As a general trend, I'd agree, but I'm not sure that's quite right.
First -> Second: Younger, bit more manic.
Second -> Third: Comparable age. Less manic (but more physical)
Third -> Fourth: Younger, more manic.
Fourth -> Fifth: Younger, much less manic
Fifth -> Sixth: Comparable age, much more manic (in the literal, psychiatric sense, too)
Sixth -> Seventh: Older (seems so), less manic
Seventh -> Eight: Younger, less manic, (also remember, they're all a bit crazy after a regen and we only see one "episode" with Eight).
Eight -> Nine: Older, bit more manic.
Nine -> Ten: Comparable age but younger image, loads more manic.
Ten -> Eleven: Younger, less manic on the whole (still quite manic, but comes across as someone sane but highly enthusiastic, rather than crazily excitable like Ten).
If you want to say that Ten and Eleven are younger and more manic than One and Two, definitely, but I don't think it's a steady progression.
Sorry. Whenever I start typing about the Cybermen, my hands start to shake. I don't know why, but it's nothing to do with seeing Colin Baker trying to stop them from implanting circuitry in his friend's skull when I was six.
This series very blatantly sets out to get away from that. Even from the very first episode where he has to save the Earth without any of his usual toys - or in his own words: "No TARDIS. No Sonic Screwdriver. Two minutes to spare!". And then at other points in the series, it's re-emphasised. E.g. the line in 'Vincent and the Doctor': "That does it! From now on, I'm only using this thing to screw in screws". The device has mainly just been used in this series as a short-hand for things. Similar goes for all the maudln Rose/Martha/Kylie pining love story stuff. If you haven't seen the episode in question yet, I'll avoid saying what happens, but we get a very clear (and funny) distancing from romantic entanglements with the new Doctor. And the one character that may or may not be a romantic entanglement (Doctor River Song), we have only deep suspicions as to what might happen between her and the Doctor. Originally, we assumed she was the Doctor's wife. Now... maybe yes, maybe something more sinister. We've been promised some answers next series, but it's definitely a deliberate stepping away from all the "Roooooose!" unstated love stuff.
David Tennant was really, really good. He sometimes suffered from dubious plotting or overly-sentimental writing, but he himself was brilliant. But so is Matt Smith. I couldn't ask for a better replacement for David Tennant. I really hope this isn't true that he's leaving. He's been absolutely great.
at least some of the episodes like "The Empty Child"/"The Doctor Dances" or "The Time of Angels"/"Flesh and Stone" are far too dark for a children's show.
Bah! Maybe American children. Hiding behind the sofa from the Doctor Who aliens is a right of passage for British children. Did you see the "Pandorica Opens" episode, where the severed cyberman helment pops open and the desicated skull pops out? The general reaction over here was: "my seven year old ran out of the room in fear - good episode!"
Yeah, granted. Apple certainly do their darnest to promote themselves. And although the other respondent above is correct to say everyone else does too, it's hard not to concede that Apple do a better job of it than anyone else.
But I guess I just don't buy into the hype and I wonder why other people do, too. If you check out my post, you'll see that it's not directed against Apple for hyping themselves up, but against the press. It's the press that run endless stories about Apple's highs and then, with great relish, start running stories about its lows. My point is that it is hype both ways and papers, IT sites and everyone else should just stop buying into it. Nokia still have far more of the phone market than Apple. Blackberry's still have more of the phone market than Apple. Do we see three weeks of stories about Blackberry upgrading their O/S or releasing a new model? I suspect Apple have one of the most developed marketing machines we've yet seen - sort of the Paris Hilton of the electronics world. We've no idea what actually makes them so special, but they seem to be discussed merely because they're discussed. (No offense to Paris if she reads/., I'm sure she's lovely).
Good phones, over-priced, some innovations, some dubious limitations. What irritates is the hype and the media share blame for that, it's not just because Apple say: "Hey - our phone is great!"
Holy crap, UK is extremely tiny compared to Canada and over here the lowest we can get is 5 megabits per second. Even in my remote town in the middle of nowhere, we now have access to 12 megabits per second for commercial clients.
