Sorry to tell ya, but I don't know A SINGLE PERSON who hasn't a pirated program installed. Actually, I'm not even sure I know anyone who hasn't a pirated copy of Office, and I can safely say that EVERYONE I know has it.
Microsoft makes a lot of money with companies, and OEM versions. The students never buy anything. Too expensive. That's why I'm moving to OO.
OO has a couple of neat features. I like the concept, and the equation editor is really kewl.
I can also said that I've disliked every version of Oficce after 97. Only because its full of useless things I don't need, nothing else.
While I have yet to see anyone complain about it, I can easily imagine the reason for all the complaints.
Aside, from the annoyance that the update on IE brings (*), the firewall activated by default will give alot of headaches with the DCC transfers. Since alot of users on IRC use those on a regular basis, and since 99% of'em have absolutely no idea as to how a firewall works, what a "port" is, or how to configure it, they'll be complain' about it night and day 'till someone finally explains them how to solve their problems.
(*) The fact that it is usefull as well as necessary, will NOT distract any users from what they will believe to be its new main "feature": BEING ANNOYING.
Can we really trust these discs?
I mean, the CD is a reliable digital support, it will tolerate alot of abuses. We all know that sometimes, a CD with lots and lots of scratches will work just fine.
The DVD on the other hand, is alot more sensitive. I've had problems with dvd's where I could hardly see any scratches on the surface, and I've heard some other people complain about it as well. Maybe we're just dumb and don't know how to properly handle them, but still no one can deny that a DVD is alot more sensitive.
If these guys says they pub 50gb on a single disk, I can only imagine how sensitive the damn thing will be. They should have some kind of enclosure, like the old 3.5" disks. Those were never reliable, but I can only imagine how much worse they'd be if they had the exposed disk.
It should also be noted that Apache is open source, meaning you can actually go look at the code to look for possible ways to exploit possible bugs/security flaws. The same doesn't happen with Microsoft's IIS and yet it is still more vulnerable than Apache is...
Yah. Indeed, MS documentation is quite good. I vaguely remember the online documentation not being as good some 3 or 4 years ago, but maybe I was just lookin' at the wrong places. I dunno.
It should be noted, however, that there ARE non-working examples in the documentation. I may not be much of a programmer, but I have managed to stumble upon a couple of examples with bugs.
Not everything can be perfect. But programming heaven should be bug-free, wouldn't you say?:)
The whole purpose of the internet is AVOIDING work! I mean, do you actually know anyone wich has had an increase in productivity ever sicne they had internet access at work?
And no, the data produced by the management doesn't count, and they too use it so they just fake it so that no one will take the internet away from them. Their's was a tough job (read: boring), with the internet things have changed and no one wants it to go abck to the way it was before.
Yes yes, That's exactly what engineering is all about.
The difference lies in the acceptable margins of error. While in mechanical Engineering you deal with a precision of 0.1mm or less, in Civil Engineering you're talkin' about an error of at least 20%.
Don't be fool by the story. Its a nice story and all that, but I sincerely doubt it to be true.
I like to believe Civil Engineering is a field that tries its best to bridge the gap between RL and science. Its really really hard to predict a structure's behaviour, and even more so to predict how that behaviour will change over time. Civil Engineering deals with alot of uncertanties, so anything one says about the expected behaviour of a given structure should always be considered as a "rough estimate", nothing more.
Let me explain it a bit further.
When designing a reinforced concrete structure, as you would expect, there are some saffety coefficients involved, to make sure the structure doesn't collapse, even if it is subjected to loads greater than you would expect in a worst case scenario. But if you look at those coefficients, you'll see something interesting: they're all impresively high. Just look:
# We study the concrete's resistante to compression (fck) and determine what is the minimum resistant strength that 95% of the samples can achieve. As you can imagine, the average sample's resistant capacity is well above that.
# That resistant capacity is now divided by a 1.5 factor (gamma-c) so we now have fcd = fck/1.5
# When calculating the structure, we multiply that capacity by 0.85. This is because in some circumstances, that resistant capacity tends to decrease over time. so we now have 0.85fcd for our calculations.
# We make an estimate for the loads the structure is expected to handle. We then multiply those loads by 1.5 if they have a negative effect on the structure and we don't even count them if the effect its positive.
* So now we have: 1.5 * (worst case scenario loading pattern)
* for a: 0.85 * fcd (the expected minimum resistant capacity 95% of the samples divided by a 1.5 factor)
# for the steel things are a bit different. The control of the production is much tighter, so the variance of the resistant capacity is much lower, so we just use a coefficient of 1.15 (gamma-s)
* so for steel we have: fsyk / 1.15 (where fsyk is the expected minimim resistante to uniaxial traction strength that 95% of the samples are expected to achieve)
Well.. as you can see, there are lots and lots of uncertainties. Simplifications are a dime a dozen. And though you can better approximate reality with Finite Elements Analysis and Discrete Elements Analysis, its still way off. Just think, how can you accurately predict the behaviour of a structure where the composition is heterogenous in nature, where that composition varies within the structure (i.e. the ammount of steel varies with the expected loads, therefore some areas will have more steel and with different arrangements than others), and where you can't accurately know the resistant capacity of the materials you used.
