MSRP may be $30-$40, but I've never seen an actual hardcover that was actually selling for that that wasn't giant book o' stunning pictures. Most of the time you get them for "40% off!!!" which brings new hardcovers into the 17-24 range.
Publishing is not the music industry and it is not the movie industry. Almost all the profit is spent in up-front costs before the product even hits the streets.
Got it, it's the movie industry. Unless those "up-front" costs are actually printing and storage costs. But that wouldn't jive well with your assertion that printing is a tiny fraction of the cost of bringing a book to market.
There is no need to be entering your password in every time. If you're logging in frequently, see man pages for ssh-agent, ssh-keygen, and ssh-add.
It's not that difficult to set up, although the first time takes few minutes to understand. Your OS may also have integration into its keychain, depending on what you're using.
Antarctica. But it doesn't have readily accessible natural resources, so you're going to have to figure out how to sustain an economy sufficient to enable you to bring in most of your foodstuffs.
"If you don't have anything to hide, you don't have anything to fear" is exactly backwards. If you've actually committed a crime, I don't care about your privacy. I only care about the privacy of people who haven't committed crimes. I think we should care about it so much that we protect the criminals, too.
Protected rights aren't supposed to be loopholes with which to "get away with stuff." That's just a side effect of the real purpose of protecting your rights.
Just because your data is boring to a law enforcement agent, does not mean that your data will be boring to everyone that subsequently has access to it, including people who are in addition to being LEOs also people who have an interest in you, personally.
The biggest mistake is to draw. You only need to pull the weapon out of the holster if you intend to aim with the sights. Otherwise, you can just shoot from the hip and cut a lot of unnecessary motion out of it. At close range it probably doesn't matter that much anyway.
Well sort of. I was really shooting [funny], but regardless, the pollution credits themselves are referential, you can always "make more" in the same way you can "make more" money by printing it.
But there is a larger issue with pollution credits: namely that they are often arbitrary, and always capricious: they are predicated on the idea that certain compounds are harmful to everyone else to be pumping into the environment, so if you just pay some bureaucrat, you can pump this "acceptable" level on everyone.
In other words, they're suspicious. The governing body has no particular motivation to make sure that the regulated substance really is harmful, and further, if it is harmful then in the case that bans would be appropriate, they will not be considered as readily since the government has a financial stake in continued credit production.
It depends on how they reject it. If they're just silently rejecting anything that comes through incorrectly oriented, then they're spending no effort, and they don't have to review the patent of the person who was too lazy to check the orientation and later to check the progress of the patent.
Now, maybe they handle it in such a way that it results in more effort for everyone, but there are applications of a "no upside-downeys" that result in confounding shovelware patents and saving effort for the patent office.
No, the numbers in a bank account represent a quantity of currency which itself is only referential in value.
In other words, the bank account is worse. Pollution credits represent a real thing: number of pounds of x you can dump on everyone. Your numbers in a bank account have to be converted into money before that can be turned into goods.
No, it's aesthetic. Look at the pictures that you have provided. The glass in those pictures demonstrates no particular affinity for lining up thick side down, merely for "cutting up a circle so that the pieces can be relatively efficiently reassembled into a square." My first guess would be that refiring the scraps was too wasteful compared to the clever jigsaw puzzle engaged in, and my second guess would be that it just looked cool and all "recycley" despite being hugely labor intensive.
But the text of the article is the most damning on the "structural" theory: panes are often found "carelessly" laid thick side not-down. Yet those panes have survived the intervening years just as well as their "carefully" laid counterparts.
I think the evidence is most supportive of the following assertion: ancient glass, for process reasons, tends to have a thick side, which was generally placed in windows with the thick side down, for aesthetic reasons.
I fail to see the big catastrophe here. Pollution credits are a renewable resource, you can manufacture as many of them as you want by just changing the orientation of the magnetic field in a microscopic quantity of iron oxide.
I mean, all they need to do is give the companies who got scammed extra credit under some pretense (perhaps they were nice at recess). It's just numbers on a page.
