It appears to me that Linux may have started thinking about focusing all it's efforts on being a more stable, secure OS, but to gain acceptance in a more mass market, they need to do things that, while they reduce security, increase their general user base. Sure, it's Linux, so you can strip it down to near nothing and have a rock-solid, dependable, secure system designed for a specific hardware setup, but if they want to stay alive, they may need to realize that they need less secure measures that allow the typical end-user to use their OS behind the scenes without any extra effort on their part.
TLDR:To (Probably most) people, ease of use is more important than security, and some software developers working around Linux may be seeing that. However, being Linux, the hardcore can always build their system to be the fort Knox of data. If anything, this is a good thing IMO. Keep the security-conscious aware of issues, but let the average end-user go about their business as they will.
I like the idea of patient consent, but it wouldn't always be possible. I just got into a motorcycle a few months ago and had surgeries, chest tubes, intubations, and couldn't even breathe on my own for a bit. I wouldn't have been able to consent to any of this, but it was necessary to keep me alive.
I work a night shift in a hospital. If you've never worked one before, know that some nights you will be absolutely exhausted. I'm sure most night-shifters have fallen asleep at work before, if not on a regular basis. Doctors are not above this. Our hospitalists have on-call rooms to sleep in every night. If you code in a hospital overnight, chances aren't bad that one of the doctors that shows up was woken up by your code seconds before he showed up in your room.
My point is, hospitals are open 24/7. There is a night shift. Those people are usually tired. Also, emergencies happen 24/7. Sometimes patients can't consent to anything.
Imagine this: A patient shows up at 2am with an injury that would kill the patient before the morning shift came in. All the surgeons are asleep. You'd have to wake up an entire surgical team. All of them will be tired when they come in. The patient, however is unconscious. Bringing this patient back to alertness would risk their life and put them in so much pain they wouldn't be able to sign or agree to anything. What now? (
I think attention should be paid to organizations overworking clinical professionals, but it should be kept in mind that sometimes work that a patient may not even want to save their life has to be performed by people who are incredibly tired and just woke up just to keep the person alive. That's just how it is.
don't you guys think the aprilfools tag would kinda give it away?
I think you should keep this as a chooseable skin... I'm not gay, but hell, I'd keep it around for a few days, just because it's nice to see a change every once in a while...
I think a more interesting competition would be to bring the "security" team down to a few people, and split the rest up into the "hacker" group, with a few more "experts" dispersed into the "hacker" crowd.
of course, the people that had their teams switched would be "let go" from the security team - accounts locked down/deleted, escorted "out of the building" so as to not steal anything on the way out, etc.
...when they released the F6 - sources like popular photography were reporting that with the release of Nikon's F6 and Canon's T2, both companies were going to watch the market to see wether or not it was worth it to keep putting money into 35mm R&D.
There are some situations where fear is an entirely appropriate response - lose it, and unwarranted risks may start to become a problem.
Imagine the evolutionary turn that could create - it would put much more emphasis on critical thinking, and if it weren't for fear, I think we'd end up with a smarter society. What I mean is, without an emotion to guide us away from dangerous activities, we'd only have our logic and reasoning to do that.
For example, take two mice. One is exceptionally smart, and the other is, well, not. Both of them still fear. If both of them stick to the wall of the box, they both survive another day.
Now take away that fear. The "dumb" mouse wanders into the middle of the box and is eaten by a cat. The "smart" mouse thinks "If I leave the side of this box, I open myself to attack from predators."
Now I know that that wouldn't happen with mice, but it could happen with some other lifeforms. The question is, without fear, would there be enough of a species that was smart enough to survive, or would it cause most specices to go extinct?
wow... it's recursive linking... I actually clicked the digg link here and then clicked their story's header thinking maybe I'd get to read more, but it linked right back to the story I just came from...
basically, I would look for qualifications. but there is a point, as invalid as it is. a lawyer would have to deal with customers and government officials, as would a doctor.
while I agree that sometimes interaction with the public and outside forces (business partners, patients, government officials, etc.) should be taken into consideration for some things, I just don't see any point to having your employees that sit in cubicles all day long wear a shirt and tie.