Anyways... I know its off topic. And to embrace the spirit of slashdot, I must sai IANACE (I'm actually still a student). But I just had to write this:)
Please forgive my english and any errors that I might have made (along with the simplifications).
This is hardly news to anyone. If my memory doesn't fail me, that has been around for at least two years. And if you were ever into assembly or even just curious, you were bound to stumble uppon the Art of Assembly (his book, a must read when learning assembly) and his site. Its not like HLA was any secret of even hidden in some obscure webpage...
Don't worry. Engineering *will* move to the SI. The mix of metric with imperial is mostly just felt in the US.
Its not all that hard to switch, if people were really forced the whole transition could be done in a couple of years. Just look at what happened with the Euro. Everyone now uses it, and though in my country the transition was kinda easier (1 Euro =~ 200 Escudos) in other countries (like spain, for instance) it wasn't that simple and still the transition was quite smooth.
Actually, you're forgetting something alot more useful (imho): conversions.
When you're tryin' to see convert from inches to feet, or whatever, it gets really confusing:\
I must say, I had no idea the US didn't use the same system we do. I always just ignored the letter size, I thought it was some weird size used for letters ^^
Why would anyone bother with MTV? I mean, just take a look at it: half the stuff that's shown is censored!
Just try watching some of Eminem's work and half the time you'll see his lips moving but no words coming from your speakers. And one of these days, I was watching RW's "come undone" live, and it was just stupid, they'd even censor the image whenever he said "the F word". At least when its not live you hear the music, when its live the sound just goes dead every other second.
MTV even goes to the trouble of blurring the image whenever the nipples can be seen through the clothing. And I'm not talkin' about transparent clothes or anything like it!!:\
Slashdot Mirror
I approve your suggestion. Henceforth I shall use the term "Clawyers" when referring to "evil lawyers". I hope others will follow.
Youceff Torrents got raided it seems.. http://www.zeropaid.com/news/articles/auto/1215200 4b.php
dvdr-core.org has also been unavailable recently....
1. Tax deductible.
2. Good PR
It might have been an option of compromise.
One thing is for sure: they stayed on the 4bill for a looooong time.
"I'm new here"?
Yah... right... and we're all in love with Bill Gates.
Yah. I'm curious too, I would think one thing has no relation to the other... but the again, IANAMD
Sorry to tell ya, but I don't know A SINGLE PERSON who hasn't a pirated program installed. Actually, I'm not even sure I know anyone who hasn't a pirated copy of Office, and I can safely say that EVERYONE I know has it.
Microsoft makes a lot of money with companies, and OEM versions. The students never buy anything. Too expensive. That's why I'm moving to OO.
OO has a couple of neat features. I like the concept, and the equation editor is really kewl.
I can also said that I've disliked every version of Oficce after 97. Only because its full of useless things I don't need, nothing else.
While I have yet to see anyone complain about it, I can easily imagine the reason for all the complaints.
Aside, from the annoyance that the update on IE brings (*), the firewall activated by default will give alot of headaches with the DCC transfers. Since alot of users on IRC use those on a regular basis, and since 99% of'em have absolutely no idea as to how a firewall works, what a "port" is, or
how to configure it, they'll be complain' about it night and day 'till someone finally explains them how to solve their problems.
(*) The fact that it is usefull as well as necessary, will NOT distract any users from what they will believe to be its new main "feature": BEING ANNOYING.
Can we really trust these discs? I mean, the CD is a reliable digital support, it will tolerate alot of abuses. We all know that sometimes, a CD with lots and lots of scratches will work just fine. The DVD on the other hand, is alot more sensitive. I've had problems with dvd's where I could hardly see any scratches on the surface, and I've heard some other people complain about it as well. Maybe we're just dumb and don't know how to properly handle them, but still no one can deny that a DVD is alot more sensitive. If these guys says they pub 50gb on a single disk, I can only imagine how sensitive the damn thing will be. They should have some kind of enclosure, like the old 3.5" disks. Those were never reliable, but I can only imagine how much worse they'd be if they had the exposed disk.
It should also be noted that Apache is open source, meaning you can actually go look at the code to look for possible ways to exploit possible bugs/security flaws. The same doesn't happen with Microsoft's IIS and yet it is still more vulnerable than Apache is...
I would be very much interested in seeing it. Could you email, or make it available through http/ftp/whatever?
:)
I'm sure I'm not the only slashdottian interested in seeing something like this.
I think the man wanted to kill its website. Why would anyone in his right mind put up a direct link to a screenshot on slashdot?!
I dunno, but this sure looks like a good way to give out screeners. It should make things harder at least.
They can still rip it before they watch it though... guess there's no easy solution for that problem.
Yah. Indeed, MS documentation is quite good. I vaguely remember the online documentation not being as good some 3 or 4 years ago, but maybe I was just lookin' at the wrong places. I dunno.
