That is the biggest draw of blogging, you can find someone that is writing about what you like, and don't have to read articles that don't interest you. There is so much out there.
Except to find the ones you like, you have to read a lot of articles that don't interest you. Doh!
I think trying to categorize bloggers is mostly useless.
I think most bloggers would be categorized as "mostly useless".
What you probably want is a used Apple Newton or something like that.
Or maybe a pad of paper and a pencil. Way under $50.
A fundamental limitation of any device like this will be the crappy data-entry device. Blackberry users get RSI problems with their thumbs just from doing short emails, so you probably wouldn't want to write your PhD thesis on one of these things, even if they did exist.
HDDs may not be as mechanically reliable but if there's something on stored on an HDD that you really need then it can be recovered by a recovery service. What happens to your data if your rig gets zapped in some kind of freak accident and the flash memory is affected?
You restore it from the backup. You have heard of backups? They're sort of the 20th-century version of the 'recovery service' you mentioned.
In the article, the author says, about the ACM Collegiate Programming Contest:
[]the number of teams competing has grown nearly sevenfold from 1994 through 2005. In other words, for a team to finish at, say, third place, in 1994 would be equivalent to finishing 21st this year.
Coincidentally, I was a member of the team that finished third in 1982. I guess we'd be lucky to qualify today. I think I'll sulk all day....
The good thing about research like this is that no one really loses.
Actually, if somebody succeeds in finding a way to factor large numbers efficiently, it could cause a lot of disruption. For example, much practical online security relies on the difficulty of factoring, and if that suddenly becomes broken the disruptions could be severe (at least temporarily).
If it continues to take years to factor numbers, we're still safe. If it gets down to hours, watch out!
Perhaps, or perhaps if Google changes its rankings enough, the SEOs' credibilities will be destroyed
That would be great. Now that I've read TFA, it looks like Google's techniques a long way toward eliminating the fakery done by SEO's currently.
As an aside, the article looks like it was written by an SEO consultant, as it contains a lot of advice about how to get good rankings under Google's patented approach. Interestingly, the recommended actions are mostly legitimate (offer interesing content, update regularly, don't try to create fake links to your site), but also some less-upfront techniques (make link-exchange deals with other sites and encourage bookmarking, for example).
It just occurred to me that, as Google changes its algorithms, it'll just create more business for the Search Engine Optimization consultant. When web sites drop in the Google rankings, they'll want to make changes to move back up, and will hire the SEO again to do so.
A new company called JasperSoft (http://www.jaspersoft.com) has formed to invest in JasperReports and offer support, services and complimentary commercial products for JasperReports.
Unless, of course, he meant "complementary"...
Seriously, the above statement seems to be saying that they will be offering mostly support and add-ons, not taking the core product private. The JasperReports software is currently under the LGPL, so there is some assurance that the original will still be available in the future, if anybody cares enough to fork the project.
Most strong environmentalists are inherently distrustful of corporations, and this distrust grows as the size of the corporation increases.
Nicely put. That explains a lot of the Walmart opposition, I guess...it's not based on any rational analysis, just distrust of the largest company.
Just look at the rumors that have been growing about Google and its dark plans and interests.
My take on Google is that they're turning over to the dark side because they've gone public. Time will tell, but companies change when they have more pressure from outside investors. (offtopic, sorry...)
Wal-Mart was mainly criticized by communities for building new stores, and then leaving the older ones vacant and abandoned so that competitors could not buy the older buildings and use them.
I have to call BS on this statement. Around here, every time Walmart tries to build a store in a new town, they get massive organized opposition, even when there's no existing store that they're replacing.
Unions and competitors hate Walmart, because they tend to win the market battle whereever they go. And the main reason they win is that consumers prefer to shop there.
The kind of packing people together that is better is where most people live in Apartment Buildings/Condos near to where they work, they don't have lawns or SUVs and they are able to walk to work and to the grocery store. This reduces the per-person ecological footprint.
That's exactly the attitude that I've observed. But, as Brand points out, many in the environmental movement like villages. And I suppose the grocery stores in these high-density areas will be supplied from simple farmers who ride their horse-drawn carts into town on market day. Yeah, right...
Not everybody wants to live like a gerbil in a cage, packed in with hundreds of other gerbils. The reason that people buy big houses with lawns and SUV's is that it's a more enjoyable lifestyle.
Yes, but enviros should love Walmart, which squeezes every penny to get the most out of it.
Money is basically a proxy for resource consumption. A company that conserves money through economies of scale should be good for the environment on balance.
The environmentalist aesthetic is to love villages and despise cities.
as part of his observation that urbanization is slowing population growth (which he contends is slowing growth).
Actually, my observation is exactly the opposite. I seem to hear more sympathy for packing everyone together than for spreading them out in the modern environmentalist rhetoric. That's why "sprawl" has become a cuss-word among this bunch.
For another example, look at the current opinion of Walmart. Just today I heard an NPR story about Walmart that criticized them for their environmental impact (pollution and rainwater runoff from their parking lots, plus the extra air pollution from people driving there, I guess).
I guess my point is that the "environmental movement" is a little conflicted; they apparently either like or dislike centralization and efficiencies of scale, depending on the context.
Since she started her writing back in 1998, there are references to mainframes, Unisys systems and the days when you would call tech support and instantly get a human being on the other end.
That should be 1988. By 1998 things had already gone to hell, tech-support-wise.