First of all, people are more comfortable in what they like to wear. people that are more comfortable are more productive. secondly, I think a company who concerns themselves with the way it's employees dress (in the cubicle-like environment) has it's priorities in the wrong place. third, if you let people dress how they want, you're basically saying "It's okay to be creative", rather than "think outside the box (but within company guidelines)"
If I were to invest in a company that is supposed to be pumping out innovative ideas, I would be a little put off if they had some kind of strict dress code. I can understand not wanting your employees to come in in their underwear, but requiring a shirt and tie when nobody (important) is around to see it is a little too much.
I'm two years out of High school and I agree to an extent. In my HS, there was a huge gap between the people that knew computers well and those who didn't.
I think what you would need to do to get people interested in computers (or more specifically, programming) is to show them how easy it can be. I don't think the robotics competition is a good idea, but I think with modification it could be a great idea.
case in point: instead of a robotics competition, have a general programming fair, but at one station give them a robotic platform and have them type instructions into a computer to control the robot.
I think teaching them programming is highly unlikely, but give them a little exposure like that and make it easy (compilers/tutorials on a CD like OP said) and they may be likely to pick it up.
TLDR Version: don't make it to 'nerdy', just make it fun and entertaining and don't push it in their face that they're at a programming fair. they need to make the connection between their environment and the computer environment before you have any chance of getting them into the field of programming.
if you do not make it physically impossible for the insanely stupid from entering that lane when they are not supposed to, they will.
that's why the cars don't communicate with eachother, they just do their own thing. the car in front of them doesn't have to be driven by the same system, because all your car cares about is how fast it's going, it's acceleration/deceleration, and how far away it is... as long as it can track those three (from a good distance), it won't matter.
also, that takes care of the point somebody brought up earlier about wildlife... if the system can detect something early enough, it can set a decelration that will stop in time and not create too much of a G-force in the car.
I think the bigger problem is road conditions... what happens when your car hits ice? what happens when something small runs in the way? sure, you could just go through an animal that small with no problem, but people like me will try their hardest to try to create something to prevent that...
Re:Uses existing signal and price is right.
on
RGB to become RGBCMY
·
· Score: 1
I think that's just for backwards-compatibility's sake. I imagine that they want broadcasters to eventuall record in, and transmit full RBGMCY color.
I still don't wholly understand how this will help, seeing as Cyan is the Opposite of red, as is Magenta is the Opposite of Green, and Yellow is the Opposite of Blue... I'm guessing that instead of mixing colors to get Cyan, they'll just flash pure cyan, but I still fail to see exactly how that will enhance an image.
true, but think about this: their subject is in front of a back/foreground, and the lighting has been set up already... in that case, the road crew comes in and takes hours to set everything up (if it's not already set up) and then the photographer comes in...
In my photography class, I used my girlfriend as a model, and got 4 good shots out of a roll of 25 exposures. my instructor commended me on my achievement, and said that most professional photographers only get ~2 good shots in a roll... you can't forget that your subject won't always be in a good pose...
Most of the time excellent photos aren't about being good, they are about getting lucky.
I have to disagree here, while I agree that you'll only submit/print/etc. on average about 2-3 out of a roll of 24 exposure, skill is the determining factor. not only in composing the picture and getting the lighting right, but in the darkroom as well... especially in B&W photography...
Let me pick the best picture out of 20 I take on my crappy 1 megapixel Kodak and I will put it up against any camera (even the really awesome expensive ones) if you only take one picture with that camera.
working in a camera store, I have to disagree strongly here... take your challenge, if I'm using a Nikon D70, I can guarantee my 1 picture will look better than yours... especially if we're printing 5x7,6x8,10x8, or 10x15... the higher-end cameras can even be printed at sizes up to 20x30...
