard Vs. Vista
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Well, actually, what they did was build their own and then build their own OS on top of it. So I don't think that anyone is stopping you from building your own computer and your own operating system. By all means, GO FOR IT! Maybe it will keep you occupied enough to stop making stupid posts on slashdot.
I mean, does Apple advertise, "This is waaaay better than you could ever do it!" No. Again, nothing is stopping you from posting your 1337 r0x0r new system (d00d, with picz!) on the intarweb. I don't see what that has to do with Apple, or to the other guy's post.
Bad analogy -5. A better analogy is a clown leaving a rental car unlocked and having it stolen. In this case, the rental car company is the person using the machine, the personal info is the car and the clown is the insecure ATM. The thief stars in a cameo role. The ATM makers did do something far, far worse. They are leaving personal information that is not theirs available to anyone who tries to get it. That is called Gross Negligence and should be prosecuted. I mean, some people have been, but not nearly enough.
Well, I am not sure about humans, but I know that one reason that animals will lick their wounds is that their saliva has antibiotic properties and will actually clean/disinfect the wound and help it heal faster. It may also have painkilling properties, but I remember that an animal's saliva will help a wound of theirs heal better.
Good point. So far, slashdot hasn't gotten over the "The Sky is Falling" effect. A vote is either missing, or miscounted. It is easy to determine which it is: look at the number of signatures/voters at the office. If it isn't 36, then the vote is missing. If that number is 36, then the machine registered the vote for the wrong candidate or the guy lied, and nobody will ever know. However, if the vote is registered for the wrong candidate, how is it possible to verify the election.
I switched from Windows to Linux on 24 August 1991, two days before Linus Torvalds announced it to the world by telneting his box (who would have guessed he'd leave it unsecured) and compiling from source.
You, sir, have gotten to the point where analogies just mislead. The immune system does not work like a cryptographic hash. The immune system never has a chance to look at the DNA of anything it is eating (not even virii). Instead, an antibody is something that binds to a surface protein. Antibodies are themselves fairly large proteins with two binding sites: one that binds to a surface protein on the "invader," whether its a bacteria, virus, cancer cell or even a regular cell (in some diseases like lupus). The other binding site binds to white blood cells, which will phagocytose (basically, eat it) the thing with the antibody stuck to it. The only thing that the immune system responds to is surface proteins, not DNA. So the "junk" portions of the DNA which do not encode for proteins are not involved at all in the immune system response.
I hate to explain a joke, but I believe what he is saying that, instead of typing "Large Hadron Collider" he typed "Large Hardon Collider" into Google Image Search....And if SafeSearch wasn't on...Well, there would still be pulsating tubes shooting into caverns, but I'm not sure if any of your other adjectives would still work.
I had the exact same kind. I loved it to death. Well, until something happened so that it would get so hot it would just turn off after 10-15 minutes of use. Then it stopped being so nice.
Hey, a lamp that turns off by itself...It's not a bug, it's a feature.
That's just really not true. Especially nowadays, there are a lot of planes that fly with empty seats, and its really really easy to find out what seats are available. Heck, you don't even need to change the number on the ticket, just sit in the seat that won't have anyone in it.
SP2 also breaks things. Steve Balmer must have thrown in some chair-throwing code because when my research lab was trying to update our laptops when SP2 came out two years ago, we kept having issues getting SP2 to even boot. So I suppose that a laptop that won't boot is definitely more secure...but also definitely less useful.
Why not? SP2 changed a lot of things. What does it matter when the code was written? Because SP2 doesn't behave in the same way as SP1 its not bullshit at all. I mean, if my Toshiba laptop couldn't boot under SP2 but ran perfectly fine under SP1, why is it so hard to believe that other code breaks under SP2?
Slashdot Mirror
No, he didn't prove that f(x)=0/x is continuous. He simply stated that it has a hole discontinuity (which occur when a value of a function is not defined, but a limit exists at that point), not an asymptotic one (which occur when a value of a function is undefined, and a limit is either undefined, positive or negative infinity at the point). There is one other type of discontinuity, a displaced discontinuity. For example, consider the piecewise defined function f(x)={0/x for x != 0, 1, x = 0}. The function is defined at x=0, but its value does not equal the limit at that point.
