We got enough problems with Bush relatives. There's Jeb in Florida, trying to push the Schiavo case as far as he can take it, no doubt hoping to be the third Bush in the White House. Please, DON'T think of the children, leave them darned twins out of it!
Unless, maybe, they can marry each other and one can be the President and the other can be the first, uhh, spouse?
Some sites which have no use whatsoever for cookies try to set them. What the heck do cookies do for me when perusing, say, recipes? You give me a reason for cookies, show some benefit to me, maybe I'll use them.
Some sites try to send me a half a dozen different cookies. I have contempt for these idiots. If they can't just use one cookie and key everything off that, they are incompetent and I will ignore their cookies just for the sheer perverse pleasure of it.
What will Simon Lok do? He doesn't like what he finds buried in the Linux comments, so he switched to OpenBSD; will he now switch again because of Theo's public comments? Does Theo actually inspire confidence, that he is so angry all the time, and that he has time to spare to disparage the competition?
There have been two incidents recently which have really soured me on Gentoo, and I will probably migrate my opteron system to slamd64 soon.
One, someone added a/usr/lib library to/bin/ls. I think it was the console mouse (gm?) routines; everything had been ok, until some emerge -sync changed the ebuild. I had to explicitly disable it to fix te problem. The very idea that any boot partition command would link to a non-boot library ought to send shivers down any UNIX user's spine. There is no excuse for this. No matter what USE flags were set, or what packages were merged, no boot command should ever be linked against anything not on the boot partition. This was not some manually added command or library. This was completely the result of a Gentoo screwup.
Two, an update of LVM created a new lib, version 1.01, and deleted the 1.00 lib, without relinking everything that was linked against the 1.00 lib. The next boot failed. Luckily, a symlink from 1.01 to 1.00 fixed it well enough to boot and re-emerge the orphaned command. Another horror for anyone who has used UNIX for more than a few months.
There is no excuse for these two incidents. When I say amateur, I mean it in the derogatory sense. Any system which lets novices screw up basics like this is not ready for prime time. I have been too busy to investigate slamd64, but it is on my list... I ran slackware for years, but had to switch for the opteron machine. Gentoo has a lot of nice features, and thankfully does not have shadow config files, and follows traditional UNIX practices nicely, but I cannot excuse these two cockups.
I remembered just enough of my high school Spanish to roughly translate your sig, and google confirmed it... is there some slang involved? Nice phrase, but it seems like I must be missing some cultural reference...
Someone else, somewhere, sorry for the vagueness, said 75% of Apple's revenue is from hardware sales. Let's suppose this is true. Let's suppose that 25% of revenue comes from software sales.
Suppose they gave away the hardware, that is, the sticker price was $0. Suppose also that marginal costs of software are also 0, so they could easily produce 10 times or 100 times as much software for no additional cost. Well, there would be manuals and boxes, but it wouldn't be like hardware.
Seems to me that selling 4 times as much software would provide all the revenue they currently get. And I suspect that increasing sales four fold would nto be particularly difficult if OS X could run on pretty much any x86 machine.
And if they stopped producing hardware altogether, a lot of the staff would be unnecessary. There would be a significant drop in R&D costs, thus requiring a lot less fotware to be sold to make up for the lack of hardware sales.
I wonder.... if they were to stop selling hardware and doubled their software sales, would they be as profitable as now?
VHS beat Beta because of proliferation, NOT because of quality
VHS had two hour capability, Betamax had one hour.
Sony kept Betamax to themselves. VHS was a consortium and many companies built VHS machines.
The vaunted quality of Betamax was only on the video, and not enough to really notice, given how crappy TV is anyway; the audio was worse. A small loss in quality, probably not even noticeable most of the time, in exchange for double the time was a pretty good deal to most people, and then throw in competition from multiple manufacturers and lower prices and different features and lots of choices, and Betamax was doomed.
To be pedantic, the mantle does not go all the way to the center. There's the core below the mantle. To extend your analogy, the crust is the M&M's chocolate shell, the mantle is the chocolate below that, and the core is the peanut.
Openheimer, Feynbaum, and all the others who built the bomb were surely the best informed of its radioactive dangers. Yet they stood out in the open air with nothing more than sunglasses for protection, I think something crazy like just a mile away, when the single test bomb was exploded. Almagorado (sp?), July 16th, I think.