You can get 12 megabits per second in pretty much all of the UK, if you're willing to pay BT (British Telecom) enough. It's not standard though.
Anyway, not to cast any doubt, but when you say the lowest you can get is 5Mb/s, is that the actual minimum speed you'll get, or the minimum they'll sell you? Most ISPs in the UK will happily sell you "up to 8Mb/s" but the lines might only support 4Mb/s, for example.
Are you really arguing that we need to worry about an injury rate of 0.3% or 3% or 30%, when the alternative is death? Because that sort of idiocy is what I was pointing out as a very poor rationale for holding back use on this weapon.
This is a weapon used by SOLDIERS for crowd control. They are currently using automatic weapons. Why is it so hard to see that there is a very, very good chance that this is a better option?
This is shifting the arguments. The OP merely pointed out that when the company touts 0.1% injury rate, we really have very little idea what that means in practice. And it is valid to make that criticism which is what you've been arguing against. Now you wish to make another argument that we don't need to worry whether the "injury rate is 0.3%. 3% or 30% because the alternative is death." That's incorrect. These weapons are not primarily an alternative to "a dozen men with fully automatic weapons". It's an alternative to persuasion, patience, negotiation, etc. If US soldiers are currently using fully automatic weapons to disperse public protests and meetings, then things are even more fucked up than I realised. If they're not, then your argument falls apart.
Actually, with all due respect and in a friendly manner, you're going to get my pretty strong rejection of that.
I don't like the term "geek". It's a cultural export from the US and it's bizarre school system that seems to engender some sort of division between technical ability versus social ability and sporting ability. I don't think it's even particularly true within the US schools, though from what I've been told about how some schools push sports at the expense of academic study, it has some basis. At any rate, it's alien to much of the world or was until the US seemed to start developing some Geek and Proud movement and rolling all sorts of things up into some stereotype. Comics, for example. I've worked with some very good programmers of a variety of ages. I recall one that was particularly into them. I recall rather more that were into all sorts of sports from squash to boxing. Of course, like some perverse, inverse of the No True Scotsman, the definition of Geek shifts to encompass anyone you want it to. "You may be sporty, but you're still a geek". "You may have a partner, but you're still a geek". And with the term, come all the negative connotations. For example, you've classed me as a "weirdo." Apparently because I'm posting in a story about US use of non-lethal weapons. Naturally, I feel insulted by any attempt to classify me by the fact that I've been known to write the odd bit of telecomms software and like to keep up with the IT news.
I see it as having parallels to the use of the word nigger. It was a term of abuse and still is. But an upcoming generation decided to adopt the term as a badge of pride in response. But there are a lot of older black people who still find the term very offensive and would never use the term to describe themselves. Not because they consider there to be anything wrong with being black (obviously), but because they object to being classified as some special category rather than being free to be something outside what one particular trait. And rightly so.
Same with me. I have an interest both by nature and profession, in database design and analysis. That doesn't make me part of some cultural movement. I get pretty pissed off when people assume it does. And when someone rolls their eyes when I tell them what I do for a living, it's because of other people going around talking about how much they are geeks. I worked on a large C++ project that had approx. 20 people working on it. One of the people was very hairy and had a Stallman beard. Another guy read X-men comics at his desk. That's about it, iirc. Is it any wonder I dislike people perpetuating some stupid stereotype?
If the US is so fucked up that people working in maths or programming have to take refuge in some sort of Pride movement, then India and China are going to eat it up and shit it out without even chewing. Not to mention what such stereotypes do to keep women out of studying for careers in computer programming. And that's the thing of it - these stereotypes do actually have an affect on society and how people will treat you.
Do what you like, but I'd recommend trying to disassociate particular careers and hobbies from social identity because it's going to bite the USA in the arse one day.
If you don't like the current iPhone, your only choice is to stick with an older model.
It's not my only choice at all. I can buy a Nokia which is what I did. I don't like the iPhone myself. I think it has a pretty good UI which is great for people who need that. But I'm currently writing software based on Postgres and I a simple UI isn't such a big selling point to me, I want value for money and a so long as the basic features I require are there (old Nokia 5800 in this case), then I'm happy.