I didn't call anyone stupid; I called the analogy stupid. And I maintain that it is stupid because a bullet in a ballistics gel is a classical system. I don't know all these advanced physics topics with great levels of intricacy like you do; but I do know that quantum mechanics is based upon statistics and probabilities. When you have a sample that is so large that the statistics of that system can truly be defined as a normal, Boltzmann distribution, you have a classical system. That's why, even though the exact position of an electron in a copper wire may not be known, a current will still flow through that wire if differing voltages are applied at either end. That is one reason why your analogy was not good. I made a grievous error in my initial post by being technically incorrect; however, the message of what I was saying still stands, and it is what I clarified in my initial response.
Your analogy was stupid because it compared apples to oranges. You first make an analogy of a subatomic system to a classical system, and then you yell at me for equating the two. I did the opposite! I said it was stupid to talk about a microscopic system when talking a macroscopic system. I have no quibble with any of the facts you state*. They're all correct. But all your advanced physics knowledge and all these facts are both clouding the issue and your argument. The axions cannot use a regular electromagnetic detector because, like neutrinos (I think; as I have said before, I'm not intimately acquainted with subatomic physics), they interact very weakly with real matter (i.e. they have very little to no electromagnetic interaction, due to being not just net neutral, but fundamentally neutral). The detector that had to be used did indeed detect electromagnetic signatures (photons, I would surmise) because this axion, a fundamentally neutral particle decayed into two not neutral things and these interacted with matter, but the difference between it and the regular detectors is that the interaction site where the axions were created could exist inside the detector. Now, the electromagnetic stuff that this detector is detecting is not like the electromagnetic stuff that ballistics gel is detecting. This is detecting a photon, a packet of electromagnetic energy, an electromagnetic wave; ballistics gel is detecting a wave caused because different pieces of matter are colliding thanks to the electromagnetic force.
The two are different. Quite different. And that is another reason I didn't like your analogy. You obviously know a lot of physics. However, I am surprised that you didn't pick up the difference between an electromagnetic wave and/or photon and a wave of matter that the electromagnetic force mediates.
Now, just one last thing. What I was saying in my previous post was not that you were making things simpler, it was that you were making them more complex. As you said, the special cases (like spring constants) are made to make life simple because they are simpler than having to integrate the electromagnetic field equations over all the particles in the ballistic gel! I was complaining that you were making things way more complicated than they needed to be. That was my last quibble with your analogy.
That all said, I would be glad to hear your response, and again, sorry to have implied that you were stupid. I was complaining about the analogy.
So yes, there are 4 fundamental forces and all other forces are developed from these. However, what is the force applied to a mass suspended on a spring with spring constant K and displaced X? Well, it's -KX. Sure, the electromagnetic forces between all the atoms in the spring are what cause the force and you can even use Young's modulus and/or chemical bond theory to find what the "atomic spring" constant is...but that's senseless and pedantic. Similarly, if you want me to describe why that shockwave develops, it is because of momentum. The bullet imparts some of its momentum and energy to the gel, and causes the viscosity of the gel is what causes the wave to propagate, just like when we talk about sound waves in air, or ocean waves. I sure as hell hope you don't resort to electromagnetism to describe those. What I was saying is that using the bullet analogy is stupid because, while technically correct, its completely vacuous. And in fact, particles that have a net neutral charge only interact electromagnetically in distance scales where the separate regions of positive and negative charge are distinct (like atomic nuclei). Two neutral atoms don't interact (electromagnetically, or at all) until their two regions of negative space get close enough together that they begin to have an effect on each other. But you know, that's roughly 8 order of magnitude off of the scale of a bullet, and, again, talking about a microscopic (and quantum!) system in terms of a macroscopic problem is, as I said before, stupid.
"The wake of a bullet going through ballistics gel is due to the electromagnetic force."
And the Universe is powered by stupidity. The wake of a bullet going through ballistics gel is caused by the shockwave of the bullet's impact with the surface of the gel; a bullet is not a charged particle, nor magnetic, and it's way to big to create the ionization effects that traditional particle detectors use. I don't know how it is possible that, not only could say that a bullet causes a wake due to electromagnetic force, but that a mod actually believed that bullshit.
Of all the naturally occuring fluids that are salty, blood has to be one of the saltiest. If salt inhibited the way these (pre-existing) blood proteins worked, they wouldn't work much at all, so there would be no worries about salt inhibiting the proteins. What would affect behavior is changes from biological pH (~7.4) and temperature (37 C).
