So the Earth's rotation is theorized by one NASA geophysicist to have sped up by 3 microseconds.
Is that 3 microseconds per minute? Per hour? Per day? Per month? Per year? Per century? The importance of this figure depends on the unit by which we divide.
If it's 3 microsec/minute, then that's 525,600 microsec/year *faster* that we rotate to reach 1 year, or, 525.6milliseconds/year, or 0.5256 seconds/year, or 52.56 seconds/century (ignoring leap-years).
But if it's 3 microsec/century, well -- clearly that's of far less significance. Still arguably important, but not nearly as much so. Personally, I wouldn't lose sleep over it even if it is 3 microsec/minute, but for timing purposes in physics, and quite possibly for keeping time in-sync in world financial markets, among other examples of relevance, that could be well worth considering.
My gripe in all this is as follows: this is Slashdot, not USA Today. I expect at least a fundamental grasp of science and math here - is that asking too much? We learned about the importance of units in elementary school; have we already forgotten that lesson?
IMO, we ought to legalize all drugs, tax the hell out of those which seriously impair one's ability to operate machinery (e.g. cars, guns, etc.) so as to pay for the consequences which may result from legalization. Regulate the sale of the harder drugs (coke, heroin, etc.) by requiring a doctor's prescription -- a prescription as a recreational drug, much like Viagra... But softer drugs ought to be available over-the-counter for adults.
Eliminate drug offenses, and your rate would go to around 1 in 284 (about 0.35%) Americans... Plus, by freeing all those people, we'd have more people here working productively and therefore able to share the cost of incarcerating the *real* criminals -- the murderers, rapists, fraudsters, etc., so the average annual cost of incarcerating prisoners would drop...
Hey now, cut it out with that economics logic! We here on/. don't understand economics, but because it contradicts our belief that software can be free, "just like air" (as Stallman once wrote), we don't like economics! So there!
Let's face it: the main reason people use OSS is because it doesn't cost money -- I'd use WinXP on my desktop if GNU/Linux or FreeBSD cost as much as WinXP. No, the truth is, a small minority of people donate their time to some cause they see as destructive of MSFT, meanwhile the rest of us free-ride on the output of their hatred-driven work without ever giving back a dime of money or a minute of time...
Unfortunately, even legitimate, legal software sometimes comes loaded w/ spyware.
My father installed Broderbund's "Family Tree Maker" and it installed an app which AdAware determined was spyware (IIRC, the binary was "ddagent.exe"). It runs as a daemon. I looked up the app once and it's supposed to send the family tree data you've inputted back to Broderbund so that they can build a big, interconnected family tree of all their software's users.
It's relatively harmless, really, but it's still an invasion of privacy. Some people just don't want their family tree to be known by Broderbund...
Re:It depends on which press you're talking about
on
The Media in 2014
·
· Score: 1
I wish I had mod points. That is an excellent survey of big-name, mainstream print sources which are still of high quality (I've never read the Atlantic, but I'm familiar w/ the others, particularly the NYT, WSJ, and Economist).
The games are still legal, they can still be bought and sold, this is not censorship to repress violent video games.
They *can* still be bought and sold -- but they cannot be bought and sold by children.
Thus, IT IS A BAN. That was my point the entire time.
Try re-reading my post.
you're presuming that a restriction on the sale of video games equates to a restriction of usage, and that's foolish.
It is a restriction of usage in that usage cannot occur unless "privileged" people (i.e. adults) make the sale. Without the privileged class handling step 1 (sale), there cannot exist step 2 (usage).
Restricting sale, therefore, restricts usage. In this case, the sale (and the resulting usage) to children, is restricted, unless their parents buy the games for them. It makes usage conditional, whereas the First Amendment makes no such conditions...
Main Entry: ban Function: transitive verb Inflected Forms: banned; banning : to prohibit or forbid esp. by legal means (as by statute or order) ; also : to prohibit the use, performance, or distribution of
He seeks to impose legislation that will prohibit the distribution, sale, rental and availability of mature video games to children younger than 18.
Look you neanderthal moral minority retard, notice the common word "prohibit" there? It is a prohibition -- a ban -- on "the distribution, sale, rental and availability of mature video games to children younger than 18."
It is not a full ban. It is a partial ban aimed at children. BUT IT IS STILL A BAN, BY LEGAL DEFINITION.