*sigh* The way the press has scented blood on this - there's nothing they like better than to tear down what they've built up. iPhones. Good machines, over-priced, sometimes innovative with a somewhat irritating and closed development model attached to them. Apple wasn't producing immaculate products from Heaven before, and they're not producing bricks from Satan's arse all of a sudden. Something got fucked up along the way this time, it'll get fixed. The hype and the derision in both directions is irritating to me. Maybe we can stop the rollercoaster and start treating Apple like any other company soon, please? I don't see constant stories about Nokia's phones (which are pretty nice, imho), for example.
Whenever people justify Hiroshima and Nagasaki by saying it persuaded Japan to surrender with fewer casualties than a land-based invasion, they always seem to omit comparing it to option C. which is saying "hey, this country is in no position to threaten us for a good old time, let's not invade them and wait till they negotiate". The justification for the use of the atomic bomb on Japan always takes it as a given that US was right to demand the complete and utter submission of Japan at any cost.
The OP's point was that we don't know what that 0.1% injury statistic means. It could be blindness in one eye, it could be a mild burn. We don't know how it scales. The 0.1% figure will be for "correct usage". If that is a 1 second burst and someone leaves it on for three seconds, do we get an injury rate of 0.3% or 3% or 30% or what? We don't know. That 0.1% hides a multitude of possibilities.
The scenario you propose is a hypothetical one. If the soldiers felt their lives were in danger, they would use the most effective means they have in defending themselves which would be lethal weaponry. This is for population control.
With only lethal weapons, your options are: (A) potentially kill people or (B) reason with them and use minimal force.
With weapons like this, your options are: (A) potentiall kill people, (B) reason with them and use minimal force or (C) inflict intolerable pain on them and then shrug afterwards saying: "no permanent harm was done".
The problem isn't that (C) is a substitute for (A). It isn't. The problem is that it is a substitute for (B).
WTO meetings affect everyone. If government and business representatives from all around the world gather in city X, then it's not unreasonable to expect some of those that wish to protest to gather in city X to do so.
Which is why the weapon should be very effective against insurgent activity. Rather than become a martyr, you give the Taliban a major hot flash. Sounds great!
I sometimes think posters on/. believe that fighters in the Middle East just wake up and say: "Hey, I'm a bad guy, I'm going to go and shoot some Americans". Will causing a Taliban soldier temporary pain remove any of the reasons why that person is a Taliban fighter or why he or anyone else is risking their lives fighting the US? Of course not. Anyway, these weapons aren't intended for use against Taliban fighters (at least until they're disarmed and chained to the back of a shed). Point this at some Taliban fighter and he'll just shoot the device if he's got any sense. It's not like it isn't a big obvious dish, yes? These devices are for use against protestors, public meetings, that sort of thing. Basically, not for combat, but for keeping a population in line.
No, no, no. You can't do that. You see it's only okay for the police to control you by inflicting pain. If you carry around equipment that can do this, you get put away for a couple of years. "Doesn't cause permanent harm" is only a defense for the government approved. When you do it, it's called assault.
Thanks for the suggestions. The project is actually still in the development stage. By next year, perhaps some of the new designs will be out and I'll look at investing in a couple for the project. At present, I might grab a cheaper SSD for development purposes as it's all mock-up data anyway.
Thanks for that reply. I don't know how I missed it previously, but I dared to make an anti-piracy post around the same time so your reply notification probably got lost in the hail of pro-piracy replies and you've-been-moderated-down notifications.;)
The database is currently running on an ext3 filesystem but it's actually still in development so it's just running with mock-up test data at the moment. It's not going to be hit by the merciless public until the new year where it will be hammered. That said, even in simulation, it needs help. The biggest issue is that the application isn't playing to the strengths of a relational database - it's storing linked lists / trees. Unfortunately, I don't want to spend two months writing a dedicated backend for my application that handles it better. So I've got a database that involves a lot of quite complicated queries and inserts. Or if not complicated, at least intensive.