OH! So that's why peace keeping forces were deployed in Kosovo in the '90s. And why the UN wants to send troops to Darfur...
I had the same experience. I was dual-booting Ubuntu and OS X on my old powerbook when some sort of error on the hard drive prevented the OS X partition from booting. Fortunately, the Ubuntu partition would boot, and so I managed to get all the important stuff off my OS X partition and back it up.
You must have St. John the Baptist Syndrome. Just because you're some lonely voice saying something no one else does not in any way make you right. In fact, you are most likely wrong. Now, its not possible to say for sure, but let's review:
You say that Al Gore is most assuredly a bad person because he is a politician. That's a load of crock. Why that's just as bad as saying that if a man's a Jew...or African-American...or not even a man but a woman. You get full credit for Wingjob.
The environment is not just a ploy. Or was the liberation of India just a ploy for Gandhi? Or Civil Rights just a ploy for Martin Luther King? Or saving mankind a ploy for Jesus? I guess they were insincere too. Shucks, I can feel my world falling apart around me.
Dude, the man's gone on record as saying he will not be a candidate for President again. Indeed, Democrats begged him, and he said he wasn't interested. So yes, I would say he's uninterested in politics. However, I would laud you for the job. You'd make the brainless, highly opinionated but truly misguided politician that fits so snugly into your view of them! Additionally, the man knows a lot more than you. Period. He is/was a Rhodes scholar. Unlike our current leadership, he didn't get C's at Yale. He would make it in a life without politics...which is what he's been doing on the road with his presentation, "An Inconvenient Truth" (shit, I got back on topic...)
My logic is not "it's important." My logic is "Human cause is important because it is independent of whether or not there is global warming. If humans did not cause global warming, we have no need to change our habits, but if we are causing it, then we must change our habits or we will continue having the same problem." Which is...what I said in my post before. Maybe if I say it louder and slower you'll understand.
Some are more equal than others. Everyone knows this. However, two things: 1) Why do you believe that you would be paying more than he would? That's very much not true. Proportionately, you might be, but then again, maybe not. You don't know; neither does anyone else. 2) Your spiel about corporate revenues doesn't matter.
And as I started this post with: it's really inconceivably dumb to believe that popular opinion is always wrong, and even stupider to believe that in order to be right, no one else can agree with you. You'd wonder why all those scientists care about concensus...do they all want to be wrong?
God, I wish slashdot had a captcha that could catch all the idiots.
FUD.
3 years go by and while that MacIntel is going to be "obsolete" it will still work. You will still have access to both it and all your files on it. Additionally, you can throw that sucker on the network and get at it with *NIX (via ssh), or windows (SAMBA, puTTY, whatever). Hell, you can even make it into a glorified FireWire external hard drive. So you can buy a whitebox and...get all your files off it! Sweet Jesus, where did all the vendor lock-in go? Now I suppose a guy like you is anal, and is going to point out that OS X is "locked-in" to Apple's hardware. But that's not vendor lock-in. You are free to move to any vendor for your hardware, and you can take your data with you. However, Apple, as a hardware vendor although throws in a very nice perk by also providing OS X with its hardware instead of Windows. That doesn't mean that its trying to "lock you in" except that OS X is nicer than Windows, so you'll want to continue to use it. But...that's what every corporation does to differentiate it from the competition. If you have a problem with that, go live in North Korea.
In case you were still wondering, the difference between Apple's behavior and Microsoft's is that...Microsoft locks down access to the filesystem so you can't access your files with anything. Microsoft also decides for you whether you can access your data. Apple does neither of those things*.
*By migrating to the x86/x64 architecture, Apple is aiding and abetting Microsoft's vendor lock-in schemes by allowing their users to also fall into the trap.
You say you haven't made up your mind on the matter. However, you don't seem to possess the brains to made up your mind.
You cynically "refute" everything, using anything from the ad hominem attack to the non sequitur. If you knew what Al Gore has done, and the causes he has championed, you would realize 1) that this whole environment isn't some political ploy for him and 2) that the man isn't interested in politics anymore. Furthermore, it does matter if it's natural or caused by man because if it is caused by man, then we not only need to solve the problem of returning global temperatures to "normal" but we also have to fix our habits so that this will not happen again. If it were natural, we wouldn't have to bother with the latter. Additionally, not only you and others like you be paying for this, but assholes like him will as well. I don't think anything you said had any redeeming value except to remind me of the very reason I am afraid of becoming stupid. Thank you.
