My chem teacher in high school was a retired navy captain. Went to Annapolis in the 30s I believe, maybe 1920s. Real fun guy. He said he and some other midshipmen put a big gyroscope in a suitcase, got out of a taxi in front of a hotel and aimed it for the front door, wound it up, walked straight in, set it down, got a room, and the bellhop picked the suitcase up to take it to their room, turned a corner, and fell down when his arm went flying up and he lost control. He described it much better than I can, quite a gleam in his eyes. He was quite a joker...
Before worrying about space, the old NACA was a decent research based organization. Along came NASA and Mercury / Gemini / Apollo, they had a mission and did it in grand style. Ever since, they've been more interested in protecting their turf and knocking down private ventures into space, even going so far as nasty back stage tricks to keep Tito from getting into space as a tourist, as if being a tourist was somehow dirty and... commercial!
I'm all for getting into space, but one shot missions to Mars or even the moon aren't the answer. They need to get back to research basics, let space tourism take off (ha), and in general get out of the way. They can't even handle the space station, their budget is blown to heck and back, how are they supposed to handle a mission to mars on top of it?
A square may have sides of 1 cm but if you were to try to actually measure the perimeter with that thread, you would have bumps around the atoms and molecules, which not only would make it hard to define exactly where the boundary is, but they also vibrate, meaning you could only measure a static square at absolute zero.
The latest Aviation Leak has an article on some think tank out of Reston VA who have several interesting ideas to speed loading and unloading. First, a high wing transport with engines above rather than below the wing. This has two benefits: one, engine noise is reflected upwrds by the wing. Two, it can park parallel to the terminal instead of nose in, and the passenger terminal can be ground mounted instead of having to slide out over the wing. To facilitate this parallel parking, they propose castering steerable landing gear, like on a B-52, so the airline can move at least somewhat sideways, even if it still has a forward movement at the same time.
By parking parallel, every door on that side of the airplane coudl be used simultaneously, a tremendous speedup in getting people on and off. The terminals would also be smaller and simpler, and it would be easier to move planes in and out.
Airbus and Boeing see the airline market evolving in different directions. Airbus says forecasts show airlines will be expanding the hub and spoke networks as they have been ever since the 747 introduced the idea of a huge airliner. Being sees more trend for direct flights, such as the cheap and profitable Southwest (USA) and Ryanair (Europe).
Hub and spoke requires big airliners to crowd ever more people into airports at the same time so they can make connections. Passengers like the connectivity but can't stand the cattle car planes and mammoth terminals and transfer problems; when airlines don't keep to their schedule, people miss connections.
Direct flights require more airplanes but smaller ones. People like the direct flights and smaller airplanes, but you can't get the same coverage as with hub and spoke. Direct flights skim the cream, sort of, and have been one of the reasons for the growth of regional airlines with small turboprop planes, which fill in the connectivity.
As for which will win out, my personal guess is that hub and spoke is reaching its limits, and bigger planes will be needed to keep them going. But these will only replacements for the current big planes, not new growth, because you can only get so many planes into one airport at the same time. True growth will be in direct connections, because these don't have to be prime time flights.
Also, business travel is the one that requires flights all around the clock, and especially the prime time flights, whereas tourists are more willing to take off peak flights and save money. Business travel is probably going to shrink as video conferencing, email, etc, takes the sting out of needing face to face meetings. Whereas tourism will only grow. I see this as favoring direct flights.
I believe, personally with not much facts, and not being in the industry, that Boeing has the right long term outlook, but things will change so slowly that the Airbus 380 will still sell well enough to pay for itself. It just won't have the impact of the 747. Airbus is following the old trend to its conclsuion, Boeing is going with the long term growth.
I am dead serious here. Here in CA, it will cost $50 up front (court plus serving the summons) but you get it all back if you win. No doubt at all you will win if they did not have the sign up when you bought the tickets, so you WILL recover the money. Takes a couple of months.