Great Idea.... Computer management, clickly clicky, drop list.. NTFS or FAT. Which one of those is ZFS?
Let's try another option. $ mkfs.zfs/dev/disk/by-label/MyMainDisk
No command 'mkfs.zfs' found, did you mean:
Command 'mkfs.gfs' from package 'gfs-tools' (main)
Command 'mkfs.hfs' from package 'hfsprogs' (universe)
Command 'mkfs.bfs' from package 'util-linux' (main)
Command 'mkfs.xfs' from package 'xfsprogs' (main)
Command 'mkfs.ufs' from package 'ufsutils' (universe)
Command 'mkfs.jfs' from package 'jfsutils' (main) mkfs.zfs: command not found
Okay...hmm.
$ diskutil listFilesystems | grep -i zfs
hm, nothing.
I suppose it *should* be possible to do in software, and I'd even imagine that like RAID, the benefits of doing it in hardware become more dubious as tome goes on. However, there is the question of the least effort way of getting it done in "my" computer right now.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that was due to the extremely short window between when compuserv started going after gif offenders and when the patent for gif actually ran out. IIRC, png wasn't even supported in IE until after the patent on gif ran out, further hampering its adoption.
Aesthetic reasons actually, and that doesn't mean that glass doesn't creep. Just that it won't creep anywhere near as dramatically as seen in old windows in time periods as short as millions of years, which is significantly longer than the age of most buildings with windows.
And I hate physical keyboards on devices where the keys are so small my finger covers five at a time. I hate the wasted real-estate that could've instead been used for a bigger screen, and therefore a bigger screen-keyboard with almost proper-sized key-contact-patches.
I hate them even more when they waste space making a "full" qwerty keyboard half the size of a deck of cards. I'm a touch-typist, and such things feel like a cruel joke at my expense. If you must have a physical keyboard of that size, put some UI research into making one with decent-sized keys, perhaps a chorded setup. People can learn to play the guitar in a month, they can learn to type on a chorded keyboard, too.
Touch-typing is about muscle memory, which you can't possibly have transferred from a full-sized keyboard to a phone-sized or book-sized device (and which in my experience actually does transfer pretty well to screen keyboards if they're big enough and not oriented vertically). If there is a new device that touch typing would make sense on, that doesn't mean that qwerty touch-typing is the answer: there may also be a new layout and style of touch-typing that makes more sense for the form factor, like the aforementioned chorded keyboard.
So you can take your old-man "I don't want anything different" whining and buy one of the billions of physical key devices that are constantly being excreted onto the market by unimaginative cost-cutters like RIM. Let there be a few devices that cater to those of us who are willing to try new UI vocabularies and evaluate them on their own merits.
Uh yeah, or that the living might want to sell the rights to their works and not have a corporation say, "look you're 70, so we'll give you $300 for it, but we're pretty comfortable just waiting for you to die."
70 years after death might be excessive, but in order for the selling price of a work to be related to the value of the work, copy rights need to be somewhat protected from the author's death. I'd suggest a fixed term that is smaller than 21 years. One generation is more than enough of a monopoly on cultural items.
If you train a mule and you don't need it, it keeps eating anyway, and you can't let up on the training in case you do eventually need it. Then you have to provision the plane that brings it to the front, and scoop the poop after the long trip.
Once you build a mule-bot, you stick it in a box until you need it. It doesn't need fuel until it arrives in theater, and you don't need to hose down your aircraft after bringing it in.
Good point. Let's take this opportunity of AMD doing something for the open source community to bitch about all the stuff they didn't do yet. Way to play right into nVidia's hands, smart guy.
Slashdot Mirror
MSRP may be $30-$40, but I've never seen an actual hardcover that was actually selling for that that wasn't giant book o' stunning pictures. Most of the time you get them for "40% off!!!" which brings new hardcovers into the 17-24 range.
Publishing is not the music industry and it is not the movie industry. Almost all the profit is spent in up-front costs before the product even hits the streets.