Good lord there are some illiterate dumbasses on Slashdot.
Hello, how is this different than R-rated movies today?
I used to work in a movie theater here in IL a few years ago. The R ratings are *voluntarily* enforced -- not *legislatively* (i.e. forced on everybody by the whims of a politician). If I wanted to let people into the theater who were under 17, I could. But I didn't, because my boss felt we ought to enforce that restriction, and I didn't feel like losing my job (or getting reprimanded), so, I checked the ages of people who looked like they might be under 17.
Mature games are intended for a mature audience and you better believe we shouldn't have 8 year olds playing GTA3 unless their parents approve of it and buy it for them.
So? How is legislation necessary to accomplish this? Since when did boycotts go out of style?
What's the crazy backlash to this? It's absolutely sound to set up laws prohibiting sales of these games to minors (just as it prohibits sales of pr0n to minors).
Yeah, if you believe in state regulation of free speech. However, the First Amendment applies to *all* people -- not just adults. Consult a lawyer if you don't believe me.
Prohibiting pr0n sales to minors also violates the 1st. Frankly, I don't see why seeing a woman's tits -- an entirely-natural part of the human body, occurring in approximately 50% of the world population -- is somehow *worse* for children to see than to see people being murdered in various action movies on TV, movies, etc.. Or even in war videos from Iraq and elsewhere (but unlike movies and such, those videos are real, and at some age, IMO children *should* see those things, to see how violent the world can be...). Such is the Puritanical American culture, however.
If parents choose that their kids are mature enough for said games then they'll go and buy it for their kids. If not, then kids won't be playing games that they likely aren't ready for.
There's still no legislative requirement for this to occur, however. If the parent finds GTA3 in their kid's room, they can throw it out. That teaches the kid not to spend $50 of his/her money on something they aren't allowed to have -- quite a powerful lesson to children who, usually, have little money to begin with.
The world does not need *your* morals inflicted on it, because not everybody lives by *your* morals. Yet, infliction of morals is precisely what laws like this do...
Wrong, it *is* a ban. The law would prevent -- or "ban" -- children from having access to "mature" content. It is a targeted ban -- a ban aimed at children, not adults.
However, it is still a ban by any reasonable definition of the word "ban". Just not a *full* ban.
Maybe not as much as the outgoing Republican Gov. Ryan, whose administration was nearly as corrupt as that of Richard Nixon's (selling licenses in exchange for bribes to people who can't even read English, anybody?), but he's close. Besides, this is Illinois. If it doesn't turn up that Blagojevich's administration is corrupt in some way, I'll be surprised.
Blagojevich thinks letting off-duty and retired cops carry concealed weapons is OK -- but not the citizens. In fact, he wants *more* restrictions on the citizens' right to bear arms (which is codified in our state constitution even more-powerfully and clearly than the U.S. Constitution, BTW). Yeah, way to create an unequal society there "Rod". I'm just *sure* former and off-duty cops won't abuse their power. *rolls eyes*
The only thing Blagojevich has done right is not raise taxes; a considerable accomplishment for a Democrat, I admit, especially since we have merely a 3% flat income tax - one of the lower state income taxes in the nation. That, and he's defied the federal govn't and is working on getting prescription drugs reimported to the state (at least on that point, the Democrats like free trade...). I remain indifferent about his stance on flavored condoms.
But in Blagojevich is still a fan of bigger government. It doesn't surprise me that he wants to restrict the right of the people (including children) to gain access to the "distribution, sale, rental and availability of mature video games to children younger than 18".
Blagojevich fails to recognize the responsibility of parents to ensure that their children are not misbehaving. He wants the nanny-state to take care of our kids; not us, the individual adults who borne them.
So what exactly is the goal of KDE? To beat Microsoft at providing a flashy, splashy GUI that any retard can use, or is it to provide free and open-source software to the world, regardless of the end use of the software?
Arguing for the latter is the nobler goal; arguing for the former is the practical goal. Which is it?
It is official; Slashdot confirms: PeopleSoft is being eaten!
