There really isn't any pretty way to end a life but of the available methods that our technology allows I would argue that being shot is the most humane. If the shooters do their job right you will be dead in seconds.
Except there's some evidence to suggest that the rifle shots are seldom that well placed. Quite often, what used to happen was the man leading the firing squad checked the victim, found him still breathing and shot him in the head.
(It's a bit difficult to find evidence for this right now - Google's efficiency at keeping their search engine results is working against me as most searches involving the term "firing squad" bring up stories related to this particular execution - but knowing how fantastically good/.'ers are at finding evidence for a particular POV, I have no doubt that someone with more knowledge will reply....)
There's quite a few Windows management tools which are equally brain damaged - how the Hell are you meant to guarantee that every client is online and reachable in these days of laptops and working remotely?
(Yes I know it requires you to go out and buy a Mac running OS X Server. Running your own local Windows updates requires you to go out and buy Windows Server, so how's this any different?)
They had a commercial that blatantly said that Macs don't get viruses. Liars.
Technically speaking they're telling the truth. But it's a bit disingenuous because viruses in the traditional file-infector sense are all but dead. Most modern "viruses" are actually trojans and worms, which no operating system is ever going to be immune to.
The bit that always gets neglected in these discussions is that there's a huge cultural difference here in the UK and the majority of thugs don't carry guns themselves. Sure, you hear about the odd bit of gun crime but it's unusual enough that it's still a major news item.
You may not be far from the truth, but not for the reasons you envisage. The great majority of offices in the UK don't have cubicles at all - they're open-plan.
Except the great majority of computers aren't bought by geeks who are equipped to repair them. They're bought by companies (who are unlikely to repair computers themselves anyway, that's what the warranty is there for, and by the time it's out of warranty it's probably not worth repairing because it'll cost more in man hours than it's worth) and by individuals who would need to pay to have someone repair them anyway - they may as well get the benefit of portability.
This is before you even consider the vast number of computers being sold today that are so cheap it will never be cost effective to repair them. Never mind hardware issues, I've seen computers so infested with various virii the only cost effective repair if you want to consider "cost per man-hour" is to rebuild them from scratch - which starts to fail horribly if they're owned by an individual who says "Oh I threw out those CDs" or "I had to make them myself?!"
I've seen one of these in the flesh - they're very shiny indeed.
There's no earthly reason it has to be used for power monitoring - it could, for instance, provide a pretty UI to a fullblown home automation system. AFAICT, the only reason Intel are specifically making a thing about the power monitoring is because with ever-increasing electricity prices they think it's a sexy marketing feature.
I would have to agree there - I wouldn't touch an HP inkjet device of any description today. (Actually, I probably wouldn't touch an inkjet device of any description, but that's bye the bye) And it's entirely HP's fault.
It's common enough to find that hardware companies are lousy at writing software and vice-versa, but HP have turned that into an absolute art form.
I have a small Kyocera laser printer at home. Cheap, speaks Postscript and PCL5, toner cartridges are £40 a throw (mainly because Kyocera coat the drum so it doesn't wear out at the same time as your toner runs out and doesn't need regular replacing).
Question: Are HP's bigger (think departmental) printers still OK or are they demanding absurd software as well these days?
When did it become "ok" to "pay" for "free" services by looking at ads? What kind of retarded philosophy is that? Either it's free or it's not. If it's free, there's no justification for including ads. If it's not free, HP should charge something for it, and then they'll see how popular their "feature" really is.
At a rough guess, I'd say probably around about the time that commercial radio and television broadcasting was pioneered.
Actually, I don't have a huge problem believing it's a relatively small number of people doing it. The initial emails at least are most certainly NOT sent out by means of someone clicking "New message", filling in the To:, subject: and content and hitting send.
See, I don't think this is a product that should be considered on its own.
It's obviously intended that it could be used as the centre a home theatre - most monitors don't have HDMI inputs. I think it's a product which - with the right software (basically the itunes store with a remote-control friendly interface) - would do for home theatre PCs what the iPod did for MP3 players. It will already have Front row....
The very first mini was fairly obviously intended to allow people who already had a PC to give Apple a go by making something cheap and cheerful with just about adequate performance for basic purposes.
