There are kids who can't keep up with the current educational system. It could be argued that they need more help. The smart kids will do OK if they don't get as much guidance. They could do better if they got more, but you get the idea.
It is this attitude that is responsible for the sorry state of education in this country (USA). The vice principal of our high school infamously remarked that students such as myself would learn "by themselves in a dark closet with a flashlight." Perhaps intended as a compliment, but used to justify cutting programs for students who were motivated and wanted to learn so that the resources could be spent on bringing "making everyone above average."
It is simply not the case that everyone has the same potential. You cannot make those with lesser abilities equal to those with greater abilities, unless you are willing to try to drag down those with the greater abilities, and sadly it seems that this is becoming more and more the modus operandi. This is tragic, because those minds are our most vital natural resource; we are plundering them for the purchase of a tiny slice of equality that does little but make us feel good.
All this in an environment where people love to bitch about the quality of education, but don't pay teachers what they are worth and expect endless hours out of them.
Are teachers professionals or not? They want to be treated like professionals and paid like professionals, but they don't seem to want to be held accountable like professionals or work long, hard hours like professionals. People might be willing to pay much more for good teachers if the teachers' unions didn't make them subsidize poor teachers at the same time.
I disliked not that the ending was "happy," for, as you point out, it is not objectively happy. Rather, my chief complaint was that the tacked-on ending was unnecessarily emotional. The final scenes seemed deliberatitely contrived to jerk the tears and confuse the audience into thinking that there was a profound idea there. Contrast with 2001, which had no people in it getting all weepy and hugging each other. In fact, there were few displays of any emotion whatsoever in that movie, and certainly none designed deliberately to tug the heartstrings.
Hmm. As I think about this, I realize how odd 2001 really was, but damned if I don't love it.
The BBC is not forcing anyone to have their recording, nor are they providing it without intervention
If you are a British subject, you are forced to pay for it whether you want it or not.
The scenario would have been more similar to Microsoft providing a free browser on their website, while Netscape was charging for theirs. I don't think nearly as many would have cried foul if this had been done.
You and almost everyone else who replied missed the point of the analogy, which was to demonstrate that the BBC is exploiting a similar power position relative to its customers, but the power of its position stems not from monopolistic practices but from the power to compel payment on pain of imprisonment. Just like you are not forced to use Internet Explorer (or WMP or what have you) but must pay for it whether your want it or not, so too (if you are British) are you forced to pay for these recordings, whether you want to listen to them or not. That is the analogy. The OP asked how giving something away for free could be anticompetitive. I merely provided a case which this crowd should be able to relate to.
I don't understand how giving something away for free could be seen as competition.
Here's an analogy for the Slashdot crowd:
The BBC is like Microsoft, except its power to force consumers to pay up comes not from sleazy deals and market penetration but the well-polished heel of a bobby's boot. The classical recordings, then, are like Internet Explorer, which they are giving away for "free" (though in reality subsidized by the rents created from their power position), and this record industry exec is like Netscape, trying to protect a stagnant, failing product space while whining about how consumers are harmed by delivery of a free product.
So the question for you is: are you consistent in your application of principles in these cases? Because I have a feeling that if you said:
I still take the side of Microsoft on this one, though. They created the browser with their own in-house programmers and therefore should be able to distribute it any way they like. Period.
...well, you might get some more vocal disagreement!
I'm curious as to what properties LCD screens possess that make them more harmful to look at than, say, paper (since this is a replacement for traditional paper-based books).
If you pay attention to the movie, you'll see that she really does end up weighing the same as a duck, and that she really is a witch
But if I recall correctly, when they remove the woman/duck, the scale drops lopsidedly on the side the duck was on, implying that the apparent sameness of weight was due to improper calibration and failure to tare the instrument prior to weighing.
That is, Windows also hides the little-used items on the main Programs menu until you click the arrow on the menu to expand it.
I think you are wrong. It does do this in Classic mode, in which case it's the old-style menu you're used to. It doesn't do this in the new style, with the most-recently used items in the start menu.
I seem to recall that one metric was whether the language could be used to write its own compiler. I don't particularly know how often that is still used, however.
please tell me where I can find Windows equivalents of the above log files, and how I can override Windows' own detected hsync/vrefresh values: I have several machines upon which I cannot install Windows XP, because it mistakenly believes that the monitor can display 1024x768.
Boot into safe mode, which uses a generic VGA video driver at 60 Hz in (IIRC) 8-bit 640x480. Go to the properties for your display and click "advanced" on the settings tab. The monitor tab will allow you to choose a video mode. If your monitor is reporting available modes incorrectly and the mode you want is unavailable, uncheck the "Hide modes that this monitor cannot display" box.
You do know that Microsoft doesn't sell computers, right? So they would have had to purchase the PPC dev kits from somebody, and it just so happens that Apple does (for now) indeed produce a fine PPC computer. Maybe it would be embarassing if they were using Apple's software, but they weren't. Maybe it's ironic/funny in some alternate universe when people use the right tool for the job, but not in mine.
Microsoft has realized the potential market here, and I think that it could be a "killer app" for XBox360 if they manage to implement it competently. Clearly they intend to leverage casual games and video chat on the Xbox 360 using XBL. Since XBL is (so far) uniquely well-adapted for this sort of thing, it gives them an early advantage in this field over other consoles.
This is, I think, what MS is really talking about when they play up their efforts to make the Xbox360 more "mainstream" and capturing a large segment of the market that doesn't traditionally buy consoles. Just how big that market really is, though - well, that's anyone's guess.
Because the viability and usability of a platform is in great part a function of the number of people using and developing for it. That's why Windows, despite being pricey and closed source, has the best hardware support, game support, the largest number of developers, arguably the largest availability of techincal support, and the largest number of users.