Either they were suicidal or ignorant, which leads to the obvious conclusion that no way could anyone reasonably expect the military to know more than the scientists.
The point is that the kernel is governed by the GPL. The GPL forbids further restrictions. The kernel can't add code which must stay in the kernel; if it is in the kernel, it is GPL'd; if it is GPL'd, it can be redistributed and modified.
This Nokia announcement is worthless from a practical code point of view. It may be good marketing PR, but it will add no code to the kernel.
I figure it is probably like catshots.... whatever power is necessary to do it safely. I don't think there's much lag with afterburner, there's no spinup involved, so that may be right, only kick in afterburner if you miss the wires. I do remember well how they would not shut down the engine until they were stopped dead by the arresting gear and the airdale gave them the cut signal. Then the tension on the wire hauled them back a bit, and when the momentum backed the hook clear of the wire, they raised the hook for a quick trip out of the way.
Carrier planes land at, I think, 20+fps sink rate. I saw a video of an acceptance test for the F-18. They lifted it in the air sufficient to produce that sink rate, cocked it at an agle, and dropped it, untethered. It bounced quite a bit but settled down without ever hitting wing tips, tail, or nose.
Ground landing sink rates are around 2 fps, I think (lots of old memories coming up here). That's one tenth the carrier sink rate.
Also, just FYI, carrier planes run the engine up to full speed (which probably includes afterburner as necessary, but this was 30 years ago, and memory doesn't include those details) just before landing, and do not shut the engines down to idle until they are stopped cold, in order to bolter immediately without waiting for the engines to spool back up. They are tough planes.
When I was on a carrier (supply clerk, ha!) in the 1970s, there was a TV camera in the yellow line of the landing strip down the angle. It seemed like half the time, the two nose wheels of an F-4 would go down opposite sides of that TV camera as I watched in my spare time on the ship's TV system. This is landing at probably well over 150 knots in a cross wind on a platform which is rolling, pitching, and changing elevation. One night every single pilot, I think 98 traps, hit the right wire.
I'd say they can get within 10cm no sweat. Navy pilots are damned good.
It is my understanding that carrier planes have had this technology since the 1960s at least, but other than try it once in a while, they do not depend on it, because it is just one more thing to go wrong; if a plane is damaged, it is better to have an experienced pilot landing than some automatic gizmo which may or may not be damaged itself, and probably hasn't been programmed to deal with a damaged plane. And the pilot won't get that experience except by doing it all the time.
Some day a computerized system will be better than a human under all weather conditions and with planes in all (recoverable) conditions. But I somehow doubt that day has arrievd yet. Give them another ten or twenty years with UAVs landing under adverse conditions and I will believe it.
It never ceases to amaze me how things get moderated. Quite obviously, anyone reading my actual post would have realized the devices would be safe in laps, same as anyone reading the actual FA. And just as obviously, the moderators saw the subject, assumed it was a stupid joke, and never bothered to read the post, just clicked that moderation button.
Well, shucks. Is moderators reading part of the post better than moderators reading none?
And hey, moderators... take your best shot at this post too. It obviously deserves to be modded as flamebait or troll, as that is what I am hoping for... or you could all decide to leave the post alone, and then it would not have baited or caught any trolls, making it -1 useless. Your call.
Slashdot Mirror
We got enough problems with Bush relatives. There's Jeb in Florida, trying to push the Schiavo case as far as he can take it, no doubt hoping to be the third Bush in the White House. Please, DON'T think of the children, leave them darned twins out of it!
Unless, maybe, they can marry each other and one can be the President and the other can be the first, uhh, spouse?
Some sites which have no use whatsoever for cookies try to set them. What the heck do cookies do for me when perusing, say, recipes? You give me a reason for cookies, show some benefit to me, maybe I'll use them.
Some sites try to send me a half a dozen different cookies. I have contempt for these idiots. If they can't just use one cookie and key everything off that, they are incompetent and I will ignore their cookies just for the sheer perverse pleasure of it.
What will Simon Lok do? He doesn't like what he finds buried in the Linux comments, so he switched to OpenBSD; will he now switch again because of Theo's public comments? Does Theo actually inspire confidence, that he is so angry all the time, and that he has time to spare to disparage the competition?
Sour grapes indeed.
Larry would have said A one and a two ...
...