I will certainly try your suggestion next time I run simulations on it. That said, 20GB in writes per day should be more than adequate for quite some time to come. Of greater concern is the issue of power failure. I may get an SSD just for development and by the time we roll this out properly, perhaps we'll look at a higher-end model depending on how things go.
Slashdot Mirror
As a general trend, I'd agree, but I'm not sure that's quite right.
First -> Second: Younger, bit more manic.
Second -> Third: Comparable age. Less manic (but more physical)
Third -> Fourth: Younger, more manic.
Fourth -> Fifth: Younger, much less manic
Fifth -> Sixth: Comparable age, much more manic (in the literal, psychiatric sense, too)
Sixth -> Seventh: Older (seems so), less manic
Seventh -> Eight: Younger, less manic, (also remember, they're all a bit crazy after a regen and we only see one "episode" with Eight).
Eight -> Nine: Older, bit more manic.
Nine -> Ten: Comparable age but younger image, loads more manic.
Ten -> Eleven: Younger, less manic on the whole (still quite manic, but comes across as someone sane but highly enthusiastic, rather than crazily excitable like Ten).
If you want to say that Ten and Eleven are younger and more manic than One and Two, definitely, but I don't think it's a steady progression.
So what you're saying, is still not ginger.
Sorry. Whenever I start typing about the Cybermen, my hands start to shake. I don't know why, but it's nothing to do with seeing Colin Baker trying to stop them from implanting circuitry in his friend's skull when I was six.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'll be behind the sofa.
This series very blatantly sets out to get away from that. Even from the very first episode where he has to save the Earth without any of his usual toys - or in his own words: "No TARDIS. No Sonic Screwdriver. Two minutes to spare!". And then at other points in the series, it's re-emphasised. E.g. the line in 'Vincent and the Doctor': "That does it! From now on, I'm only using this thing to screw in screws". The device has mainly just been used in this series as a short-hand for things. Similar goes for all the maudln Rose/Martha/Kylie pining love story stuff. If you haven't seen the episode in question yet, I'll avoid saying what happens, but we get a very clear (and funny) distancing from romantic entanglements with the new Doctor. And the one character that may or may not be a romantic entanglement (Doctor River Song), we have only deep suspicions as to what might happen between her and the Doctor. Originally, we assumed she was the Doctor's wife. Now... maybe yes, maybe something more sinister. We've been promised some answers next series, but it's definitely a deliberate stepping away from all the "Roooooose!" unstated love stuff.
David Tennant was really, really good. He sometimes suffered from dubious plotting or overly-sentimental writing, but he himself was brilliant. But so is Matt Smith. I couldn't ask for a better replacement for David Tennant. I really hope this isn't true that he's leaving. He's been absolutely great.
Bah! Maybe American children. Hiding behind the sofa from the Doctor Who aliens is a right of passage for British children. Did you see the "Pandorica Opens" episode, where the severed cyberman helment pops open and the desicated skull pops out? The general reaction over here was: "my seven year old ran out of the room in fear - good episode!"
Firstly, I love that you've been modded up +3 Insightful already for this. Secondly, I love that you are right!
Yeah, granted. Apple certainly do their darnest to promote themselves. And although the other respondent above is correct to say everyone else does too, it's hard not to concede that Apple do a better job of it than anyone else.
But I guess I just don't buy into the hype and I wonder why other people do, too. If you check out my post, you'll see that it's not directed against Apple for hyping themselves up, but against the press. It's the press that run endless stories about Apple's highs and then, with great relish, start running stories about its lows. My point is that it is hype both ways and papers, IT sites and everyone else should just stop buying into it. Nokia still have far more of the phone market than Apple. Blackberry's still have more of the phone market than Apple. Do we see three weeks of stories about Blackberry upgrading their O/S or releasing a new model? I suspect Apple have one of the most developed marketing machines we've yet seen - sort of the Paris Hilton of the electronics world. We've no idea what actually makes them so special, but they seem to be discussed merely because they're discussed. (No offense to Paris if she reads
Good phones, over-priced, some innovations, some dubious limitations. What irritates is the hype and the media share blame for that, it's not just because Apple say: "Hey - our phone is great!"