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered PeopleSoft community when IDC confirmed that PeopleSoft market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Slashdot poll which plainly states that PeopleSoft has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. PeopleSoft is being swallowed by Oracle, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive database test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict PeopleSoft's future. The hand writing is on the wall: PeopleSoft faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for PeopleSoft because PeopleSoft is being eaten. Things are looking very bad for PeopleSoft. As many of us are already aware, PeopleSoft continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
PeopleSoft Enterprise is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time PeopleSoft Enterprise developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: PeopleSoft Enterprise is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
PeopleSoft EnterpriseOne leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of PeopleSoft EnterpriseOne. How many users of dbase are there? Let's see. The number of PeopleSoft EnterpriseOne versus dbase posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 dbase users. DB2 posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of dbase posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of DB2. A recent article put PeopleSoft Enterprise at about 80 percent of the PeopleSoft market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 PeopleSoft Enterprise users. This is consistent with the number of PeopleSoft Enterprise Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, PeopleSoft Enterprise went out of business and was taken over by IBM who sell another troubled OS. Now IBM is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that PeopleSoft has steadily declined in market share. PeopleSoft is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If PeopleSoft is to survive at all it will be among database dilettante dabblers. PeopleSoft continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, PeopleSoft is dead.
2) Get PocketPC or Zaurus, both of which have a non-flat, hierarchical filesystem
3) Transfer data and be happy...
Your problems are a large part of why I abandoned my old PalmOS-based Visor Deluxe years ago. I recently got a Zaurus 6000L and haven't looked back, and I'm much happier now. A real computer fits in my hand, not some Palm toy.
Seriously, Palm devices suck if you do anything besides basic PIM stuff (as organizers, however, they are fantastic, and better than my Z. But I barely use my Z for PIM stuff, so I don't care)...
Whoopee. My Zaurus 6000L has 480x640. Try web-surfing on your P910, then come back after you've stopped crying and you can ask to use my Zaurus...
Also, let me know when you can get a command-line with some semblance of *nix's functionality on that phone, not to mention USB host capability. Oh, and the ability to use the phone on all networks (Sprint, Nextel, Cingular/AT&T, GSM, etc.), not just one (that way, if I don't like one provider, I can switch to another).
The idea of a PDA/phone combo is a fantastic one; it's the logical convergence of the two devices currently weighing down the cargo pants pockets of us gadget geeks. But I've yet to see such a PDA/phone which does both functions as well as the respective separate devices which it replaces...
I'm pinning my hopes on the PocketPCs moving in this direction, since unfortunately, the Zaurus never really caught on in the U.S..:( A Zaurus 6000L w/ a cellphone built-in? *That* I would go for!
Then OOo's own file format is worthless. Customers don't give a crap about your open, XML file format; customers care about whether they get their Word/Excel/PPT files to work, the first time, every time.
Try sending an OOo-generated, non-Office-compatible file to the next person asking for your resume. See how long it takes them to say "I need it in Word or.txt format please" if they're nice, or delete the resume and ignore you entirely if they're not so nice.
Face it, the MS Office file formats still rule the world, like it or not.
Does anything exist which repels birds, e.g. sounds audible only to birds or something?
I'm thinking that if we have some way of repelling birds from windmills, we can cut down the number of birds killed by them. I'm just not aware of what would be necessary for doing this...
Hope the spam filtering doesn't suck as badly in 1.0 as it does in 0.7.3 (I once "upgraded" to 0.8.0, but downgraded to 0.7.3 because 0.8.0 wasn't reading my various mail folders correctly for some reason).
The Thunderbird filter catches (guesstimating) about 80% of what comes in -- not bad, except that other filters are supposed to be capable of > 90%... I thought Thunderbird's filter was supposed to implement a Bayes neural-net to detect and thus filter the junk from not-junk?
Slashdot Mirror
I can hang my tinfoil hat in on the hatrack while I'm inside my house now, right?
Oh @#%@#%98@!#!!! Nevermind, I totally mis-thought this problem out. 1 rotation = 24 hours, duh.
So it goes for being on less than 3 hours' sleep.
My apologies to the poster and those wasting their time reading these 2 posts.
So the Earth's rotation is theorized by one NASA geophysicist to have sped up by 3 microseconds.
Is that 3 microseconds per minute? Per hour? Per day? Per month? Per year? Per century? The importance of this figure depends on the unit by which we divide.
If it's 3 microsec/minute, then that's 525,600 microsec/year *faster* that we rotate to reach 1 year, or, 525.6milliseconds/year, or 0.5256 seconds/year, or 52.56 seconds/century (ignoring leap-years).
