You can structure your modules and your tests such that you can test them independently, using unit tests and functional tests while mocking other services. This keeps each individual build, likely to be kicked off by a change in the revision control system, to a minimum. Integration tests using all the components together can be kicked off at larger intervals (twice daily, for example). These should always pass if all the individual module tests passed. If not, then your tests are incomplete.
If you're running on an Intel platform, try running powertop. I can easily gain over an hour of battery life by disabling the services it recommends and reducing the screen brightness.
The service is a "network DVR", basically moving the DVR capabilities from a box sitting in the user's home to a server at the cable company. IANAL, but from what I understand that's exactly how they won the lawsuit, by showing that it matched feature-for-feature with a home DVR.
The main problem is the dichotomy between the KDE platform and KDE environment. It was a stable release of the platform, but not of the environment, because the tools which use that platform and create the environment (all the applications) hadn't been ported yet. They should really be two separate releases.
Specifically the No Fly List. It is utterly trivial to change the name on a boarding pass that is expected to be printed out on a user's home computer (most are just HTML). This has received a fairamount of attention in the past, but apparently the theatrics of it suffice.
Then why are there nine people listed as Level Designers? It's been a few months since I played through, but I'm pretty sure there were loading screens between the levels.
I think this is a wonderful idea to get the user to submit metadata, namely give them free storage and bandwidth. My concern with this, though, is that there will be no way for the general public to access that metadata once Google has it other than through a webpage (with or without Google ads on it) in an attempt to protect its interests. Others have discussed their excitement over the thought of an API to access Google Base, but I wonder if they would provide a 2-directional api. Sure, they'll eventually provide an API to submit information, but will they provide one to pull information out? Would that go against their interests, namely to sell ads? Perhaps they will, but limit the number of queries one API key can do, as they do with the other APIs?
A subsidiary of a company is not the actual company itself, it's just a [front the company can use to make the public think it's] a peon with which to attribute blame.
I've become so tired of summaries of stories on other websites being the first paragraph of said story on other website. I don't really need to read the same paragraph twice, do I? Sometimes the exact same teasers are three deep.
I would love to see a ground-level simulation complete with screaming faces and heart attacks. Some of those cars get real close in the intersection. I think it will be a long time before people trust any fully automated system like this with their lives. On airplanes there may be autopilot, but there's still a pilot.
Technically, others have pointed out the lack of external influences on the system, breakdowns are a good example. This system assumes each vehicle will travel through the intersection at the speed it said it would. There's no room for error correction: if the car crossing in front of it suddenly crashes or breaks down, there's not enough time for that car to stop, and then you end up with a big pile of cars. I wonder how efficient the system would be if each car was required to allow enogh room to stop should an error occur.
This is a combined Continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 08/641,010, filed on Apr. 29, 1996, and entitled "COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED TRANSPORT OF ELECTRONIC INFORMATION OBJECTS," which is a Continuation-in-Part of U.S. application Ser. No. 08/251,824, filed on May 31, 1994, and entitled "SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATIC UNATTENDED ELECTRONIC INFORMATION TRANSPORT BETWEEN A SERVER AND A CLIENT BY A VENDOR PROVIDED TRANSPORT SOFTWARE WITH A MANIFEST LIST," which as U.S. Pat. No. 5,420,820 on May 30, 1995, and U.S. application Ser. No. 08/982,157, filed on Dec. 1, 1997, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,125,388 and entitled "COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED TRANSPORT OF ELECTRONIC INFORMATION OBJECTS," which is a Continuation of the aforementioned Ser. No.08/251,724 filed May 31, 1994 (now U.S. Pat. No. 5,694,546). All of the above-identified applications are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety.
What does a patent by TI on a DRAM circuit have to do with this?
From the article, it seems they'll be tackling the rest of the explosions next:
The Research and Development team is now turning its attention to developing next-generation low-smoke substitutes for black powder and other materials, which have been used in pyrotechnics for hundreds of years.
