George Bush senior involved us in a war which gave the impression to the rest of the world to be an almost completely unwarranted US invasion of an OPEC nation, for what appeared to be monetary reasons.
Actually, George Bush thought this would gain us points with the world, especially the Middle East. His intention was to go into Kuwait, evict the Iraqi army, and leave. So that when other nations spoke of us as evil invaders they would have reason to pause and rethink that. By not staying there, by entering only under the terms that they asked us to be there, we would like like a benevolent ally. I make no case for how well that worked, but that is a big part of why we did not go after Saddam Hussein at the time.
(This topic is covered in his biography, which I don't have on-hand to quote)
Actually, that's necessarily true. It depends on how you define warm.
If the average temperature in January is usually 30 degrees, and the temperature rises to 31 degrees, then it is warmer than average, but can still snow. In this case, it is not the temperature that determines how much snowfall you get - it is the amount of water vapor in the air.
I live in the Northeast US, and the temperatures this year were about average. In my Baltimore, it was 1.4 degrees colder than average. The record highs and lows are +/- 40 degrees from the average. That puts us well within standard deviation. So temperature variation did not cause the snowstorm. It was an increase in precipitation, not temperature. Which is exactly what global warming predicts.
Now, is this one data point sufficient to prove global warming? No. But it does support it.
I don't think the peeping tom laws go that far. If you took a picture of a building for some other purpose, and the naked girl just happened to appear in it, the I do not believe photo would be illegal. Similarly, I doubt one could get away with hiring someone to stand in the window naked just to make the building unphotographable.
Yes, the article says that, but what does that mean?
I have a document in my hand. I have 1 million people writing me letters asking me to release it. I refuse. How is that being silent on the issue? They are actively refusing to release it.
Just like pretty much every other company on Earth their primary interest is money.
Obviously not. Once their license is shut down, the plant is fined by the NRC, and the company is sued into oblivion they won't be making much money. If they were concerned about money, they would have dealt with the problem.
The article boils down to one argument: Many current Flash applications expect mouse hover, and since mouse hover is not supported on the iPad, all Flash applications will not work. Let me tear this down quite simply.
1) This problem has nothing to do with Flash. It applies to all development tools. By his reasoning, no programming tools should be ported to the iPad. 2) This problem has nothing to do with the iPad. It applies to almost all hand-held, portable, or touch-screen devices. By his reasoning, no one should ever program for these devices. 3) It assumes Flash apps will not be modified for touch screen devices. They have been, and continue to be. 4) It assumes there is no way to do mouseover. Lots of touch devices actually do support mouseover. (Ex: Drawing tablets) 5) It overinflates the problem to make it seem like a big deal:
This distinction is not rare. It’s pervasive, fundamental to interactive design, and vital to the basic use of Flash content.
No - it's actually rare. And it is not fundamental to interactive design. There's touch screens in most Point-of-sale systems. It's on medical devices. It's on the Nintendo DS. It's on almost every mobile phone out there now. And yet somehow -- they manage to get around this vital thing. Again, the author seems to think that the programming language has something to do with it.
I have written code for touch-screen devices, and sometimes I design a screen or a control then go *darnit* No mouseover! It's not a huge change most of the time. If the article wasn't so "OMG!" over the top, it might have actually been insightful.
Tell me now what your justification is for attempting to discipline the student for performing whatever act in his own home.... Explain why no criminal or disciplinary action was taken...
There is no justification, nor explanation, so far as I can tell. I am not defending the school at all. I'm just pointing out that there is more to this case than some school administrator randomly spying on students.
Did the district remotely access any laptops which were not lost, missing or stolen? No.
Aha! So why was the laptop reported lost/missing/stolen if the student had it? It seems like the administration had a legitimate reason for turning on the security software! If this is true, it complicates things. I do not fault the school system for putting security software on the system. Especially since they claim that 42 were reported lost/missing/stolen and they recovered 18 of them.
The details about this will be very interesting...
I just have to chime-in and agree. For my crowd, we treated the local community college as 13th grade. The kids who went there rarely even finished their AA degrees, were into drugs, and goofed-off. They played games all day long. This is absolutely NOT where we should be sending intelligent but immature students.
The worst part is that if we do this, then it fails, it will make it look like the entire idea of acceleration is a bad idea, instead of pointing out how stupidly it was implemented.
Also -- why is this program even needed? I thought that if a student took their SATs, took the college entrance exams, that a college could choose to accept them. I thought that the law required anyone under 15? 16? to be enrolled in school - I didn't think it specifically said it has to be a high school.
I own several, and I've always called them "mod chips" because it contains a "chip" and it modifies the function of the device. I suppose then someone could call any DS game a "mod chip" by my definition. But "flash cart" doesn't seem right since all games are flash carts too.
Given the choice, "mod chip" better describes what it does. So until a new term arises, I'll stick with that.
I wrote a fairly popular DS app a few years ago, but I saw the writing on the wall for this platform. Between Nintendo making it harder to get these chips, and cell phones becoming more open, I don't see much point in writing for the DS. It's a shame: I think Nintendo could be where Apple is today with the iPhone, had they opened the DS. It had so much potential. Now, it is simply out of date.