But if it's 3 microsec/century, well -- clearly that's of far less significance. Still arguably important, but not nearly as much so. Personally, I wouldn't lose sleep over it even if it is 3 microsec/minute, but for timing purposes in physics, and quite possibly for keeping time in-sync in world financial markets, among other examples of relevance, that could be well worth considering.
My gripe in all this is as follows: this is Slashdot, not USA Today. I expect at least a fundamental grasp of science and math here - is that asking too much? We learned about the importance of units in elementary school; have we already forgotten that lesson?
As of June 2002, 1 in 142 US residents are in jail. The average annual cost to incarcerate an inmate in state prison is $22,650 .
FYI, about half of the people in federal prisons, and around 20% of those in state prisons, (or 27%, by the DEA's numbers, though there they say the federal rate is about 5%, but this contradicts the Federal Bureau of Prisons figure of 54%) are in on nothing more than mere drug offenses, correct?
IMO, we ought to legalize all drugs, tax the hell out of those which seriously impair one's ability to operate machinery (e.g. cars, guns, etc.) so as to pay for the consequences which may result from legalization. Regulate the sale of the harder drugs (coke, heroin, etc.) by requiring a doctor's prescription -- a prescription as a recreational drug, much like Viagra... But softer drugs ought to be available over-the-counter for adults.
Legalizing marijuana alone would end the arrests of about 750k Americans/year and save the U.S. $7b in enforcing this prohibition, plus another $2b in housing weed-charged inmates.
Eliminate drug offenses, and your rate would go to around 1 in 284 (about 0.35%) Americans... Plus, by freeing all those people, we'd have more people here working productively and therefore able to share the cost of incarcerating the *real* criminals -- the murderers, rapists, fraudsters, etc., so the average annual cost of incarcerating prisoners would drop...
Hey now, cut it out with that economics logic! We here on /. don't understand economics, but because it contradicts our belief that software can be free, "just like air" (as Stallman once wrote), we don't like economics! So there!
Let's face it: the main reason people use OSS is because it doesn't cost money -- I'd use WinXP on my desktop if GNU/Linux or FreeBSD cost as much as WinXP. No, the truth is, a small minority of people donate their time to some cause they see as destructive of MSFT, meanwhile the rest of us free-ride on the output of their hatred-driven work without ever giving back a dime of money or a minute of time...
Don't install warez.
Unfortunately, even legitimate, legal software sometimes comes loaded w/ spyware.
My father installed Broderbund's "Family Tree Maker" and it installed an app which AdAware determined was spyware (IIRC, the binary was "ddagent.exe"). It runs as a daemon. I looked up the app once and it's supposed to send the family tree data you've inputted back to Broderbund so that they can build a big, interconnected family tree of all their software's users.
It's relatively harmless, really, but it's still an invasion of privacy. Some people just don't want their family tree to be known by Broderbund...
I resent that!
I wish I had mod points. That is an excellent survey of big-name, mainstream print sources which are still of high quality (I've never read the Atlantic, but I'm familiar w/ the others, particularly the NYT, WSJ, and Economist).
They *can* still be bought and sold -- but they cannot be bought and sold by children.
Thus, IT IS A BAN. That was my point the entire time.
Try re-reading my post.
you're presuming that a restriction on the sale of video games equates to a restriction of usage, and that's foolish.
It is a restriction of usage in that usage cannot occur unless "privileged" people (i.e. adults) make the sale. Without the privileged class handling step 1 (sale), there cannot exist step 2 (usage).
Restricting sale, therefore, restricts usage. In this case, the sale (and the resulting usage) to children, is restricted, unless their parents buy the games for them. It makes usage conditional, whereas the First Amendment makes no such conditions...
Yeah, and that too, unfortunately...
The IL Toll Authority -- which was supposed to be disbanded like 10+ years ago -- takes the phrase "highway robbery" too literally.
From dictionary.com:
From the
Look you neanderthal moral minority retard, notice the common word "prohibit" there? It is a prohibition -- a ban -- on "the distribution, sale, rental and availability of mature video games to children younger than 18."
It is not a full ban. It is a partial ban aimed at children. BUT IT IS STILL A BAN, BY LEGAL DEFINITION.
Good lord there are some illiterate dumbasses on Slashdot.
This is the government doing it, not private business. It's bad that private businesses do it, but IMO, it's far-worse that the govn't does.