Steve will say i1 and i2
There have been two incidents recently which have really soured me on Gentoo, and I will probably migrate my opteron system to slamd64 soon.
/usr/lib library to /bin/ls. I think it was the console mouse (gm?) routines; everything had been ok, until some emerge -sync changed the ebuild. I had to explicitly disable it to fix te problem. The very idea that any boot partition command would link to a non-boot library ought to send shivers down any UNIX user's spine. There is no excuse for this. No matter what USE flags were set, or what packages were merged, no boot command should ever be linked against anything not on the boot partition. This was not some manually added command or library. This was completely the result of a Gentoo screwup.
... I ran slackware for years, but had to switch for the opteron machine. Gentoo has a lot of nice features, and thankfully does not have shadow config files, and follows traditional UNIX practices nicely, but I cannot excuse these two cockups.
One, someone added a
Two, an update of LVM created a new lib, version 1.01, and deleted the 1.00 lib, without relinking everything that was linked against the 1.00 lib. The next boot failed. Luckily, a symlink from 1.01 to 1.00 fixed it well enough to boot and re-emerge the orphaned command. Another horror for anyone who has used UNIX for more than a few months.
There is no excuse for these two incidents. When I say amateur, I mean it in the derogatory sense. Any system which lets novices screw up basics like this is not ready for prime time. I have been too busy to investigate slamd64, but it is on my list
No, it is you who is missing something. Read what I wrote, not what you want to read. Look at the big picture. Here, let me help you.
...
Let's make up some bogus figures here.
Suppose total revenue is $1 billion.
$250 million comes from software.
$750 million comes from hardware.
How the development costs are split is immaterial. But let's just suppose that profits are 25% and that software costs a fortune to develop:
$250 million profit.
$250 million hardware development costs.
$500 million software costs.
Wow, software loses money!
OK, now let's drop hardware development and quadruple software revenue, like I suggested:
$1000 million comes from software.
$0 comes from hardware.
Hey, lookee here, same gross revenue, and since software has zero marginal costs
Software development costs: $500 million.
Profit: $500 million.
I remembered just enough of my high school Spanish to roughly translate your sig, and google confirmed it ... is there some slang involved? Nice phrase, but it seems like I must be missing some cultural reference ...
Someone else, somewhere, sorry for the vagueness, said 75% of Apple's revenue is from hardware sales. Let's suppose this is true. Let's suppose that 25% of revenue comes from software sales.
.... if they were to stop selling hardware and doubled their software sales, would they be as profitable as now?
Suppose they gave away the hardware, that is, the sticker price was $0. Suppose also that marginal costs of software are also 0, so they could easily produce 10 times or 100 times as much software for no additional cost. Well, there would be manuals and boxes, but it wouldn't be like hardware.
Seems to me that selling 4 times as much software would provide all the revenue they currently get. And I suspect that increasing sales four fold would nto be particularly difficult if OS X could run on pretty much any x86 machine.
And if they stopped producing hardware altogether, a lot of the staff would be unnecessary. There would be a significant drop in R&D costs, thus requiring a lot less fotware to be sold to make up for the lack of hardware sales.
I wonder
VHS beat Beta because of proliferation, NOT because of quality
VHS had two hour capability, Betamax had one hour.
Sony kept Betamax to themselves. VHS was a consortium and many companies built VHS machines.
The vaunted quality of Betamax was only on the video, and not enough to really notice, given how crappy TV is anyway; the audio was worse. A small loss in quality, probably not even noticeable most of the time, in exchange for double the time was a pretty good deal to most people, and then throw in competition from multiple manufacturers and lower prices and different features and lots of choices, and Betamax was doomed.
Here are some links:
Guardian
Wikipedia
Yesss! Exactly what I meant, if I had only known. Thank you, sir.
I suppose the lettering is like our buildings, inconsequential but noticeable.
To be pedantic, the mantle does not go all the way to the center. There's the core below the mantle. To extend your analogy, the crust is the M&M's chocolate shell, the mantle is the chocolate below that, and the core is the peanut.
Openheimer, Feynbaum, and all the others who built the bomb were surely the best informed of its radioactive dangers. Yet they stood out in the open air with nothing more than sunglasses for protection, I think something crazy like just a mile away, when the single test bomb was exploded. Almagorado (sp?), July 16th, I think.
Either they were suicidal or ignorant, which leads to the obvious conclusion that no way could anyone reasonably expect the military to know more than the scientists.