Communications infrastructure, like the roads, should be a public service. If that doesn't happen, we're going to end up in a right mess.
You can get 12 megabits per second in pretty much all of the UK, if you're willing to pay BT (British Telecom) enough. It's not standard though.
Anyway, not to cast any doubt, but when you say the lowest you can get is 5Mb/s, is that the actual minimum speed you'll get, or the minimum they'll sell you? Most ISPs in the UK will happily sell you "up to 8Mb/s" but the lines might only support 4Mb/s, for example.
This is shifting the arguments. The OP merely pointed out that when the company touts 0.1% injury rate, we really have very little idea what that means in practice. And it is valid to make that criticism which is what you've been arguing against. Now you wish to make another argument that we don't need to worry whether the "injury rate is 0.3%. 3% or 30% because the alternative is death." That's incorrect. These weapons are not primarily an alternative to "a dozen men with fully automatic weapons". It's an alternative to persuasion, patience, negotiation, etc. If US soldiers are currently using fully automatic weapons to disperse public protests and meetings, then things are even more fucked up than I realised. If they're not, then your argument falls apart.
Actually, with all due respect and in a friendly manner, you're going to get my pretty strong rejection of that.
I don't like the term "geek". It's a cultural export from the US and it's bizarre school system that seems to engender some sort of division between technical ability versus social ability and sporting ability. I don't think it's even particularly true within the US schools, though from what I've been told about how some schools push sports at the expense of academic study, it has some basis. At any rate, it's alien to much of the world or was until the US seemed to start developing some Geek and Proud movement and rolling all sorts of things up into some stereotype. Comics, for example. I've worked with some very good programmers of a variety of ages. I recall one that was particularly into them. I recall rather more that were into all sorts of sports from squash to boxing. Of course, like some perverse, inverse of the No True Scotsman, the definition of Geek shifts to encompass anyone you want it to. "You may be sporty, but you're still a geek". "You may have a partner, but you're still a geek". And with the term, come all the negative connotations. For example, you've classed me as a "weirdo." Apparently because I'm posting in a story about US use of non-lethal weapons. Naturally, I feel insulted by any attempt to classify me by the fact that I've been known to write the odd bit of telecomms software and like to keep up with the IT news.
I see it as having parallels to the use of the word nigger. It was a term of abuse and still is. But an upcoming generation decided to adopt the term as a badge of pride in response. But there are a lot of older black people who still find the term very offensive and would never use the term to describe themselves. Not because they consider there to be anything wrong with being black (obviously), but because they object to being classified as some special category rather than being free to be something outside what one particular trait. And rightly so.
Same with me. I have an interest both by nature and profession, in database design and analysis. That doesn't make me part of some cultural movement. I get pretty pissed off when people assume it does. And when someone rolls their eyes when I tell them what I do for a living, it's because of other people going around talking about how much they are geeks. I worked on a large C++ project that had approx. 20 people working on it. One of the people was very hairy and had a Stallman beard. Another guy read X-men comics at his desk. That's about it, iirc. Is it any wonder I dislike people perpetuating some stupid stereotype?
If the US is so fucked up that people working in maths or programming have to take refuge in some sort of Pride movement, then India and China are going to eat it up and shit it out without even chewing. Not to mention what such stereotypes do to keep women out of studying for careers in computer programming. And that's the thing of it - these stereotypes do actually have an affect on society and how people will treat you.
Do what you like, but I'd recommend trying to disassociate particular careers and hobbies from social identity because it's going to bite the USA in the arse one day.
It's not my only choice at all. I can buy a Nokia which is what I did. I don't like the iPhone myself. I think it has a pretty good UI which is great for people who need that. But I'm currently writing software based on Postgres and I a simple UI isn't such a big selling point to me, I want value for money and a so long as the basic features I require are there (old Nokia 5800 in this case), then I'm happy.