Which was exactly what it was for me - and, I suspect, quite a few others.
Seems to me that Apple have decided that they no longer need to have such a product in their lineup.
And you would immediately incur the wrath of sysadmins like me who have dealt with RDBMSs that assume the database would be all that ever runs on the system.
(Hint: That's probably true for any modern database in any sensibly-sized organisation, but it's not necessarily true if you're running some clapped-out legacy database which doesn't speak SQL and you need to install on the same hardware some sort of layer to get it to talk to the new systems. In fifteen years' time it's entirely possible that today's database will be the clapped-out legacy which needs another layer installed in order to get it talking with newer software)
Re:One of the most un-American things I've ever re
on
The Real Science Gap
·
· Score: 1
So start an enterprise right after graduating? It's not enough that you have a huge student debt, but you will need more loan for your enterprise. How realistic is that?
Seriously, what you wrote is the most un-American thing I read. Few people go there, because there are few oppurtunities. (You know, return on investment.) That's just how the market works. If you want to more scientist for your projects, but you don't find enough, bid higher.
Actually, I can't think of anything more American than start your own enterprise. It doesn't have to involve getting into masses of debt.
Though I'm not in the US, my own view is that I'm within a few thousand of the most I could reasonably expect to earn without going into management - which I'm not sure I want to do. I am very tempted to jack in the IT altogether and set up a business.
Doing what I don't know (it may not even be IT), but right now I'm doing the IT to put food on the table and I don't really want to spend the next thirty-five or forty years (the rate retirement ages are going in the UK it'll be 40 years....) just doing the same thing over and over. I'd sooner take a paycut - particularly right now when I don't have kids - and do something for myself just to see if I can.
If our science students can't find jobs, the problem is a GLUT of science education. Perhaps we should focus more on trade schools than churning out more unemployed bio and physics majors.
There's that, but there's also the fact that globalisation brings quite a few issues to the fore. An Indian or Chinese student can study and qualify in Europe or the US, go home and land a job with a firm that's moving their R&D offshore.
Sure they'll be paid Indian or Chinese wages, but they'll be paid top-end Indian or Chinese wages that allow them to live like a king compared to what they could earn in Europe or the US. Of course, it's likely that labour costs in India or China will go up - and as soon as they do I guarantee you there's several million people in Africa who will be only too happy to train up and do the job cheaper.
I don't know the cost of terminal server licensing for windows, but for organizations with this kind of push, it may be worthwhile.
Like most MS products, the cost looks quite reasonable if you start off relatively small with, say, SBS, and upgraded as your needs have changed - or you're used to paying through the nose for licensing.
Which, to be fair, is true for probably 95+% of businesses.
For others, Windows TS complete with all appropriate CALs starts to look very expensive very quickly - and unlike many aspects of Windows licensing, CALs in use are actively tracked by a DRM module.
This is before you even consider that some proprietary applications explicitly exclude you from running them under TS in the terms of the license - or charge extra for the privilege.
Or 35 years ago on a VT52 (though to be fair, back then you more or less HAD to use some sort of remote access because the computer itself was such a huge, noisy beast that nobody in their right mind would want to be in the same room for any length of time)
Of course the whole system is insane, and it's a shame that it is not enforced very well - if it was, so many people would object that the law would get changed pretty fast.
I rather suspect this is why it's not enforced very well.
Now I'd disagree with that, largely because the great majority of (though I realise not all) successful F/OSS projects have a substantial amount of corporate sponsorship.
Generally this takes the form of either compan(y|ies) paying one or more developers to dedicate some of their time to working on a particular F/OSS project - which may or may not receive any serious input from outside developers (eg. the Linux kernel) or the original developer has set up their own dedicated company to provide custom functionality and support to their pet project (eg. Bacula, CUPS before Apple bought ESP).
AFAICT, the majority of projects which don't have substantial corporate sponsorship are either not terribly successful or are dedicated to solving a problem that is so simple that they don't require corporate sponsorship.
Slashdot Mirror
There really isn't any pretty way to end a life but of the available methods that our technology allows I would argue that being shot is the most humane. If the shooters do their job right you will be dead in seconds.
