IIRC, Diebold has had the printer-models since the begining. It's been the choice of the counties buying them to go with the printerless models to save money.
It is the lowest level of mmorpg: dice-based "combat" game. It lacks any tatical or strategic elements, which you'd think would be emphasized considering the "massively multiplayerness" of the whole thing.
It's very pretty, but it's no more complicated than bridge or cribbage. In fact, that's insulting to bridge and cribbage. It's a bit more akin to a giant, endless game of slapjack.
My mind was actually changed on seat-belt law by another slashdotter. I had been thinking in terms of personal liberty, and the exceedingly rare odds that a ballistic corpse would strike a living person.
However the argument that changed my mind was this: the seatbelt helps the driver maintain control of the vehicle, which is a critical factor in the scope of an accident. Without a seatbelt, it is very likely that you WILL lose control of the vehicle in a severe accident. Requiring seatbelts for drivers is simply codifying the idea that drivers must maintain maximum control of their vehicles possible.
I've got nothing on passenger seat belt laws though.
No it's the foundry that crafted the steel from which the gun-makers made the gun. When are we going to make heavy industry responsible for all the deaths caused by applications of their products?
You're really better off just getting whatever mp3 player/whatever you like and buying a separate am/fm tuner. Not only do you get the best of either world instead of some kind of stupid compromise between the both (power requirements for the tuner are actually significantly greater than the player for instance) but you get the possibility of recording the radio for later listening, a feature which I haven't seen on ANY mp3/minidisk/tape player/radios in quite some time.
You can get quite small radio tuners quite cheaply now.
Now.. whatever happened to the "battery-free" models powered by the recieved signal? Surely by now we can build pretty good recievers like that.
I'd much prefer a word-count law. At the very least, a single person should have the time to read and understand a year's worth of legislation in a year's time.
And for some reason, I remember the "weapons inspectors" trying to play diplomat, commenting on how nice a guy Saddam was and how cooperative the iraqis were even while puzzling over being prevented from viewing certain sites at certain times. Hans Blix alternately stirred a hornets' nest of global opposition (presumeably in an attempt to garner favor from saddam) and "tried" to avert war.
I'm not entirely convinced they were looking very hard at all for WMDs, as I suspect their goal was the rehabilitation of iraq on the international scene rather than the aparantly unromantic task of thorough confirmation of treaty compliance. Their lack of information was a prime driver in the development of the war.
Of course the price of the war was terrible, but it could've been averted if the UN had at tried to at least appear willing to extract it. Diplomacy only works if the threat of a non-diplomatic resolution is real.
I could've sworn I saw something about a version of matlab compliled with mpich a while back, but I'll admit it could've just been a way to run multiple instances of it at once that i saw. If your situation does not require a whole lot of fiddling, you could put a lot of the code into a compiled.mex file and make that parallel.
Ironically, the nature of MATrix LABoratory's design goals is particularly suitable for multi-processor implimentations. The language is expressly designed to allow/coax users into thinking about problems in massively-parallel ways. It should've been one of the first programs ever to take such advantage.
So who else is printing upside-down partially eaten apples on the back of the silver notebooks seen dotting the café, clacked away on by nose-ring sporting, white-earbud wearing, young adults with sea-wench pictures adorning their sippy-cups?
Mac: trendy and visually appealing computers. Not much substance, but not broken either. overpriced.
Starbucks: trendy and visually appealing coffee shop. Not great or particularly unique cherry seed tea, but satisfying enough. some non-coffee selection, all of which fits the theme. overpriced.
I'd say microsoft is more like "dunkin' donuts," no-frills shop, not particularly satisfying coffee, but drinkable caffiene delivery system. wide selection of other-than-coffee items of varying quality. overpriced.
If you go into a public park on a nice summer day, set up a concert quality sound system (read: very loud, but not that good...) and proceed to shout, "Fuck!" into the microphone so everyone in the park is assaulted by your curse-wording antics, I'm pretty sure you'll be asked to leave (and maybe fined or even arrested.)