It's not backwards compatible. I can't run old IPv4 on the same net, it's one or the other. Don't tell me to run multiple NICs, that's not practical.
In short, there's no easy way to upgrade, to try it out, to upgrade slowly and practically.
The point is that the kernel is governed by the GPL. The GPL forbids further restrictions. The kernel can't add code which must stay in the kernel; if it is in the kernel, it is GPL'd; if it is GPL'd, it can be redistributed and modified.
This Nokia announcement is worthless from a practical code point of view. It may be good marketing PR, but it will add no code to the kernel.
It doesn't say GPL, so it probably can't actually add any code to the kernel.
It only applies to current patents, and (IIRC) current interpretations of those patents.
But at least it sounds good enough to whack Redmond.
sewer water is being dumped into the Moscow river
and
who gives a shit about Internet?
What exactly are you trying to say here?
I figure it is probably like catshots .... whatever power is necessary to do it safely. I don't think there's much lag with afterburner, there's no spinup involved, so that may be right, only kick in afterburner if you miss the wires. I do remember well how they would not shut down the engine until they were stopped dead by the arresting gear and the airdale gave them the cut signal. Then the tension on the wire hauled them back a bit, and when the momentum backed the hook clear of the wire, they raised the hook for a quick trip out of the way.
Phantoms sure whistled on landings.
Note carefully how the sig refers to ess-one-eh-ess ...
Note carefully how you didn't realize what was going on and neither did bozo #1 who you responded to.
Note carefully how it is spelled ess-one-eh-ess ...
You know SW3ROTS is a movie, right... it's not real...
What makes you think slashdot is real? Or a sig on slashdot? Or Bush?
Carrier planes land at, I think, 20+fps sink rate. I saw a video of an acceptance test for the F-18. They lifted it in the air sufficient to produce that sink rate, cocked it at an agle, and dropped it, untethered. It bounced quite a bit but settled down without ever hitting wing tips, tail, or nose.
Ground landing sink rates are around 2 fps, I think (lots of old memories coming up here). That's one tenth the carrier sink rate.
Also, just FYI, carrier planes run the engine up to full speed (which probably includes afterburner as necessary, but this was 30 years ago, and memory doesn't include those details) just before landing, and do not shut the engines down to idle until they are stopped cold, in order to bolter immediately without waiting for the engines to spool back up. They are tough planes.
When I was on a carrier (supply clerk, ha!) in the 1970s, there was a TV camera in the yellow line of the landing strip down the angle. It seemed like half the time, the two nose wheels of an F-4 would go down opposite sides of that TV camera as I watched in my spare time on the ship's TV system. This is landing at probably well over 150 knots in a cross wind on a platform which is rolling, pitching, and changing elevation. One night every single pilot, I think 98 traps, hit the right wire.
I'd say they can get within 10cm no sweat. Navy pilots are damned good.
It is my understanding that carrier planes have had this technology since the 1960s at least, but other than try it once in a while, they do not depend on it, because it is just one more thing to go wrong; if a plane is damaged, it is better to have an experienced pilot landing than some automatic gizmo which may or may not be damaged itself, and probably hasn't been programmed to deal with a damaged plane. And the pilot won't get that experience except by doing it all the time.
Some day a computerized system will be better than a human under all weather conditions and with planes in all (recoverable) conditions. But I somehow doubt that day has arrievd yet. Give them another ten or twenty years with UAVs landing under adverse conditions and I will believe it.
"great enough to constitute a firing offence (shagging a student, for example)"
...
brought forth this fabulous little ditty
There wouldn't be any staff left if that rule were enforced.
Wowser! Maybe the reason for not shagging students is to have staff left, eh? Filthy students, never know what they are carrying around.
It never ceases to amaze me how things get moderated. Quite obviously, anyone reading my actual post would have realized the devices would be safe in laps, same as anyone reading the actual FA. And just as obviously, the moderators saw the subject, assumed it was a stupid joke, and never bothered to read the post, just clicked that moderation button.
... take your best shot at this post too. It obviously deserves to be modded as flamebait or troll, as that is what I am hoping for ... or you could all decide to leave the post alone, and then it would not have baited or caught any trolls, making it -1 useless. Your call.
Well, shucks. Is moderators reading part of the post better than moderators reading none?
And hey, moderators