But here's the reason you do this. As a college student, you might miss a class or two going to court, but they have to send someone in management, whose time is real money. They would be fools to actually show up in court, then lose, and have to pay all the court costs.
Make SURE they understand you WILL take them to small claims cxourt if they do not cough up the money, and that once filed, you WILL NOT settle for less than tickets + court costs.
The article seems to imply that certain subnets are misconfigured, and presumably those subnets have windows clients only on them, the unix clients being on other subnets. Whether this is intentional or accidental is not mentioned. If not many clients are involved, and there are far more windows clients than unix, coincidence seems possible. But maybe there are enough differences in windows and unix clients (SMB shares? NFS) that it makes sense to keep them on separate subnets.
you'll have somebody to complain to if it doesn't work or the listings are incorrect
Isn't this one of Microsoft's reasons for avoiding free source projects? How is this any more relevant here than with source code? Do you really think they are going to pay much attention?
What exactly do you have in mind that elementary school kids need to research?
<rant>
School bureaucracies today are among the worst pin headed bureaucracies. School boards and teacher unions tussle over who controls the money, not about education.
In particular, there have been two conflicting fights, one raising test scores to match the Japanese among others, the other reducing class size (which seems more a cycical ploy to hire more teachers and enlarge the unions). No one seems to consider that Japanese schools do NOT have small class sizes, have longer days, go to school on Saturday, and have much more homework.
One of the more recent ways to spend (ie, control) more money is computers in school. Fine, in high school. WTF do elementary school kids need computers for? They need to learn how to do arithmetic on their own, how to write on their own, the elementary stuff.
</rant>
Is the concept of actually teaching passe?
What exactly do you think elementary school kids need to learn?
Ditto here, had SFNB, they were great, but then RBC wanted outrageous fees, even charging me not only the now-extra monthly fee merely to have an account, but an extra monthly fee (I think $12 or so!) to pay bills online. I oculd not believe that they would charge me $12 to NOT write paper checks. Found Netbank and have been 90% happy ever since. I do wish they would send email status updates of received snail mail deposits (received, cleared).
Come on, these guys don't even read the stories they themselves submit, and neither do the moderators or posters or even the slashdot crew. You expect them to do enough research to actually read the slashdot story too?
You must be very young and/or naive to think that a bankrupt company simply disappears assets and all. What happens is that the assets are sold off, auction-like, at a fraction of the cost to build them from scratch. For instance, the Iridum satellite phone system went belly up, cost billions to shoot 77 (88?) satellites into orbit, plus spares, ground stations, all that, sold for pennies on the dollar or less, and still running, and now it can stay in business because the initial R&D expense has evaporated and is no longer part of the return on investment equation.
Who loses? The original investors. So what, they bet on the wrong horse.
EVERY bankrupt company goes out like that. Original investors lose, R&D is written off, lost, gone, evaporated. If any assets have remaining value, someone buys them up for what they are actually worth. If they have no worth, they go to the landfill. But they usually have soem value.
Think of what would happen if you declared bankruptcy. Would your house, car, computer, all disappear in a puff of smoke? Would the bankruptcy court order them destroyed? Of course not! They'd be sold to pay your debts. Same thing for bankrupt companies.
Slashdot Mirror
... give one to every client ... customer ... entrant ... whatever! and tell them to pelt the bride when the minister says "You may now kiss the bride".
I myself had one in my pocket and gave it to my bride. Definitely confused her.
... this is the vaunted back door or front door exploit ... side doors too.
So it's ok to return from the first check without the lock, and ok to return from the second check with the lock?
Methinks it is YOU who needs a hint, preferably delivered with a clue by four.
They have 32K sets of randomly generated games, and the ones that survive (let alone actually run) are the ones they will charge for next time around.