:)
It should be noted, however, that there ARE non-working examples in the documentation. I may not be much of a programmer, but I have managed to stumble upon a couple of examples with bugs.
Not everything can be perfect. But programming heaven should be bug-free, wouldn't you say?
you're missing one of the main points.
The whole purpose of the internet is AVOIDING work! I mean, do you actually know anyone wich has had an increase in productivity ever sicne they had internet access at work?
And no, the data produced by the management doesn't count, and they too use it so they just fake it so that no one will take the internet away from them. Their's was a tough job (read: boring), with the internet things have changed and no one wants it to go abck to the way it was before.
Yes yes, That's exactly what engineering is all about.
The difference lies in the acceptable margins of error. While in mechanical Engineering you deal with a precision of 0.1mm or less, in Civil Engineering you're talkin' about an error of at least 20%.
Don't be fool by the story. Its a nice story and all that, but I sincerely doubt it to be true.
:)
;)
I like to believe Civil Engineering is a field that tries its best to bridge the gap between RL and science. Its really really hard to predict a structure's behaviour, and even more so to predict how that behaviour will change over time. Civil Engineering deals with alot of uncertanties, so anything one says about the expected behaviour of a given structure should always be considered as a "rough estimate", nothing more.
Let me explain it a bit further.
When designing a reinforced concrete structure, as you would expect, there are some saffety coefficients involved, to make sure the structure doesn't collapse, even if it is subjected to loads greater than you would expect in a worst case scenario. But if you look at those coefficients, you'll see something interesting: they're all impresively high. Just look:
# We study the concrete's resistante to compression (fck) and determine what is the minimum resistant strength that 95% of the samples can achieve. As you can imagine, the average sample's resistant capacity is well above that.
# That resistant capacity is now divided by a 1.5 factor (gamma-c) so we now have fcd = fck/1.5
# When calculating the structure, we multiply that capacity by 0.85. This is because in some circumstances, that resistant capacity tends to decrease over time. so we now have 0.85fcd for our calculations.
# We make an estimate for the loads the structure is expected to handle. We then multiply those loads by 1.5 if they have a negative effect on the structure and we don't even count them if the effect its positive.
* So now we have: 1.5 * (worst case scenario loading pattern)
* for a: 0.85 * fcd (the expected minimum resistant capacity 95% of the samples divided by a 1.5 factor)
# for the steel things are a bit different. The control of the production is much tighter, so the variance of the resistant capacity is much lower, so we just use a coefficient of 1.15 (gamma-s)
* so for steel we have: fsyk / 1.15 (where fsyk is the expected minimim resistante to uniaxial traction strength that 95% of the samples are expected to achieve)
Well.. as you can see, there are lots and lots of uncertainties. Simplifications are a dime a dozen. And though you can better approximate reality with Finite Elements Analysis and Discrete Elements Analysis, its still way off. Just think, how can you accurately predict the behaviour of a structure where the composition is heterogenous in nature, where that composition varies within the structure (i.e. the ammount of steel varies with the expected loads, therefore some areas will have more steel and with different arrangements than others), and where you can't accurately know the resistant capacity of the materials you used.
Anyways... I know its off topic. And to embrace the spirit of slashdot, I must sai IANACE (I'm actually still a student). But I just had to write this
Please forgive my english and any errors that I might have made (along with the simplifications).
Have fun!
Looks better in a graph. :)
This is hardly news to anyone. If my memory doesn't fail me, that has been around for at least two years. And if you were ever into assembly or even just curious, you were bound to stumble uppon the Art of Assembly (his book, a must read when learning assembly) and his site. Its not like HLA was any secret of even hidden in some obscure webpage...
Don't worry. Engineering *will* move to the SI. The mix of metric with imperial is mostly just felt in the US. Its not all that hard to switch, if people were really forced the whole transition could be done in a couple of years. Just look at what happened with the Euro. Everyone now uses it, and though in my country the transition was kinda easier (1 Euro =~ 200 Escudos) in other countries (like spain, for instance) it wasn't that simple and still the transition was quite smooth.
Actually, you're forgetting something alot more useful (imho): conversions. When you're tryin' to see convert from inches to feet, or whatever, it gets really confusing :\
I must say, I had no idea the US didn't use the same system we do. I always just ignored the letter size, I thought it was some weird size used for letters ^^
If that were the case, wouldn't MS's effort to demand licenses for the use of FAT32 be futile?
Why would anyone bother with MTV? I mean, just take a look at it: half the stuff that's shown is censored!
:\
Just try watching some of Eminem's work and half the time you'll see his lips moving but no words coming from your speakers. And one of these days, I was watching RW's "come undone" live, and it was just stupid, they'd even censor the image whenever he said "the F word". At least when its not live you hear the music, when its live the sound just goes dead every other second.
MTV even goes to the trouble of blurring the image whenever the nipples can be seen through the clothing. And I'm not talkin' about transparent clothes or anything like it!!
Dunno why all the fuss about MTV...
I believe so. But its not like its something rare to see on slashdot. :\