Got it, it's the movie industry. Unless those "up-front" costs are actually printing and storage costs. But that wouldn't jive well with your assertion that printing is a tiny fraction of the cost of bringing a book to market.
That's a maddeningly recursive solution...
There is no need to be entering your password in every time. If you're logging in frequently, see man pages for ssh-agent, ssh-keygen, and ssh-add.
It's not that difficult to set up, although the first time takes few minutes to understand. Your OS may also have integration into its keychain, depending on what you're using.
You can just click through that? There's an easier way than going into .ssh/known_keys and deleting the offending line?
I thought it was like that to force you to think about why the host you're connecting with might be presenting you with a new key...
Antarctica. But it doesn't have readily accessible natural resources, so you're going to have to figure out how to sustain an economy sufficient to enable you to bring in most of your foodstuffs.
"If you don't have anything to hide, you don't have anything to fear" is exactly backwards. If you've actually committed a crime, I don't care about your privacy. I only care about the privacy of people who haven't committed crimes. I think we should care about it so much that we protect the criminals, too.
Protected rights aren't supposed to be loopholes with which to "get away with stuff." That's just a side effect of the real purpose of protecting your rights.
Just because your data is boring to a law enforcement agent, does not mean that your data will be boring to everyone that subsequently has access to it, including people who are in addition to being LEOs also people who have an interest in you, personally.
The biggest mistake is to draw. You only need to pull the weapon out of the holster if you intend to aim with the sights. Otherwise, you can just shoot from the hip and cut a lot of unnecessary motion out of it. At close range it probably doesn't matter that much anyway.
Well sort of. I was really shooting [funny], but regardless, the pollution credits themselves are referential, you can always "make more" in the same way you can "make more" money by printing it.
But there is a larger issue with pollution credits: namely that they are often arbitrary, and always capricious: they are predicated on the idea that certain compounds are harmful to everyone else to be pumping into the environment, so if you just pay some bureaucrat, you can pump this "acceptable" level on everyone.
In other words, they're suspicious. The governing body has no particular motivation to make sure that the regulated substance really is harmful, and further, if it is harmful then in the case that bans would be appropriate, they will not be considered as readily since the government has a financial stake in continued credit production.
It depends on how they reject it. If they're just silently rejecting anything that comes through incorrectly oriented, then they're spending no effort, and they don't have to review the patent of the person who was too lazy to check the orientation and later to check the progress of the patent.
Now, maybe they handle it in such a way that it results in more effort for everyone, but there are applications of a "no upside-downeys" that result in confounding shovelware patents and saving effort for the patent office.
What if they pre-rotate the paper by 180 degrees instead? Would that violate the patent?
I'm sure I've heard this description before somewhere...
No, the numbers in a bank account represent a quantity of currency which itself is only referential in value.
In other words, the bank account is worse. Pollution credits represent a real thing: number of pounds of x you can dump on everyone. Your numbers in a bank account have to be converted into money before that can be turned into goods.
No, it's aesthetic. Look at the pictures that you have provided. The glass in those pictures demonstrates no particular affinity for lining up thick side down, merely for "cutting up a circle so that the pieces can be relatively efficiently reassembled into a square." My first guess would be that refiring the scraps was too wasteful compared to the clever jigsaw puzzle engaged in, and my second guess would be that it just looked cool and all "recycley" despite being hugely labor intensive.
But the text of the article is the most damning on the "structural" theory: panes are often found "carelessly" laid thick side not-down. Yet those panes have survived the intervening years just as well as their "carefully" laid counterparts.
I think the evidence is most supportive of the following assertion: ancient glass, for process reasons, tends to have a thick side, which was generally placed in windows with the thick side down, for aesthetic reasons.
I fail to see the big catastrophe here. Pollution credits are a renewable resource, you can manufacture as many of them as you want by just changing the orientation of the magnetic field in a microscopic quantity of iron oxide.
I mean, all they need to do is give the companies who got scammed extra credit under some pretense (perhaps they were nice at recess). It's just numbers on a page.