Further, you should be asked to leave at the very least. You would be destroying everyone else's enjoyment of a public resource for your own personal interest.
Now, if on the other hand, you want to use your system to play live jazz music or somesuch, you probably still can't just go ahead and do it; someone else might want to play classical piano or something, the dissonance would certainly also be detrimental to others' enjoyment of the park. So you'd go and get a permit. A permit that's not a blanket permission to do whatever you want, but grants you some of the permissions you request in an attempt to satisfy as many people's interest in the space as possible.
Radio spectrum is just like that public park. It's a finite (really finite)* resource that a lot of people want to use. And that is the FCC's job: to allocate that resource in the way that best serves the public.
And anyway, it's not like you can't say your precious cussword over any part of the spectrum, you can use it as much as you want over your cell-phone, C-band television feed, "satellite radio," and a few other bands, much like you could do the same in a clearing way out in the woods, far from most of civilization. But yes, swearing loudly in a small public space should be regulated, and if the FCC doesn't have the constitutional authority to do so, then we should have a constitutional convention and create an authority which can.
Aren't Grand Tourismo et al. really just massive advertisments for car manufacturers? I mean, making people play the game to "unlock" the rest of the ad was pretty bright, but how are they going to move their metal when people steadfastly (and somewhat inexplicably) refuse to pay the extra $.50 (or whatever) for the priviledge of watching another few hours of car commercials?
All biodiesel needs is a better name. The current name evokes images of decaying vegetation and 'dirty' commercial vehicles. I propose we call it, "Energon," assuming Hasbro can be convinced to play along. It even already has the proper connotations as an energy transport system rather than an energy "source."
Your point about bush winning because "he's one of us" seems to contradict your earlier point that clinton was such a loved president. In fact, in the case of both cases, the sentiment held by the vast majority of either of their supporters was tolerance, and "at least he's not {x}."
You've got to face the fact that very few people vote *for* a president anymore. It's the mechanism of voting against the other guy that keeps the two-parties in power. Think about how many times you've heard someone from either side warn against wasting your vote. How can you waste a vote by voting for the person you want?
side rant: Gore was no Clinton either. In fact, I believe that Clinton was setting him up to take the fall on a mild recession, thereby setting the stage for a hillary run in 2004. I can think of no other reason for Greenspan's bewildering interest rate hikes in the 18 months preceeding the 2001 inauguration. On the other hand, recalling Bush's warning of that very recession (and its denunciation as "talking down the economy") I can think of no reason greenspan wasn't replaced by Bush following that very inauguration, or indeed any motivation to comply if it was the Clintons' desire, so it's probably wild speculation on my part.
Clinton was widely loathed, but as a conservative/libertarian, I will give him credit for this much: He didn't accomplish very much. And that's the real hallmark of a good civil servant.
If you kill a foe, you can switch your weapons for his. And you can kill your teammates to do this. (but they won't be very happy about it.) So while you can't pick-pocket, at least you can mug.
It's not going to ever look non-partisan unless everyone's posts agree with your politics. In which case, you don't really have a non-partisan forum at all, but a you-partisan forum. What's worse is politics is nasty enough that even experts cannot be relied upon to settle disputes: they come with their own biases. There's the whole epistemology problem to contend with.
I think the best you can hope for is for everyone to be civil, but even that's only enforceable if everyone's already civil: uncivil moderators would make uncivil moderations. Just look at slashdot's moderation for an example. (and it's a good system for doing what you propose.)
In short, always be wary of politicians who want to "get rid of the politics" surrounding [thing x] because what they really mean is that other politicians should conform to their partisan position. "Bipartisanship," for instance, is really just a weasel word for ending debate without really arguing one's case thoroughly.
Slashdot Mirror
IIRC, Diebold has had the printer-models since the begining. It's been the choice of the counties buying them to go with the printerless models to save money.
Biologists, Paleontologists.. nature sciences, not engineering. They probably didn't know bigger helicopters existed.
It is the lowest level of mmorpg: dice-based "combat" game. It lacks any tatical or strategic elements, which you'd think would be emphasized considering the "massively multiplayerness" of the whole thing.