I meant to CDRW, sorry for not being clear there... and I'm talking about a photo lab... not at your home computer where you can just break any laws you want...
the memory stick pro is a crippled stick... you can't bring it to a photo lab and have it printed... you have to use your computer as a middleman, which costs another $0.30US, which is about as much as one print from it...
Slashdot Mirror
It appears to me that Linux may have started thinking about focusing all it's efforts on being a more stable, secure OS, but to gain acceptance in a more mass market, they need to do things that, while they reduce security, increase their general user base. Sure, it's Linux, so you can strip it down to near nothing and have a rock-solid, dependable, secure system designed for a specific hardware setup, but if they want to stay alive, they may need to realize that they need less secure measures that allow the typical end-user to use their OS behind the scenes without any extra effort on their part. TLDR:To (Probably most) people, ease of use is more important than security, and some software developers working around Linux may be seeing that. However, being Linux, the hardcore can always build their system to be the fort Knox of data. If anything, this is a good thing IMO. Keep the security-conscious aware of issues, but let the average end-user go about their business as they will.
I like the idea of patient consent, but it wouldn't always be possible. I just got into a motorcycle a few months ago and had surgeries, chest tubes, intubations, and couldn't even breathe on my own for a bit. I wouldn't have been able to consent to any of this, but it was necessary to keep me alive.
I work a night shift in a hospital. If you've never worked one before, know that some nights you will be absolutely exhausted. I'm sure most night-shifters have fallen asleep at work before, if not on a regular basis. Doctors are not above this. Our hospitalists have on-call rooms to sleep in every night. If you code in a hospital overnight, chances aren't bad that one of the doctors that shows up was woken up by your code seconds before he showed up in your room.
My point is, hospitals are open 24/7. There is a night shift. Those people are usually tired. Also, emergencies happen 24/7. Sometimes patients can't consent to anything.
Imagine this: A patient shows up at 2am with an injury that would kill the patient before the morning shift came in. All the surgeons are asleep. You'd have to wake up an entire surgical team. All of them will be tired when they come in. The patient, however is unconscious. Bringing this patient back to alertness would risk their life and put them in so much pain they wouldn't be able to sign or agree to anything. What now? (
I think attention should be paid to organizations overworking clinical professionals, but it should be kept in mind that sometimes work that a patient may not even want to save their life has to be performed by people who are incredibly tired and just woke up just to keep the person alive. That's just how it is.
don't you guys think the aprilfools tag would kinda give it away? I think you should keep this as a chooseable skin... I'm not gay, but hell, I'd keep it around for a few days, just because it's nice to see a change every once in a while...
of course, the people that had their teams switched would be "let go" from the security team - accounts locked down/deleted, escorted "out of the building" so as to not steal anything on the way out, etc.
I wouldn't really trust Honda to build my Ferrari... But would you trust honda to make your lexus?
...when they released the F6 - sources like popular photography were reporting that with the release of Nikon's F6 and Canon's T2, both companies were going to watch the market to see wether or not it was worth it to keep putting money into 35mm R&D.
Imagine the evolutionary turn that could create - it would put much more emphasis on critical thinking, and if it weren't for fear, I think we'd end up with a smarter society. What I mean is, without an emotion to guide us away from dangerous activities, we'd only have our logic and reasoning to do that.
For example, take two mice. One is exceptionally smart, and the other is, well, not. Both of them still fear. If both of them stick to the wall of the box, they both survive another day.
Now take away that fear. The "dumb" mouse wanders into the middle of the box and is eaten by a cat. The "smart" mouse thinks "If I leave the side of this box, I open myself to attack from predators."
Now I know that that wouldn't happen with mice, but it could happen with some other lifeforms. The question is, without fear, would there be enough of a species that was smart enough to survive, or would it cause most specices to go extinct?
wow... it's recursive linking... I actually clicked the digg link here and then clicked their story's header thinking maybe I'd get to read more, but it linked right back to the story I just came from...
that's what this is for ;)
while I agree that sometimes interaction with the public and outside forces (business partners, patients, government officials, etc.) should be taken into consideration for some things, I just don't see any point to having your employees that sit in cubicles all day long wear a shirt and tie.