Great Idea. ... Computer management, clickly clicky, drop list.. NTFS or FAT. Which one of those is ZFS?
Let's try another option. /dev/disk/by-label/MyMainDisk
$ mkfs.zfs
No command 'mkfs.zfs' found, did you mean:
Command 'mkfs.gfs' from package 'gfs-tools' (main)
Command 'mkfs.hfs' from package 'hfsprogs' (universe)
Command 'mkfs.bfs' from package 'util-linux' (main)
Command 'mkfs.xfs' from package 'xfsprogs' (main)
Command 'mkfs.ufs' from package 'ufsutils' (universe)
Command 'mkfs.jfs' from package 'jfsutils' (main)
mkfs.zfs: command not found
Okay...hmm.
$ diskutil listFilesystems | grep -i zfs
hm, nothing.
I suppose it *should* be possible to do in software, and I'd even imagine that like RAID, the benefits of doing it in hardware become more dubious as tome goes on. However, there is the question of the least effort way of getting it done in "my" computer right now.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that was due to the extremely short window between when compuserv started going after gif offenders and when the patent for gif actually ran out. IIRC, png wasn't even supported in IE until after the patent on gif ran out, further hampering its adoption.
That would be interesting to find out, also whether or not the session used to retrieve the root certs is itself secure...
Aesthetic reasons actually, and that doesn't mean that glass doesn't creep. Just that it won't creep anywhere near as dramatically as seen in old windows in time periods as short as millions of years, which is significantly longer than the age of most buildings with windows.
And I hate physical keyboards on devices where the keys are so small my finger covers five at a time. I hate the wasted real-estate that could've instead been used for a bigger screen, and therefore a bigger screen-keyboard with almost proper-sized key-contact-patches.
I hate them even more when they waste space making a "full" qwerty keyboard half the size of a deck of cards. I'm a touch-typist, and such things feel like a cruel joke at my expense. If you must have a physical keyboard of that size, put some UI research into making one with decent-sized keys, perhaps a chorded setup. People can learn to play the guitar in a month, they can learn to type on a chorded keyboard, too.
Touch-typing is about muscle memory, which you can't possibly have transferred from a full-sized keyboard to a phone-sized or book-sized device (and which in my experience actually does transfer pretty well to screen keyboards if they're big enough and not oriented vertically). If there is a new device that touch typing would make sense on, that doesn't mean that qwerty touch-typing is the answer: there may also be a new layout and style of touch-typing that makes more sense for the form factor, like the aforementioned chorded keyboard.
So you can take your old-man "I don't want anything different" whining and buy one of the billions of physical key devices that are constantly being excreted onto the market by unimaginative cost-cutters like RIM. Let there be a few devices that cater to those of us who are willing to try new UI vocabularies and evaluate them on their own merits.
Uh yeah, or that the living might want to sell the rights to their works and not have a corporation say, "look you're 70, so we'll give you $300 for it, but we're pretty comfortable just waiting for you to die."
70 years after death might be excessive, but in order for the selling price of a work to be related to the value of the work, copy rights need to be somewhat protected from the author's death. I'd suggest a fixed term that is smaller than 21 years. One generation is more than enough of a monopoly on cultural items.
I really have to wonder if the N. Koreans know what the name of their missile sounds like in English.
I really can't say it's an inappropriate name for a missile, though.
They run on liquid hydrocarbons. Pour some out from the fuel dump at the motor pool.
Bah, who wants Trident?
If you train a mule and you don't need it, it keeps eating anyway, and you can't let up on the training in case you do eventually need it. Then you have to provision the plane that brings it to the front, and scoop the poop after the long trip.
Once you build a mule-bot, you stick it in a box until you need it. It doesn't need fuel until it arrives in theater, and you don't need to hose down your aircraft after bringing it in.
Good point. Let's take this opportunity of AMD doing something for the open source community to bitch about all the stuff they didn't do yet. Way to play right into nVidia's hands, smart guy.