1. Generate 32K F'd games
2. Let fools pay to try 'em out
3. Profit!!!
My chem teacher in high school was a retired navy captain. Went to Annapolis in the 30s I believe, maybe 1920s. Real fun guy. He said he and some other midshipmen put a big gyroscope in a suitcase, got out of a taxi in front of a hotel and aimed it for the front door, wound it up, walked straight in, set it down, got a room, and the bellhop picked the suitcase up to take it to their room, turned a corner, and fell down when his arm went flying up and he lost control. He described it much better than I can, quite a gleam in his eyes. He was quite a joker...
Before worrying about space, the old NACA was a decent research based organization. Along came NASA and Mercury / Gemini / Apollo, they had a mission and did it in grand style. Ever since, they've been more interested in protecting their turf and knocking down private ventures into space, even going so far as nasty back stage tricks to keep Tito from getting into space as a tourist, as if being a tourist was somehow dirty and ... commercial!
I'm all for getting into space, but one shot missions to Mars or even the moon aren't the answer. They need to get back to research basics, let space tourism take off (ha), and in general get out of the way. They can't even handle the space station, their budget is blown to heck and back, how are they supposed to handle a mission to mars on top of it?
... jumping in the getaway car, turning it on, and waiting for it to boot ... and waiting ...
and learn to have some fun in life. You are too serial about things. Get parallel, have some fun, life is too short to be such a party pooper.
/. anyway?
In fact, come to think of it, what in the heck is a sour puss like you doing reading
Convicted monopolist (spare me any whining about the company being convicted, not the man) is passing our money around and you applaud him?
So next time a bank robber throws the money out in the street, or gives it to bums, we should applaud that too?
A square may have sides of 1 cm but if you were to try to actually measure the perimeter with that thread, you would have bumps around the atoms and molecules, which not only would make it hard to define exactly where the boundary is, but they also vibrate, meaning you could only measure a static square at absolute zero.
and rockers jam.
The latest Aviation Leak has an article on some think tank out of Reston VA who have several interesting ideas to speed loading and unloading. First, a high wing transport with engines above rather than below the wing. This has two benefits: one, engine noise is reflected upwrds by the wing. Two, it can park parallel to the terminal instead of nose in, and the passenger terminal can be ground mounted instead of having to slide out over the wing. To facilitate this parallel parking, they propose castering steerable landing gear, like on a B-52, so the airline can move at least somewhat sideways, even if it still has a forward movement at the same time.
By parking parallel, every door on that side of the airplane coudl be used simultaneously, a tremendous speedup in getting people on and off. The terminals would also be smaller and simpler, and it would be easier to move planes in and out.
Airbus and Boeing see the airline market evolving in different directions. Airbus says forecasts show airlines will be expanding the hub and spoke networks as they have been ever since the 747 introduced the idea of a huge airliner. Being sees more trend for direct flights, such as the cheap and profitable Southwest (USA) and Ryanair (Europe).
Hub and spoke requires big airliners to crowd ever more people into airports at the same time so they can make connections. Passengers like the connectivity but can't stand the cattle car planes and mammoth terminals and transfer problems; when airlines don't keep to their schedule, people miss connections.
Direct flights require more airplanes but smaller ones. People like the direct flights and smaller airplanes, but you can't get the same coverage as with hub and spoke. Direct flights skim the cream, sort of, and have been one of the reasons for the growth of regional airlines with small turboprop planes, which fill in the connectivity.
As for which will win out, my personal guess is that hub and spoke is reaching its limits, and bigger planes will be needed to keep them going. But these will only replacements for the current big planes, not new growth, because you can only get so many planes into one airport at the same time. True growth will be in direct connections, because these don't have to be prime time flights.
Also, business travel is the one that requires flights all around the clock, and especially the prime time flights, whereas tourists are more willing to take off peak flights and save money. Business travel is probably going to shrink as video conferencing, email, etc, takes the sting out of needing face to face meetings. Whereas tourism will only grow. I see this as favoring direct flights.
I believe, personally with not much facts, and not being in the industry, that Boeing has the right long term outlook, but things will change so slowly that the Airbus 380 will still sell well enough to pay for itself. It just won't have the impact of the 747. Airbus is following the old trend to its conclsuion, Boeing is going with the long term growth.