Except there's some evidence to suggest that the rifle shots are seldom that well placed. Quite often, what used to happen was the man leading the firing squad checked the victim, found him still breathing and shot him in the head.
(It's a bit difficult to find evidence for this right now - Google's efficiency at keeping their search engine results is working against me as most searches involving the term "firing squad" bring up stories related to this particular execution - but knowing how fantastically good /.'ers are at finding evidence for a particular POV, I have no doubt that someone with more knowledge will reply....)
Ah, now I did not know that.
There's quite a few Windows management tools which are equally brain damaged - how the Hell are you meant to guarantee that every client is online and reachable in these days of laptops and working remotely?
You'd better tell Apple about this glaring hole. They don't think it exists.
(Yes I know it requires you to go out and buy a Mac running OS X Server. Running your own local Windows updates requires you to go out and buy Windows Server, so how's this any different?)
No, what you're thinking of is a worm.
They had a commercial that blatantly said that Macs don't get viruses. Liars.
Technically speaking they're telling the truth. But it's a bit disingenuous because viruses in the traditional file-infector sense are all but dead. Most modern "viruses" are actually trojans and worms, which no operating system is ever going to be immune to.
The bit that always gets neglected in these discussions is that there's a huge cultural difference here in the UK and the majority of thugs don't carry guns themselves. Sure, you hear about the odd bit of gun crime but it's unusual enough that it's still a major news item.
You may not be far from the truth, but not for the reasons you envisage. The great majority of offices in the UK don't have cubicles at all - they're open-plan.
Except the great majority of computers aren't bought by geeks who are equipped to repair them. They're bought by companies (who are unlikely to repair computers themselves anyway, that's what the warranty is there for, and by the time it's out of warranty it's probably not worth repairing because it'll cost more in man hours than it's worth) and by individuals who would need to pay to have someone repair them anyway - they may as well get the benefit of portability.
This is before you even consider the vast number of computers being sold today that are so cheap it will never be cost effective to repair them. Never mind hardware issues, I've seen computers so infested with various virii the only cost effective repair if you want to consider "cost per man-hour" is to rebuild them from scratch - which starts to fail horribly if they're owned by an individual who says "Oh I threw out those CDs" or "I had to make them myself?!"
I've seen one of these in the flesh - they're very shiny indeed.
There's no earthly reason it has to be used for power monitoring - it could, for instance, provide a pretty UI to a fullblown home automation system. AFAICT, the only reason Intel are specifically making a thing about the power monitoring is because with ever-increasing electricity prices they think it's a sexy marketing feature.
I would have to agree there - I wouldn't touch an HP inkjet device of any description today. (Actually, I probably wouldn't touch an inkjet device of any description, but that's bye the bye) And it's entirely HP's fault.
It's common enough to find that hardware companies are lousy at writing software and vice-versa, but HP have turned that into an absolute art form.
I have a small Kyocera laser printer at home. Cheap, speaks Postscript and PCL5, toner cartridges are £40 a throw (mainly because Kyocera coat the drum so it doesn't wear out at the same time as your toner runs out and doesn't need regular replacing).
Question: Are HP's bigger (think departmental) printers still OK or are they demanding absurd software as well these days?
When did it become "ok" to "pay" for "free" services by looking at ads? What kind of retarded philosophy is that? Either it's free or it's not. If it's free, there's no justification for including ads. If it's not free, HP should charge something for it, and then they'll see how popular their "feature" really is.
At a rough guess, I'd say probably around about the time that commercial radio and television broadcasting was pioneered.
Actually, I don't have a huge problem believing it's a relatively small number of people doing it. The initial emails at least are most certainly NOT sent out by means of someone clicking "New message", filling in the To:, subject: and content and hitting send.
If the general public was ever going to catch on, they'd have done so by now.
See, I don't think this is a product that should be considered on its own.
It's obviously intended that it could be used as the centre a home theatre - most monitors don't have HDMI inputs. I think it's a product which - with the right software (basically the itunes store with a remote-control friendly interface) - would do for home theatre PCs what the iPod did for MP3 players. It will already have Front row....
The very first mini was fairly obviously intended to allow people who already had a PC to give Apple a go by making something cheap and cheerful with just about adequate performance for basic purposes.