That said, I'm standing by for the inevitable flood of posts about Bush's fascist policies taking away our rights.
Feel free to put up a defense of how this is *not* the case...
Hello, how is this different than R-rated movies today?
I used to work in a movie theater here in IL a few years ago. The R ratings are *voluntarily* enforced -- not *legislatively* (i.e. forced on everybody by the whims of a politician). If I wanted to let people into the theater who were under 17, I could. But I didn't, because my boss felt we ought to enforce that restriction, and I didn't feel like losing my job (or getting reprimanded), so, I checked the ages of people who looked like they might be under 17.
Mature games are intended for a mature audience and you better believe we shouldn't have 8 year olds playing GTA3 unless their parents approve of it and buy it for them.
So? How is legislation necessary to accomplish this? Since when did boycotts go out of style?
What's the crazy backlash to this? It's absolutely sound to set up laws prohibiting sales of these games to minors (just as it prohibits sales of pr0n to minors).
Yeah, if you believe in state regulation of free speech. However, the First Amendment applies to *all* people -- not just adults. Consult a lawyer if you don't believe me.
Prohibiting pr0n sales to minors also violates the 1st. Frankly, I don't see why seeing a woman's tits -- an entirely-natural part of the human body, occurring in approximately 50% of the world population -- is somehow *worse* for children to see than to see people being murdered in various action movies on TV, movies, etc.. Or even in war videos from Iraq and elsewhere (but unlike movies and such, those videos are real, and at some age, IMO children *should* see those things, to see how violent the world can be...). Such is the Puritanical American culture, however.
If parents choose that their kids are mature enough for said games then they'll go and buy it for their kids. If not, then kids won't be playing games that they likely aren't ready for.
There's still no legislative requirement for this to occur, however. If the parent finds GTA3 in their kid's room, they can throw it out. That teaches the kid not to spend $50 of his/her money on something they aren't allowed to have -- quite a powerful lesson to children who, usually, have little money to begin with.
The world does not need *your* morals inflicted on it, because not everybody lives by *your* morals. Yet, infliction of morals is precisely what laws like this do...
Wrong, it *is* a ban. The law would prevent -- or "ban" -- children from having access to "mature" content. It is a targeted ban -- a ban aimed at children, not adults.
However, it is still a ban by any reasonable definition of the word "ban". Just not a *full* ban.
Then they're lazy fuckers who shouldn't be having kids.
Don't have time to raise your kids like a responsible parent? Tough shit, that's your problem, not mine.
...and Blagojevich is a fuckwad.
Maybe not as much as the outgoing Republican Gov. Ryan, whose administration was nearly as corrupt as that of Richard Nixon's (selling licenses in exchange for bribes to people who can't even read English, anybody?), but he's close. Besides, this is Illinois. If it doesn't turn up that Blagojevich's administration is corrupt in some way, I'll be surprised.
Democratic Gov. Blagojevich is a governor who wanted to seize -- by force of government -- all the casinos in Illinois in order to pay down our multi-billion dollar state debt. Yes, he's such a pinko that he wanted to literally steal the casinos from their current private owners for state use. Instead, we have casino taxes high enough such that the state technically owns more of the output of the casino than the private owners do.
Blagojevich thinks letting off-duty and retired cops carry concealed weapons is OK -- but not the citizens. In fact, he wants *more* restrictions on the citizens' right to bear arms (which is codified in our state constitution even more-powerfully and clearly than the U.S. Constitution, BTW). Yeah, way to create an unequal society there "Rod". I'm just *sure* former and off-duty cops won't abuse their power. *rolls eyes*
The only thing Blagojevich has done right is not raise taxes; a considerable accomplishment for a Democrat, I admit, especially since we have merely a 3% flat income tax - one of the lower state income taxes in the nation. That, and he's defied the federal govn't and is working on getting prescription drugs reimported to the state (at least on that point, the Democrats like free trade...). I remain indifferent about his stance on flavored condoms.
But in Blagojevich is still a fan of bigger government. It doesn't surprise me that he wants to restrict the right of the people (including children) to gain access to the "distribution, sale, rental and availability of mature video games to children younger than 18".
Blagojevich fails to recognize the responsibility of parents to ensure that their children are not misbehaving. He wants the nanny-state to take care of our kids; not us, the individual adults who borne them.