Not as much space as a Nomad either. It's lame. Just ask Taco.
Because scratching the letters off of any other keyboard doesn't let you do nearly the range of things you can do with the Optimus.
Well, actually, what they did was build their own and then build their own OS on top of it. So I don't think that anyone is stopping you from building your own computer and your own operating system. By all means, GO FOR IT! Maybe it will keep you occupied enough to stop making stupid posts on slashdot.
I mean, does Apple advertise, "This is waaaay better than you could ever do it!" No. Again, nothing is stopping you from posting your 1337 r0x0r new system (d00d, with picz!) on the intarweb. I don't see what that has to do with Apple, or to the other guy's post.
Bad analogy -5. A better analogy is a clown leaving a rental car unlocked and having it stolen. In this case, the rental car company is the person using the machine, the personal info is the car and the clown is the insecure ATM. The thief stars in a cameo role. The ATM makers did do something far, far worse. They are leaving personal information that is not theirs available to anyone who tries to get it. That is called Gross Negligence and should be prosecuted. I mean, some people have been, but not nearly enough.
Well, I am not sure about humans, but I know that one reason that animals will lick their wounds is that their saliva has antibiotic properties and will actually clean/disinfect the wound and help it heal faster. It may also have painkilling properties, but I remember that an animal's saliva will help a wound of theirs heal better.
Good point. So far, slashdot hasn't gotten over the "The Sky is Falling" effect. A vote is either missing, or miscounted. It is easy to determine which it is: look at the number of signatures/voters at the office. If it isn't 36, then the vote is missing. If that number is 36, then the machine registered the vote for the wrong candidate or the guy lied, and nobody will ever know. However, if the vote is registered for the wrong candidate, how is it possible to verify the election.
Well Whoop Deee Doo.
I switched from Windows to Linux on 24 August 1991, two days before Linus Torvalds announced it to the world by telneting his box (who would have guessed he'd leave it unsecured) and compiling from source.
Now all this thread needs is linux commenting...
You, sir, have gotten to the point where analogies just mislead. The immune system does not work like a cryptographic hash. The immune system never has a chance to look at the DNA of anything it is eating (not even virii). Instead, an antibody is something that binds to a surface protein. Antibodies are themselves fairly large proteins with two binding sites: one that binds to a surface protein on the "invader," whether its a bacteria, virus, cancer cell or even a regular cell (in some diseases like lupus). The other binding site binds to white blood cells, which will phagocytose (basically, eat it) the thing with the antibody stuck to it. The only thing that the immune system responds to is surface proteins, not DNA. So the "junk" portions of the DNA which do not encode for proteins are not involved at all in the immune system response.
I hate to explain a joke, but I believe what he is saying that, instead of typing "Large Hadron Collider" he typed "Large Hardon Collider" into Google Image Search....And if SafeSearch wasn't on...Well, there would still be pulsating tubes shooting into caverns, but I'm not sure if any of your other adjectives would still work.
I had the exact same kind. I loved it to death. Well, until something happened so that it would get so hot it would just turn off after 10-15 minutes of use. Then it stopped being so nice.
Hey, a lamp that turns off by itself...It's not a bug, it's a feature.
And if RedHat dies, Oracle won't be able to pay the bills (at least for this project) either.
That's just really not true. Especially nowadays, there are a lot of planes that fly with empty seats, and its really really easy to find out what seats are available. Heck, you don't even need to change the number on the ticket, just sit in the seat that won't have anyone in it.
Physics. That's what.
SP2 also breaks things. Steve Balmer must have thrown in some chair-throwing code because when my research lab was trying to update our laptops when SP2 came out two years ago, we kept having issues getting SP2 to even boot. So I suppose that a laptop that won't boot is definitely more secure...but also definitely less useful.
Why not? SP2 changed a lot of things. What does it matter when the code was written? Because SP2 doesn't behave in the same way as SP1 its not bullshit at all. I mean, if my Toshiba laptop couldn't boot under SP2 but ran perfectly fine under SP1, why is it so hard to believe that other code breaks under SP2?