This thing is crushingly expensive at the moment; the core costs $1990, and the shells to make it a laptop-compatible are almost another $1000. That makes for a $3000 1Ghz laptop running Windows XP. No thanks, I'll wait...
Slashdot Mirror
There's nothing worse than a witless worm.
No, I don't think that's too broad. Blogging is just publishing without an editor, and most people don't write all that well. Like me. :)
Except to find the ones you like, you have to read a lot of articles that don't interest you. Doh!
I think trying to categorize bloggers is mostly useless.
I think most bloggers would be categorized as "mostly useless".
Or maybe a pad of paper and a pencil. Way under $50.
A fundamental limitation of any device like this will be the crappy data-entry device. Blackberry users get RSI problems with their thumbs just from doing short emails, so you probably wouldn't want to write your PhD thesis on one of these things, even if they did exist.
Hey, mine is too! What's your bank name and account number?
Have you written it down anywhere? If not, post it here and we'll remember it for you.
You restore it from the backup. You have heard of backups? They're sort of the 20th-century version of the 'recovery service' you mentioned.
Unlike Microsoft, who has a truly impressive lack of options.
[]the number of teams competing has grown nearly sevenfold from 1994 through 2005. In other words, for a team to finish at, say, third place, in 1994 would be equivalent to finishing 21st this year.
Coincidentally, I was a member of the team that finished third in 1982. I guess we'd be lucky to qualify today. I think I'll sulk all day....
Actually, if somebody succeeds in finding a way to factor large numbers efficiently, it could cause a lot of disruption. For example, much practical online security relies on the difficulty of factoring, and if that suddenly becomes broken the disruptions could be severe (at least temporarily).
If it continues to take years to factor numbers, we're still safe. If it gets down to hours, watch out!
That would be great. Now that I've read TFA, it looks like Google's techniques a long way toward eliminating the fakery done by SEO's currently.
As an aside, the article looks like it was written by an SEO consultant, as it contains a lot of advice about how to get good rankings under Google's patented approach. Interestingly, the recommended actions are mostly legitimate (offer interesing content, update regularly, don't try to create fake links to your site), but also some less-upfront techniques (make link-exchange deals with other sites and encourage bookmarking, for example).
It just occurred to me that, as Google changes its algorithms, it'll just create more business for the Search Engine Optimization consultant. When web sites drop in the Google rankings, they'll want to make changes to move back up, and will hire the SEO again to do so.
I'd be delighted if somebody, who knows how to read pending legislation, would comment on this.
If I'm looking a the right Senate bill, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005, it appears that the offending Real ID Act portion has been removed.
And don't forget that, as Silent Bob, he used The Force in the climactic scene of Mallrats.
He should start his own space-flight company.
A new company called JasperSoft (http://www.jaspersoft.com) has formed to invest in JasperReports and offer support, services and complimentary commercial products for JasperReports.
Unless, of course, he meant "complementary"...
Seriously, the above statement seems to be saying that they will be offering mostly support and add-ons, not taking the core product private. The JasperReports software is currently under the LGPL, so there is some assurance that the original will still be available in the future, if anybody cares enough to fork the project.
From the abstract of their paper:
Finally, we look at activity relative to the IP address space and observe that the sources of malicious traffic are spread across the allocated range.
So the answer is no, you can't filter effectively for bad sites.
Nicely put. That explains a lot of the Walmart opposition, I guess...it's not based on any rational analysis, just distrust of the largest company.
Just look at the rumors that have been growing about Google and its dark plans and interests.
My take on Google is that they're turning over to the dark side because they've gone public. Time will tell, but companies change when they have more pressure from outside investors. (offtopic, sorry...)
I have to call BS on this statement. Around here, every time Walmart tries to build a store in a new town, they get massive organized opposition, even when there's no existing store that they're replacing.
Unions and competitors hate Walmart, because they tend to win the market battle whereever they go. And the main reason they win is that consumers prefer to shop there.
That's exactly the attitude that I've observed. But, as Brand points out, many in the environmental movement like villages. And I suppose the grocery stores in these high-density areas will be supplied from simple farmers who ride their horse-drawn carts into town on market day. Yeah, right...
Not everybody wants to live like a gerbil in a cage, packed in with hundreds of other gerbils. The reason that people buy big houses with lawns and SUV's is that it's a more enjoyable lifestyle.
Money is basically a proxy for resource consumption. A company that conserves money through economies of scale should be good for the environment on balance.
The environmentalist aesthetic is to love villages and despise cities.
as part of his observation that urbanization is slowing population growth (which he contends is slowing growth).
Actually, my observation is exactly the opposite. I seem to hear more sympathy for packing everyone together than for spreading them out in the modern environmentalist rhetoric. That's why "sprawl" has become a cuss-word among this bunch.
For another example, look at the current opinion of Walmart. Just today I heard an NPR story about Walmart that criticized them for their environmental impact (pollution and rainwater runoff from their parking lots, plus the extra air pollution from people driving there, I guess).
I guess my point is that the "environmental movement" is a little conflicted; they apparently either like or dislike centralization and efficiencies of scale, depending on the context.
That should be 1988. By 1998 things had already gone to hell, tech-support-wise.
This thing is crushingly expensive at the moment; the core costs $1990, and the shells to make it a laptop-compatible are almost another $1000. That makes for a $3000 1Ghz laptop running Windows XP. No thanks, I'll wait...