*sigh* The way the press has scented blood on this - there's nothing they like better than to tear down what they've built up. iPhones. Good machines, over-priced, sometimes innovative with a somewhat irritating and closed development model attached to them. Apple wasn't producing immaculate products from Heaven before, and they're not producing bricks from Satan's arse all of a sudden. Something got fucked up along the way this time, it'll get fixed. The hype and the derision in both directions is irritating to me. Maybe we can stop the rollercoaster and start treating Apple like any other company soon, please? I don't see constant stories about Nokia's phones (which are pretty nice, imho), for example.
Whenever people justify Hiroshima and Nagasaki by saying it persuaded Japan to surrender with fewer casualties than a land-based invasion, they always seem to omit comparing it to option C. which is saying "hey, this country is in no position to threaten us for a good old time, let's not invade them and wait till they negotiate". The justification for the use of the atomic bomb on Japan always takes it as a given that US was right to demand the complete and utter submission of Japan at any cost.
The OP's point was that we don't know what that 0.1% injury statistic means. It could be blindness in one eye, it could be a mild burn. We don't know how it scales. The 0.1% figure will be for "correct usage". If that is a 1 second burst and someone leaves it on for three seconds, do we get an injury rate of 0.3% or 3% or 30% or what? We don't know. That 0.1% hides a multitude of possibilities.
Remind me again why it was necessary for the US to invade Iraq and Afghanistan?
The scenario you propose is a hypothetical one. If the soldiers felt their lives were in danger, they would use the most effective means they have in defending themselves which would be lethal weaponry. This is for population control.
With only lethal weapons, your options are: (A) potentially kill people or (B) reason with them and use minimal force.
With weapons like this, your options are: (A) potentiall kill people, (B) reason with them and use minimal force or (C) inflict intolerable pain on them and then shrug afterwards saying: "no permanent harm was done".
The problem isn't that (C) is a substitute for (A). It isn't. The problem is that it is a substitute for (B).
WTO meetings affect everyone. If government and business representatives from all around the world gather in city X, then it's not unreasonable to expect some of those that wish to protest to gather in city X to do so.
I sometimes think posters on /. believe that fighters in the Middle East just wake up and say: "Hey, I'm a bad guy, I'm going to go and shoot some Americans". Will causing a Taliban soldier temporary pain remove any of the reasons why that person is a Taliban fighter or why he or anyone else is risking their lives fighting the US? Of course not. Anyway, these weapons aren't intended for use against Taliban fighters (at least until they're disarmed and chained to the back of a shed). Point this at some Taliban fighter and he'll just shoot the device if he's got any sense. It's not like it isn't a big obvious dish, yes? These devices are for use against protestors, public meetings, that sort of thing. Basically, not for combat, but for keeping a population in line.
No, no, no. You can't do that. You see it's only okay for the police to control you by inflicting pain. If you carry around equipment that can do this, you get put away for a couple of years. "Doesn't cause permanent harm" is only a defense for the government approved. When you do it, it's called assault.
According to Slashdot's own demographic info which they provide for advertising purposes, about a third of
Thanks for the suggestions. The project is actually still in the development stage. By next year, perhaps some of the new designs will be out and I'll look at investing in a couple for the project. At present, I might grab a cheaper SSD for development purposes as it's all mock-up data anyway.
Appreciate the reply,
H.
Thanks for that reply. I don't know how I missed it previously, but I dared to make an anti-piracy post around the same time so your reply notification probably got lost in the hail of pro-piracy replies and you've-been-moderated-down notifications.
The database is currently running on an ext3 filesystem but it's actually still in development so it's just running with mock-up test data at the moment. It's not going to be hit by the merciless public until the new year where it will be hammered. That said, even in simulation, it needs help. The biggest issue is that the application isn't playing to the strengths of a relational database - it's storing linked lists / trees. Unfortunately, I don't want to spend two months writing a dedicated backend for my application that handles it better. So I've got a database that involves a lot of quite complicated queries and inserts. Or if not complicated, at least intensive.
I will certainly try your suggestion next time I run simulations on it. That said, 20GB in writes per day should be more than adequate for quite some time to come. Of greater concern is the issue of power failure. I may get an SSD just for development and by the time we roll this out properly, perhaps we'll look at a higher-end model depending on how things go.
Thanks for your suggestions,
H.