But your example of Apple proves his point, somewhat. Apple used code with a BSD license. Do you really think Apple would have made such a decision if it had to comply with the GPL? I certainly don't think so.
That's ATI's fault for hating Linux, not the Linux community. We can't exactly create great drivers when the company doesn't release its specifications on the cards.
Why would this or any user care whose "fault" it is? It doesn't matter! Usability is not a function of blameworthiness.
Slashdot Mirror
It is this attitude that is responsible for the sorry state of education in this country (USA). The vice principal of our high school infamously remarked that students such as myself would learn "by themselves in a dark closet with a flashlight." Perhaps intended as a compliment, but used to justify cutting programs for students who were motivated and wanted to learn so that the resources could be spent on bringing "making everyone above average."
It is simply not the case that everyone has the same potential. You cannot make those with lesser abilities equal to those with greater abilities, unless you are willing to try to drag down those with the greater abilities, and sadly it seems that this is becoming more and more the modus operandi. This is tragic, because those minds are our most vital natural resource; we are plundering them for the purchase of a tiny slice of equality that does little but make us feel good.
All this in an environment where people love to bitch about the quality of education, but don't pay teachers what they are worth and expect endless hours out of them.
Are teachers professionals or not? They want to be treated like professionals and paid like professionals, but they don't seem to want to be held accountable like professionals or work long, hard hours like professionals. People might be willing to pay much more for good teachers if the teachers' unions didn't make them subsidize poor teachers at the same time.
Hmm. As I think about this, I realize how odd 2001 really was, but damned if I don't love it.
We call those "aircraft carriers." But seriously, the real problem is, how do you effeciently ship the gas from such a remote location?
If you are a British subject, you are forced to pay for it whether you want it or not.
The scenario would have been more similar to Microsoft providing a free browser on their website, while Netscape was charging for theirs. I don't think nearly as many would have cried foul if this had been done.
You and almost everyone else who replied missed the point of the analogy, which was to demonstrate that the BBC is exploiting a similar power position relative to its customers, but the power of its position stems not from monopolistic practices but from the power to compel payment on pain of imprisonment. Just like you are not forced to use Internet Explorer (or WMP or what have you) but must pay for it whether your want it or not, so too (if you are British) are you forced to pay for these recordings, whether you want to listen to them or not. That is the analogy. The OP asked how giving something away for free could be anticompetitive. I merely provided a case which this crowd should be able to relate to.
No, the post said that that the only two black consoles won the market. There's a subtle difference there which I'll leave you to work out.
Here's an analogy for the Slashdot crowd:
The BBC is like Microsoft, except its power to force consumers to pay up comes not from sleazy deals and market penetration but the well-polished heel of a bobby's boot. The classical recordings, then, are like Internet Explorer, which they are giving away for "free" (though in reality subsidized by the rents created from their power position), and this record industry exec is like Netscape, trying to protect a stagnant, failing product space while whining about how consumers are harmed by delivery of a free product.
So the question for you is: are you consistent in your application of principles in these cases? Because I have a feeling that if you said:
Refresh my memory: what color is the Xbox?
Indeed, in fact, it helps keep the console cool should you decide to stack something on top of it, with the ends acting as rising contact points.
"Stackable" != "completely covers all surface area of a face"
I find it curious that you consider this to be a "downside."
I'm curious as to what properties LCD screens possess that make them more harmful to look at than, say, paper (since this is a replacement for traditional paper-based books).
But if I recall correctly, when they remove the woman/duck, the scale drops lopsidedly on the side the duck was on, implying that the apparent sameness of weight was due to improper calibration and failure to tare the instrument prior to weighing.
And now for something completely different.
Swear to god, I saw those for sale at a local 7-11 (in Milwaukee, Wisconsin). I am not making this up. They were muffins, IIRC.
I think you are wrong. It does do this in Classic mode, in which case it's the old-style menu you're used to. It doesn't do this in the new style, with the most-recently used items in the start menu.
I seem to recall that one metric was whether the language could be used to write its own compiler. I don't particularly know how often that is still used, however.
Boot into safe mode, which uses a generic VGA video driver at 60 Hz in (IIRC) 8-bit 640x480. Go to the properties for your display and click "advanced" on the settings tab. The monitor tab will allow you to choose a video mode. If your monitor is reporting available modes incorrectly and the mode you want is unavailable, uncheck the "Hide modes that this monitor cannot display" box.
You do know that Microsoft doesn't sell computers, right? So they would have had to purchase the PPC dev kits from somebody, and it just so happens that Apple does (for now) indeed produce a fine PPC computer. Maybe it would be embarassing if they were using Apple's software, but they weren't. Maybe it's ironic/funny in some alternate universe when people use the right tool for the job, but not in mine.
I don't get it.
Could this open some eyes and increase interest in alternative (Linux, Mac) offerings?
http://winsupersite.com/images/showcase/xbox360_gu iderev_06.jpg.
This is, I think, what MS is really talking about when they play up their efforts to make the Xbox360 more "mainstream" and capturing a large segment of the market that doesn't traditionally buy consoles. Just how big that market really is, though - well, that's anyone's guess.
Because the viability and usability of a platform is in great part a function of the number of people using and developing for it. That's why Windows, despite being pricey and closed source, has the best hardware support, game support, the largest number of developers, arguably the largest availability of techincal support, and the largest number of users.
But your example of Apple proves his point, somewhat. Apple used code with a BSD license. Do you really think Apple would have made such a decision if it had to comply with the GPL? I certainly don't think so.
Do americans pronounce it with the F anymore ?Definitely not, and not for a long time.
Why would this or any user care whose "fault" it is? It doesn't matter! Usability is not a function of blameworthiness.
Eactly. That's why systems like Linux or OSX have absolutely no systemwide API libraries.