So what exactly is the goal of KDE? To beat Microsoft at providing a flashy, splashy GUI that any retard can use, or is it to provide free and open-source software to the world, regardless of the end use of the software?
Arguing for the latter is the nobler goal; arguing for the former is the practical goal. Which is it?
It is official; Slashdot confirms: PeopleSoft is being eaten!
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered PeopleSoft community when IDC confirmed that PeopleSoft market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Slashdot poll which plainly states that PeopleSoft has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. PeopleSoft is being swallowed by Oracle, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive database test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict PeopleSoft's future. The hand writing is on the wall: PeopleSoft faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for PeopleSoft because PeopleSoft is being eaten. Things are looking very bad for PeopleSoft. As many of us are already aware, PeopleSoft continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
PeopleSoft Enterprise is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time PeopleSoft Enterprise developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: PeopleSoft Enterprise is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
PeopleSoft EnterpriseOne leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of PeopleSoft EnterpriseOne. How many users of dbase are there? Let's see. The number of PeopleSoft EnterpriseOne versus dbase posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 dbase users. DB2 posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of dbase posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of DB2. A recent article put PeopleSoft Enterprise at about 80 percent of the PeopleSoft market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 PeopleSoft Enterprise users. This is consistent with the number of PeopleSoft Enterprise Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, PeopleSoft Enterprise went out of business and was taken over by IBM who sell another troubled OS. Now IBM is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that PeopleSoft has steadily declined in market share. PeopleSoft is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If PeopleSoft is to survive at all it will be among database dilettante dabblers. PeopleSoft continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, PeopleSoft is dead.
Fact: PeopleSoft is dying.
1) Sell Palm
2) Get PocketPC or Zaurus, both of which have a non-flat, hierarchical filesystem
3) Transfer data and be happy...
Your problems are a large part of why I abandoned my old PalmOS-based Visor Deluxe years ago. I recently got a Zaurus 6000L and haven't looked back, and I'm much happier now. A real computer fits in my hand, not some Palm toy.
Seriously, Palm devices suck if you do anything besides basic PIM stuff (as organizers, however, they are fantastic, and better than my Z. But I barely use my Z for PIM stuff, so I don't care)...
...Which has "a huge 208 x 320 pixels".
:( A Zaurus 6000L w/ a cellphone built-in? *That* I would go for!
Whoopee. My Zaurus 6000L has 480x640. Try web-surfing on your P910, then come back after you've stopped crying and you can ask to use my Zaurus...
Also, let me know when you can get a command-line with some semblance of *nix's functionality on that phone, not to mention USB host capability. Oh, and the ability to use the phone on all networks (Sprint, Nextel, Cingular/AT&T, GSM, etc.), not just one (that way, if I don't like one provider, I can switch to another).
The idea of a PDA/phone combo is a fantastic one; it's the logical convergence of the two devices currently weighing down the cargo pants pockets of us gadget geeks. But I've yet to see such a PDA/phone which does both functions as well as the respective separate devices which it replaces...
I'm pinning my hopes on the PocketPCs moving in this direction, since unfortunately, the Zaurus never really caught on in the U.S..
Does MS Office read .sxw files? No?
.txt format please" if they're nice, or delete the resume and ignore you entirely if they're not so nice.
Then OOo's own file format is worthless. Customers don't give a crap about your open, XML file format; customers care about whether they get their Word/Excel/PPT files to work, the first time, every time.
Try sending an OOo-generated, non-Office-compatible file to the next person asking for your resume. See how long it takes them to say "I need it in Word or
Face it, the MS Office file formats still rule the world, like it or not.
Does anything exist which repels birds, e.g. sounds audible only to birds or something?
I'm thinking that if we have some way of repelling birds from windmills, we can cut down the number of birds killed by them. I'm just not aware of what would be necessary for doing this...
What's sad is that Marxist Hacker 42 would actually advocate this approach in the name of "full employment"...
Hope the spam filtering doesn't suck as badly in 1.0 as it does in 0.7.3 (I once "upgraded" to 0.8.0, but downgraded to 0.7.3 because 0.8.0 wasn't reading my various mail folders correctly for some reason).
The Thunderbird filter catches (guesstimating) about 80% of what comes in -- not bad, except that other filters are supposed to be capable of > 90%... I thought Thunderbird's filter was supposed to implement a Bayes neural-net to detect and thus filter the junk from not-junk?