Maybe you can go to Disneyland in 10 years and get pelted with falling LEDs.
Challenge my figures if you've got better information of course...
I'm guessing each of those 55 people doesn't make $220,000 a year. I'm not sure how you got to 12 million, but perhaps the fact that a traditional US work week is 40 hours instead of 80 was the confusion (and you never gave the hourly rate you were computing with).
Slashdot Mirror
You can structure your modules and your tests such that you can test them independently, using unit tests and functional tests while mocking other services. This keeps each individual build, likely to be kicked off by a change in the revision control system, to a minimum. Integration tests using all the components together can be kicked off at larger intervals (twice daily, for example). These should always pass if all the individual module tests passed. If not, then your tests are incomplete.
I only run Windows in a virtual machine, and very rarely at that, so I can't answer your question. Sorry.
If you're running on an Intel platform, try running powertop. I can easily gain over an hour of battery life by disabling the services it recommends and reducing the screen brightness.
Except for the fact that cellphone calls interrupt a VOIP call, I'm rather happy with Skype on the iPhone for this.
The service is a "network DVR", basically moving the DVR capabilities from a box sitting in the user's home to a server at the cable company. IANAL, but from what I understand that's exactly how they won the lawsuit, by showing that it matched feature-for-feature with a home DVR.
Sounds a lot like jasypt, which I just used in a project.
The main problem is the dichotomy between the KDE platform and KDE environment. It was a stable release of the platform, but not of the environment, because the tools which use that platform and create the environment (all the applications) hadn't been ported yet. They should really be two separate releases.
Specifically the No Fly List. It is utterly trivial to change the name on a boarding pass that is expected to be printed out on a user's home computer (most are just HTML). This has received a fair amount of attention in the past, but apparently the theatrics of it suffice.
The specs are available here. "Tru2way" is merely a rebranding of OCAP.
Then why are there nine people listed as Level Designers? It's been a few months since I played through, but I'm pretty sure there were loading screens between the levels.
I think this is a wonderful idea to get the user to submit metadata, namely give them free storage and bandwidth. My concern with this, though, is that there will be no way for the general public to access that metadata once Google has it other than through a webpage (with or without Google ads on it) in an attempt to protect its interests. Others have discussed their excitement over the thought of an API to access Google Base, but I wonder if they would provide a 2-directional api. Sure, they'll eventually provide an API to submit information, but will they provide one to pull information out? Would that go against their interests, namely to sell ads? Perhaps they will, but limit the number of queries one API key can do, as they do with the other APIs?
If this is a joke, I don't get it. This project hasn't released any files and haven't committed anything to CVS.
A subsidiary of a company is not the actual company itself, it's just a [front the company can use to make the public think it's] a peon with which to attribute blame.
I've become so tired of summaries of stories on other websites being the first paragraph of said story on other website. I don't really need to read the same paragraph twice, do I? Sometimes the exact same teasers are three deep.
Okay, you're wrong. This is. It's a very close second, though. The light tan links are hard to read on both the white and tan backgrounds.
Only in one direction, though. Cascading timers suck if you're going the other way.
Technically, others have pointed out the lack of external influences on the system, breakdowns are a good example. This system assumes each vehicle will travel through the intersection at the speed it said it would. There's no room for error correction: if the car crossing in front of it suddenly crashes or breaks down, there's not enough time for that car to stop, and then you end up with a big pile of cars. I wonder how efficient the system would be if each car was required to allow enogh room to stop should an error occur.
You're gonna have to explain that one.
What does a patent by TI on a DRAM circuit have to do with this?
Would you be aware of it if they were already doing this?
It's is the only linux distro I know of that will literally speak to you as if you're an idiot with Audiot Assist Tutorials!
Actually that's when it was filed. It was issued, incredibly, only about 2 weeks ago.
...will never be the same.