I am dead serious here. Here in CA, it will cost $50 up front (court plus serving the summons) but you get it all back if you win. No doubt at all you will win if they did not have the sign up when you bought the tickets, so you WILL recover the money. Takes a couple of months.
But here's the reason you do this. As a college student, you might miss a class or two going to court, but they have to send someone in management, whose time is real money. They would be fools to actually show up in court, then lose, and have to pay all the court costs.
Make SURE they understand you WILL take them to small claims cxourt if they do not cough up the money, and that once filed, you WILL NOT settle for less than tickets + court costs.
The article seems to imply that certain subnets are misconfigured, and presumably those subnets have windows clients only on them, the unix clients being on other subnets. Whether this is intentional or accidental is not mentioned. If not many clients are involved, and there are far more windows clients than unix, coincidence seems possible. But maybe there are enough differences in windows and unix clients (SMB shares? NFS) that it makes sense to keep them on separate subnets.
... they do screw the consumer ... uuhhhh customer, right?
you'll have somebody to complain to if it doesn't work or the listings are incorrect
Isn't this one of Microsoft's reasons for avoiding free source projects? How is this any more relevant here than with source code? Do you really think they are going to pay much attention?
I see, if someone has more money than me, then I am not allowed to criticize them?
Tie it to your house or a tree at the top of the hill. Start with a very conservative guess as to length, increase it to your comfort factor.
Bonus: don't need to trudge back up hill lugging the damn sled.
... a very obscure problem, it took this long for it to appear.
You, Confused, wonder who Example is. I am Enlightened. Pleased to meet you.
What exactly do you have in mind that elementary school kids need to research?
<rant>
School bureaucracies today are among the worst pin headed bureaucracies. School boards and teacher unions tussle over who controls the money, not about education.
In particular, there have been two conflicting fights, one raising test scores to match the Japanese among others, the other reducing class size (which seems more a cycical ploy to hire more teachers and enlarge the unions). No one seems to consider that Japanese schools do NOT have small class sizes, have longer days, go to school on Saturday, and have much more homework.
One of the more recent ways to spend (ie, control) more money is computers in school. Fine, in high school. WTF do elementary school kids need computers for? They need to learn how to do arithmetic on their own, how to write on their own, the elementary stuff.
</rant>
Is the concept of actually teaching passe?
What exactly do you think elementary school kids need to learn?
Ditto here, had SFNB, they were great, but then RBC wanted outrageous fees, even charging me not only the now-extra monthly fee merely to have an account, but an extra monthly fee (I think $12 or so!) to pay bills online. I oculd not believe that they would charge me $12 to NOT write paper checks. Found Netbank and have been 90% happy ever since. I do wish they would send email status updates of received snail mail deposits (received, cleared).
Come on, these guys don't even read the stories they themselves submit, and neither do the moderators or posters or even the slashdot crew. You expect them to do enough research to actually read the slashdot story too?
You must be very young and/or naive to think that a bankrupt company simply disappears assets and all. What happens is that the assets are sold off, auction-like, at a fraction of the cost to build them from scratch. For instance, the Iridum satellite phone system went belly up, cost billions to shoot 77 (88?) satellites into orbit, plus spares, ground stations, all that, sold for pennies on the dollar or less, and still running, and now it can stay in business because the initial R&D expense has evaporated and is no longer part of the return on investment equation.
Who loses? The original investors. So what, they bet on the wrong horse.
EVERY bankrupt company goes out like that. Original investors lose, R&D is written off, lost, gone, evaporated. If any assets have remaining value, someone buys them up for what they are actually worth. If they have no worth, they go to the landfill. But they usually have soem value.
Think of what would happen if you declared bankruptcy. Would your house, car, computer, all disappear in a puff of smoke? Would the bankruptcy court order them destroyed? Of course not! They'd be sold to pay your debts. Same thing for bankrupt companies.