Back in the day when code needed to be efficient at a theoretical level, when compilers and related research was at the forefront of technology itself, and when the computer was the target of research, there was a need for a lot of computer science. Nowadays, there is not as much of a need for true computer science as there used to be. Instead, there is a greater need for people who know other types of science/engineering and have the programming skills to use a computer to solve non-computer problems.
You're right, physics be damned, the UCS is right.
It can easily be proven that what they publish violates basic laws of physics. That's why you don't see their "papers" in open journals like SAE. Go learn some engineering, actually read some of their stuff, and come back if you still think I'm wrong.
My whole point is that the UCS is not an established body of science. They're not made up of real scientists and engineers. I'd take up a debate with any one of them in a second because they don't have logic to stand on.
I've designed hybrid vehicles before. I used to be an engineer for an auto company.
The Union of Concerned Scientists is a special interest group with a convincing name. I've read their study on a "cleaner" Ford Explorer. Supposedly they "designed" one which could get dramatically improved fuel economy for a negliglbe price increase. However, close inspection revealed assumptions like:
Aluminum parts are the same price as steel parts
6 speed transmissions cost the same as 5 speed transmissions
And then they assumed modifications like these resulted in a several MPG benefit!
I've built my own vehicle simulations in MATLAB and shown that their studies are total BS. Not even in the right ballpark. Their "studies" are more marketing ploys to push their interests.
Most people are willing to pay $100 if their car breaks down for a tow. Is $100 that much for something to save your life? That's half a days salary at a decent job.
Equipping every active US soldier with one of these would cost maybe $10M. Not a big deal in the defense world.
Perhaps Office 12 will support standard typsetting features like ligatures and offer better hyphenation support.
Then again, it's probably wishful thinking to hope a word processor can generate properly typset documents.
The article mentions a "professional" being denied service at Wal-Mart. A real pro uses a real lab and maintains a working relationship with them because they can't afford not to. The price difference is negligible. I've only had the best of service from professional labs such as West Coast Imaging (not affiliated, but a happy customer).
As usual, people want the government to "do something". Congress will take some reactionary step, and in the process, our freedoms will erode, either directly through laws or indirectly through the requirements of law enforcement (i.e., monitoring). Unfortunately, this mentality seems to be the defining feature of American politics nowadays.
There's an optimal size for a heatsink based on the energy to be dissipated. If a heatsink is too large, it will actually be less efficient than a correctly sized one. It's not exactly a correct way to explain it, but you can think of the heat sink itself kind of like an insulator if it's too large.
Have you ever been on the other side of this? People actually need to _use_ their computers. That often means installing tools for use on a day to day basis. On the Mac, this doesn't typically need admin privileges, so it's reasonable. For some reason, on Windows, practically everything needs to install system level files. Whether it's an architechtural defect or the result of lazy software development, the end result is that you have to pick usability or security under Windows, whereas you get both with other operating systems.
I don't see a problem here. I would think that very few security professionals or large scale network admins would be using Windows as their primary machine. Given that Windows machines often become bots, I'd rather it be harder for people to write DDOS software for them. And if you do need low level access, there are plenty of OSs available to get the job done.
The splash screen to Win2K is a bitmap obviously blown up by 200% or so. Powerpoint can't correctly import encapsulate postscript. Can they do a graphics format correctly? I doubt it.
Re:Latin Jibberish Generator... probably from iWor
on
Saving Lives with Design
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Further information is available at http://www.lipsum.com/
A standard is a good one when it has an open interface, regardless of whether it's 'official' or not. The relevant question is, "Can I interface with this 'standard'?" If the answer is "no", proper systems engineering becomes impossible, and everyone suffers.
Or, if you want full hardware support along with a stable kernel, a C compiler, and network support, you just leave it alone. What's the advantage of switching to a free OS when you've already paid for the Mac OS?
This sort of crap runs contrary to Apple's philosophy, and I don't think they'll want it in their hardware (heck, they don't even copy protect their OS). However, they may get forced into it for compatibility.
I believe in trusted computing - I trust myself not to be dumb.
It's because your average reviewer doesn't want flat frequency response - they want excessive "bass" in the 70-90Hz range. People who actually care about music sounding real seem to be satisified with the iPod.
Why should those of us who are responsible, don't use windows, and don't want NAT or a firewall be forced to use one? Thankfully, I have a provider who doesn't handhold me, block ports, or tell me that I can't use my connection for business. They give me my IP, and I pay for my bandwidth, they way it shoudl be.
A better solution would be to cut off access to those who are perpetrating or supporting attacks. That includes people whose machines become zombies used in DDOS attacks, worms, etc. That would have the effect of only punishing hackers and people who are part of the problem (usually through stupidity).
Like most such regulations, it's there to keep the soccer moms happy through the feeling of security.
Realistically, it's meaningless. A criminal will either be sure to not have a prior record or use a fake.
This is why Verizon is rolling out fiber to the home (http://www.verizon.net/fios/). They're afraid of the cable companies with their one stop shop for phone, TV, and internet, and the telcos need to do the same to avoid extinction.
This is a waste of taxpayer money. Broadband internet is readily availale in Oakland County through private providers. Meanwhile, Michigan's roads are abominable. Snow takes days to get cleared from residential streets. I could go on and on. Someone needs to get their priorities straight.