First of all, people are more comfortable in what they like to wear. people that are more comfortable are more productive. secondly, I think a company who concerns themselves with the way it's employees dress (in the cubicle-like environment) has it's priorities in the wrong place. third, if you let people dress how they want, you're basically saying "It's okay to be creative", rather than "think outside the box (but within company guidelines)"
If I were to invest in a company that is supposed to be pumping out innovative ideas, I would be a little put off if they had some kind of strict dress code. I can understand not wanting your employees to come in in their underwear, but requiring a shirt and tie when nobody (important) is around to see it is a little too much.
meltdown-proof
read: unsinkable
he's going to have a little trouble, seeing as a future breakfast cereal is going to put a patent on the name "2001 DA42" about 500 years ago...
I think what you would need to do to get people interested in computers (or more specifically, programming) is to show them how easy it can be. I don't think the robotics competition is a good idea, but I think with modification it could be a great idea.
case in point: instead of a robotics competition, have a general programming fair, but at one station give them a robotic platform and have them type instructions into a computer to control the robot.
I think teaching them programming is highly unlikely, but give them a little exposure like that and make it easy (compilers/tutorials on a CD like OP said) and they may be likely to pick it up.
TLDR Version: don't make it to 'nerdy', just make it fun and entertaining and don't push it in their face that they're at a programming fair. they need to make the connection between their environment and the computer environment before you have any chance of getting them into the field of programming.
I find those numbers a little hard to believe.
More than 666 splash screens have been submitted would that be a conservative estimate?
RTFA
that's why the cars don't communicate with eachother, they just do their own thing. the car in front of them doesn't have to be driven by the same system, because all your car cares about is how fast it's going, it's acceleration/deceleration, and how far away it is... as long as it can track those three (from a good distance), it won't matter.
also, that takes care of the point somebody brought up earlier about wildlife... if the system can detect something early enough, it can set a decelration that will stop in time and not create too much of a G-force in the car.
I think the bigger problem is road conditions... what happens when your car hits ice? what happens when something small runs in the way? sure, you could just go through an animal that small with no problem, but people like me will try their hardest to try to create something to prevent that...
I still don't wholly understand how this will help, seeing as Cyan is the Opposite of red, as is Magenta is the Opposite of Green, and Yellow is the Opposite of Blue... I'm guessing that instead of mixing colors to get Cyan, they'll just flash pure cyan, but I still fail to see exactly how that will enhance an image.
most of the tests I read/care about focus mostly on the false positive : spam getting past the filter ratio...
you can get a basic frame (nothing too spiffy, just a small black border, no glass) for ~$10 US where I work...
true, but think about this: their subject is in front of a back/foreground, and the lighting has been set up already... in that case, the road crew comes in and takes hours to set everything up (if it's not already set up) and then the photographer comes in...
In my photography class, I used my girlfriend as a model, and got 4 good shots out of a roll of 25 exposures. my instructor commended me on my achievement, and said that most professional photographers only get ~2 good shots in a roll... you can't forget that your subject won't always be in a good pose...
I have to disagree here, while I agree that you'll only submit/print/etc. on average about 2-3 out of a roll of 24 exposure, skill is the determining factor. not only in composing the picture and getting the lighting right, but in the darkroom as well... especially in B&W photography...
Let me pick the best picture out of 20 I take on my crappy 1 megapixel Kodak and I will put it up against any camera (even the really awesome expensive ones) if you only take one picture with that camera.
working in a camera store, I have to disagree strongly here... take your challenge, if I'm using a Nikon D70, I can guarantee my 1 picture will look better than yours... especially if we're printing 5x7,6x8,10x8, or 10x15... the higher-end cameras can even be printed at sizes up to 20x30...
I meant to CDRW, sorry for not being clear there... and I'm talking about a photo lab... not at your home computer where you can just break any laws you want...
the memory stick pro is a crippled stick... you can't bring it to a photo lab and have it printed... you have to use your computer as a middleman, which costs another $0.30US, which is about as much as one print from it...