Which was exactly what it was for me - and, I suspect, quite a few others.
Seems to me that Apple have decided that they no longer need to have such a product in their lineup.
NT 4 wasn't hyped to buggery.
It does work as a media box, it's called Front Row and it's been included with OS X since 10.5 (and was included on selected models before then).
And you would immediately incur the wrath of sysadmins like me who have dealt with RDBMSs that assume the database would be all that ever runs on the system.
(Hint: That's probably true for any modern database in any sensibly-sized organisation, but it's not necessarily true if you're running some clapped-out legacy database which doesn't speak SQL and you need to install on the same hardware some sort of layer to get it to talk to the new systems. In fifteen years' time it's entirely possible that today's database will be the clapped-out legacy which needs another layer installed in order to get it talking with newer software)
So start an enterprise right after graduating? It's not enough that you have a huge student debt, but you will need more loan for your enterprise. How realistic is that?
Seriously, what you wrote is the most un-American thing I read. Few people go there, because there are few oppurtunities. (You know, return on investment.) That's just how the market works. If you want to more scientist for your projects, but you don't find enough, bid higher.
Actually, I can't think of anything more American than start your own enterprise. It doesn't have to involve getting into masses of debt.
Though I'm not in the US, my own view is that I'm within a few thousand of the most I could reasonably expect to earn without going into management - which I'm not sure I want to do. I am very tempted to jack in the IT altogether and set up a business.
Doing what I don't know (it may not even be IT), but right now I'm doing the IT to put food on the table and I don't really want to spend the next thirty-five or forty years (the rate retirement ages are going in the UK it'll be 40 years....) just doing the same thing over and over. I'd sooner take a paycut - particularly right now when I don't have kids - and do something for myself just to see if I can.
If our science students can't find jobs, the problem is a GLUT of science education. Perhaps we should focus more on trade schools than churning out more unemployed bio and physics majors.
There's that, but there's also the fact that globalisation brings quite a few issues to the fore. An Indian or Chinese student can study and qualify in Europe or the US, go home and land a job with a firm that's moving their R&D offshore.
Sure they'll be paid Indian or Chinese wages, but they'll be paid top-end Indian or Chinese wages that allow them to live like a king compared to what they could earn in Europe or the US. Of course, it's likely that labour costs in India or China will go up - and as soon as they do I guarantee you there's several million people in Africa who will be only too happy to train up and do the job cheaper.
I don't know the cost of terminal server licensing for windows, but for organizations with this kind of push, it may be worthwhile.
Like most MS products, the cost looks quite reasonable if you start off relatively small with, say, SBS, and upgraded as your needs have changed - or you're used to paying through the nose for licensing.
Which, to be fair, is true for probably 95+% of businesses.
For others, Windows TS complete with all appropriate CALs starts to look very expensive very quickly - and unlike many aspects of Windows licensing, CALs in use are actively tracked by a DRM module.
This is before you even consider that some proprietary applications explicitly exclude you from running them under TS in the terms of the license - or charge extra for the privilege.
Or 35 years ago on a VT52 (though to be fair, back then you more or less HAD to use some sort of remote access because the computer itself was such a huge, noisy beast that nobody in their right mind would want to be in the same room for any length of time)
Of course the whole system is insane, and it's a shame that it is not enforced very well - if it was, so many people would object that the law would get changed pretty fast.
I rather suspect this is why it's not enforced very well.
Quite a few console games these days use the odd F/OSS library here and there, I'd be astonished if Nintendo never have.
Now I'd disagree with that, largely because the great majority of (though I realise not all) successful F/OSS projects have a substantial amount of corporate sponsorship.
Generally this takes the form of either compan(y|ies) paying one or more developers to dedicate some of their time to working on a particular F/OSS project - which may or may not receive any serious input from outside developers (eg. the Linux kernel) or the original developer has set up their own dedicated company to provide custom functionality and support to their pet project (eg. Bacula, CUPS before Apple bought ESP).
AFAICT, the majority of projects which don't have substantial corporate sponsorship are either not terribly successful or are dedicated to solving a problem that is so simple that they don't require corporate sponsorship.