It's very pretty, but it's no more complicated than bridge or cribbage. In fact, that's insulting to bridge and cribbage. It's a bit more akin to a giant, endless game of slapjack.
My mind was actually changed on seat-belt law by another slashdotter. I had been thinking in terms of personal liberty, and the exceedingly rare odds that a ballistic corpse would strike a living person.
However the argument that changed my mind was this: the seatbelt helps the driver maintain control of the vehicle, which is a critical factor in the scope of an accident. Without a seatbelt, it is very likely that you WILL lose control of the vehicle in a severe accident. Requiring seatbelts for drivers is simply codifying the idea that drivers must maintain maximum control of their vehicles possible.
I've got nothing on passenger seat belt laws though.
It's a show about a time traveller. Just about any one of 'em could've been the first. Except where the "regeneration" has been explicitly shown.
What makes him the 8th? or whatever? Who's to say he wasn't the first doctor?
And.. how exactly would you find yourself needing to recycle a Dell computer without someone having purchased something from Dell?
No it's the foundry that crafted the steel from which the gun-makers made the gun. When are we going to make heavy industry responsible for all the deaths caused by applications of their products?
You're really better off just getting whatever mp3 player/whatever you like and buying a separate am/fm tuner. Not only do you get the best of either world instead of some kind of stupid compromise between the both (power requirements for the tuner are actually significantly greater than the player for instance) but you get the possibility of recording the radio for later listening, a feature which I haven't seen on ANY mp3/minidisk/tape player/radios in quite some time.
You can get quite small radio tuners quite cheaply now.
Now.. whatever happened to the "battery-free" models powered by the recieved signal? Surely by now we can build pretty good recievers like that.
I'd much prefer a word-count law. At the very least, a single person should have the time to read and understand a year's worth of legislation in a year's time.
And for some reason, I remember the "weapons inspectors" trying to play diplomat, commenting on how nice a guy Saddam was and how cooperative the iraqis were even while puzzling over being prevented from viewing certain sites at certain times. Hans Blix alternately stirred a hornets' nest of global opposition (presumeably in an attempt to garner favor from saddam) and "tried" to avert war.
I'm not entirely convinced they were looking very hard at all for WMDs, as I suspect their goal was the rehabilitation of iraq on the international scene rather than the aparantly unromantic task of thorough confirmation of treaty compliance. Their lack of information was a prime driver in the development of the war.
Of course the price of the war was terrible, but it could've been averted if the UN had at tried to at least appear willing to extract it. Diplomacy only works if the threat of a non-diplomatic resolution is real.
Good solution, but the real problem is the belief that yoghurt is food.
I could've sworn I saw something about a version of matlab compliled with mpich a while back, but I'll admit it could've just been a way to run multiple instances of it at once that i saw. If your situation does not require a whole lot of fiddling, you could put a lot of the code into a compiled .mex file and make that parallel.
Ironically, the nature of MATrix LABoratory's design goals is particularly suitable for multi-processor implimentations. The language is expressly designed to allow/coax users into thinking about problems in massively-parallel ways. It should've been one of the first programs ever to take such advantage.
A very special episode on an all-new, "CSI:<insert town here>"
So who else is printing upside-down partially eaten apples on the back of the silver notebooks seen dotting the café, clacked away on by nose-ring sporting, white-earbud wearing, young adults with sea-wench pictures adorning their sippy-cups?
Mac: trendy and visually appealing computers. Not much substance, but not broken either. overpriced.
Starbucks: trendy and visually appealing coffee shop. Not great or particularly unique cherry seed tea, but satisfying enough. some non-coffee selection, all of which fits the theme. overpriced.
I'd say microsoft is more like "dunkin' donuts," no-frills shop, not particularly satisfying coffee, but drinkable caffiene delivery system. wide selection of other-than-coffee items of varying quality. overpriced.
If you go into a public park on a nice summer day, set up a concert quality sound system (read: very loud, but not that good...) and proceed to shout, "Fuck!" into the microphone so everyone in the park is assaulted by your curse-wording antics, I'm pretty sure you'll be asked to leave (and maybe fined or even arrested.)