Slashdot Mirror
Back in the day when code needed to be efficient at a theoretical level, when compilers and related research was at the forefront of technology itself, and when the computer was the target of research, there was a need for a lot of computer science. Nowadays, there is not as much of a need for true computer science as there used to be. Instead, there is a greater need for people who know other types of science/engineering and have the programming skills to use a computer to solve non-computer problems.
You're right, physics be damned, the UCS is right. It can easily be proven that what they publish violates basic laws of physics. That's why you don't see their "papers" in open journals like SAE. Go learn some engineering, actually read some of their stuff, and come back if you still think I'm wrong.
My whole point is that the UCS is not an established body of science. They're not made up of real scientists and engineers. I'd take up a debate with any one of them in a second because they don't have logic to stand on. I've designed hybrid vehicles before. I used to be an engineer for an auto company.
The Union of Concerned Scientists is a special interest group with a convincing name. I've read their study on a "cleaner" Ford Explorer. Supposedly they "designed" one which could get dramatically improved fuel economy for a negliglbe price increase. However, close inspection revealed assumptions like: Aluminum parts are the same price as steel parts 6 speed transmissions cost the same as 5 speed transmissions And then they assumed modifications like these resulted in a several MPG benefit! I've built my own vehicle simulations in MATLAB and shown that their studies are total BS. Not even in the right ballpark. Their "studies" are more marketing ploys to push their interests.
Most people are willing to pay $100 if their car breaks down for a tow. Is $100 that much for something to save your life? That's half a days salary at a decent job. Equipping every active US soldier with one of these would cost maybe $10M. Not a big deal in the defense world.
Perhaps Office 12 will support standard typsetting features like ligatures and offer better hyphenation support. Then again, it's probably wishful thinking to hope a word processor can generate properly typset documents.
Wow, could an article have been more obviously flamebait?
Interestingly, I remember when there were no ads to be seen on web sites. The content was free, and surprisingly useful.
The article mentions a "professional" being denied service at Wal-Mart. A real pro uses a real lab and maintains a working relationship with them because they can't afford not to. The price difference is negligible. I've only had the best of service from professional labs such as West Coast Imaging (not affiliated, but a happy customer).
As usual, people want the government to "do something". Congress will take some reactionary step, and in the process, our freedoms will erode, either directly through laws or indirectly through the requirements of law enforcement (i.e., monitoring). Unfortunately, this mentality seems to be the defining feature of American politics nowadays.
There's an optimal size for a heatsink based on the energy to be dissipated. If a heatsink is too large, it will actually be less efficient than a correctly sized one. It's not exactly a correct way to explain it, but you can think of the heat sink itself kind of like an insulator if it's too large.
Have you ever been on the other side of this? People actually need to _use_ their computers. That often means installing tools for use on a day to day basis. On the Mac, this doesn't typically need admin privileges, so it's reasonable. For some reason, on Windows, practically everything needs to install system level files. Whether it's an architechtural defect or the result of lazy software development, the end result is that you have to pick usability or security under Windows, whereas you get both with other operating systems.
I don't see a problem here. I would think that very few security professionals or large scale network admins would be using Windows as their primary machine. Given that Windows machines often become bots, I'd rather it be harder for people to write DDOS software for them. And if you do need low level access, there are plenty of OSs available to get the job done.
The splash screen to Win2K is a bitmap obviously blown up by 200% or so. Powerpoint can't correctly import encapsulate postscript. Can they do a graphics format correctly? I doubt it.
Further information is available at http://www.lipsum.com/
Classified and confidential stuff isn't always in black and white. How many datapoints are you basing your conclusion on?
It's called "Lorem Ipsum" and is purposely gibberish. It's used by designers so that one focuses on layout rather than content.
A standard is a good one when it has an open interface, regardless of whether it's 'official' or not. The relevant question is, "Can I interface with this 'standard'?" If the answer is "no", proper systems engineering becomes impossible, and everyone suffers.
Or, if you want full hardware support along with a stable kernel, a C compiler, and network support, you just leave it alone. What's the advantage of switching to a free OS when you've already paid for the Mac OS?
This sort of crap runs contrary to Apple's philosophy, and I don't think they'll want it in their hardware (heck, they don't even copy protect their OS). However, they may get forced into it for compatibility. I believe in trusted computing - I trust myself not to be dumb.
It's because your average reviewer doesn't want flat frequency response - they want excessive "bass" in the 70-90Hz range. People who actually care about music sounding real seem to be satisified with the iPod.
Why should those of us who are responsible, don't use windows, and don't want NAT or a firewall be forced to use one? Thankfully, I have a provider who doesn't handhold me, block ports, or tell me that I can't use my connection for business. They give me my IP, and I pay for my bandwidth, they way it shoudl be. A better solution would be to cut off access to those who are perpetrating or supporting attacks. That includes people whose machines become zombies used in DDOS attacks, worms, etc. That would have the effect of only punishing hackers and people who are part of the problem (usually through stupidity).
Like most such regulations, it's there to keep the soccer moms happy through the feeling of security. Realistically, it's meaningless. A criminal will either be sure to not have a prior record or use a fake.
This is why Verizon is rolling out fiber to the home (http://www.verizon.net/fios/). They're afraid of the cable companies with their one stop shop for phone, TV, and internet, and the telcos need to do the same to avoid extinction.
This is a waste of taxpayer money. Broadband internet is readily availale in Oakland County through private providers. Meanwhile, Michigan's roads are abominable. Snow takes days to get cleared from residential streets. I could go on and on. Someone needs to get their priorities straight.