Further, you should be asked to leave at the very least. You would be destroying everyone else's enjoyment of a public resource for your own personal interest.
Now, if on the other hand, you want to use your system to play live jazz music or somesuch, you probably still can't just go ahead and do it; someone else might want to play classical piano or something, the dissonance would certainly also be detrimental to others' enjoyment of the park. So you'd go and get a permit. A permit that's not a blanket permission to do whatever you want, but grants you some of the permissions you request in an attempt to satisfy as many people's interest in the space as possible.
Radio spectrum is just like that public park. It's a finite (really finite)* resource that a lot of people want to use. And that is the FCC's job: to allocate that resource in the way that best serves the public.
And anyway, it's not like you can't say your precious cussword over any part of the spectrum, you can use it as much as you want over your cell-phone, C-band television feed, "satellite radio," and a few other bands, much like you could do the same in a clearing way out in the woods, far from most of civilization. But yes, swearing loudly in a small public space should be regulated, and if the FCC doesn't have the constitutional authority to do so, then we should have a constitutional convention and create an authority which can.
No more than two years from now.
I mean, now...
Err, now?
Aren't Grand Tourismo et al. really just massive advertisments for car manufacturers? I mean, making people play the game to "unlock" the rest of the ad was pretty bright, but how are they going to move their metal when people steadfastly (and somewhat inexplicably) refuse to pay the extra $.50 (or whatever) for the priviledge of watching another few hours of car commercials?
All biodiesel needs is a better name. The current name evokes images of decaying vegetation and 'dirty' commercial vehicles. I propose we call it, "Energon," assuming Hasbro can be convinced to play along. It even already has the proper connotations as an energy transport system rather than an energy "source."
Your point about bush winning because "he's one of us" seems to contradict your earlier point that clinton was such a loved president. In fact, in the case of both cases, the sentiment held by the vast majority of either of their supporters was tolerance, and "at least he's not {x}."
You've got to face the fact that very few people vote *for* a president anymore. It's the mechanism of voting against the other guy that keeps the two-parties in power. Think about how many times you've heard someone from either side warn against wasting your vote. How can you waste a vote by voting for the person you want?
side rant: Gore was no Clinton either. In fact, I believe that Clinton was setting him up to take the fall on a mild recession, thereby setting the stage for a hillary run in 2004. I can think of no other reason for Greenspan's bewildering interest rate hikes in the 18 months preceeding the 2001 inauguration. On the other hand, recalling Bush's warning of that very recession (and its denunciation as "talking down the economy") I can think of no reason greenspan wasn't replaced by Bush following that very inauguration, or indeed any motivation to comply if it was the Clintons' desire, so it's probably wild speculation on my part.
Clinton was widely loathed, but as a conservative/libertarian, I will give him credit for this much: He didn't accomplish very much. And that's the real hallmark of a good civil servant.
If you kill a foe, you can switch your weapons for his. And you can kill your teammates to do this. (but they won't be very happy about it.) So while you can't pick-pocket, at least you can mug.
It's not going to ever look non-partisan unless everyone's posts agree with your politics. In which case, you don't really have a non-partisan forum at all, but a you-partisan forum. What's worse is politics is nasty enough that even experts cannot be relied upon to settle disputes: they come with their own biases. There's the whole epistemology problem to contend with.
I think the best you can hope for is for everyone to be civil, but even that's only enforceable if everyone's already civil: uncivil moderators would make uncivil moderations. Just look at slashdot's moderation for an example. (and it's a good system for doing what you propose.)
In short, always be wary of politicians who want to "get rid of the politics" surrounding [thing x] because what they really mean is that other politicians should conform to their partisan position. "Bipartisanship," for instance, is really just a weasel word for ending debate without really arguing one's case thoroughly.
I'm confused. What's the difference between a donut and a coffee cup?
I, too am a big fan of gridlock. The worst thing government can do about it is something.
So.. what you're saying is they should've wrapped in a few extra wires of the longest length to allow for replacements?