Agreed, the ideal solution is to break the duopolies. But that isn't realistic. No one in congress has even proposed it.
I apologize if this sounds jaded, I don't think competition would help. The corporations would probably band together to lock-out anyone who provided a neutral experience. The DOJ would find out and sue them, but the court case would last 20 years and be thrown out by congress passing an amnesty law because the ISPs would contribute to their campaigns too much. And the customers who should be outraged at the non-neutral coverage would get all their news and information through their ISPs, who would make it hard to even find out that anything non-neutral is happening. And even if the users did find out, the ISP would promise to raise their bandwidth to YouTube by 5% if they sit down and shut up. And how many consumers will turn down that deal in order to get unbiased accurate bandwidth? Probably not enough to change things.
Competition only works if the consumers are educated and make good decisions. In this case, I don't think they would know or care. So I don't think it would work.
I didn't even know cheap sound cards still existed. I did a quick search on newegg and I see that you are correct. But the reviews on them are horrible, and some even warn people just to use the on-board sound. I don't even understand why someone would purchase a cheap sound card at all. Even the tiny embedded boards my employer orders for medical devices come with AC '97 audio chips.
I was playing a bit of a devil's advocate here. I happen to agree on storage: It is absolutely unforgivable that the iPhone does not have an SD card slot.
Yeah, but that trick is so common I can't imagine spammers haven't figured out how to chop off everything after the + sign and get to your main account.
Slashdot Mirror
Aren't they painted though? I assume these will be clear.
George Bush senior involved us in a war which gave the impression to the rest of the world to be an almost completely unwarranted US invasion of an OPEC nation, for what appeared to be monetary reasons.
Actually, George Bush thought this would gain us points with the world, especially the Middle East. His intention was to go into Kuwait, evict the Iraqi army, and leave. So that when other nations spoke of us as evil invaders they would have reason to pause and rethink that. By not staying there, by entering only under the terms that they asked us to be there, we would like like a benevolent ally. I make no case for how well that worked, but that is a big part of why we did not go after Saddam Hussein at the time.
(This topic is covered in his biography, which I don't have on-hand to quote)
Actually, that's necessarily true. It depends on how you define warm.
If the average temperature in January is usually 30 degrees, and the temperature rises to 31 degrees, then it is warmer than average, but can still snow. In this case, it is not the temperature that determines how much snowfall you get - it is the amount of water vapor in the air.
I live in the Northeast US, and the temperatures this year were about average. In my Baltimore, it was 1.4 degrees colder than average. The record highs and lows are +/- 40 degrees from the average. That puts us well within standard deviation. So temperature variation did not cause the snowstorm. It was an increase in precipitation, not temperature. Which is exactly what global warming predicts.
Now, is this one data point sufficient to prove global warming? No. But it does support it.
Source: Baltimore weather for January 2010
AMEN!
I don't think the peeping tom laws go that far. If you took a picture of a building for some other purpose, and the naked girl just happened to appear in it, the I do not believe photo would be illegal. Similarly, I doubt one could get away with hiring someone to stand in the window naked just to make the building unphotographable.
Yes, the article says that, but what does that mean?
I have a document in my hand. I have 1 million people writing me letters asking me to release it. I refuse. How is that being silent on the issue? They are actively refusing to release it.
If the magazines want variable pricing, then I see no reason they couldn't negotiate that with Google.
Hmmm, good point. I wouuld have to re-read the article to see exactly what they meant.
Worse-yet: Do these people realize that there are companies that sell open-source software? *head explodes*
Are the Comcast DNS servers still redirecting mistyped domains to advertising servers?
Just like pretty much every other company on Earth their primary interest is money.
Obviously not. Once their license is shut down, the plant is fined by the NRC, and the company is sued into oblivion they won't be making much money. If they were concerned about money, they would have dealt with the problem.
Wrong.
An inch-long hair is only 90 micrometers wide. So that is 0.00354330709 square inches, so you would need something 282 times as bright as the sun.
The article boils down to one argument: Many current Flash applications expect mouse hover, and since mouse hover is not supported on the iPad, all Flash applications will not work. Let me tear this down quite simply.
1) This problem has nothing to do with Flash. It applies to all development tools. By his reasoning, no programming tools should be ported to the iPad.
2) This problem has nothing to do with the iPad. It applies to almost all hand-held, portable, or touch-screen devices. By his reasoning, no one should ever program for these devices.
3) It assumes Flash apps will not be modified for touch screen devices. They have been, and continue to be.
4) It assumes there is no way to do mouseover. Lots of touch devices actually do support mouseover. (Ex: Drawing tablets)
5) It overinflates the problem to make it seem like a big deal:
This distinction is not rare. It’s pervasive, fundamental to interactive design, and vital to the basic use of Flash content.
No - it's actually rare. And it is not fundamental to interactive design. There's touch screens in most Point-of-sale systems. It's on medical devices. It's on the Nintendo DS. It's on almost every mobile phone out there now. And yet somehow -- they manage to get around this vital thing. Again, the author seems to think that the programming language has something to do with it.
I have written code for touch-screen devices, and sometimes I design a screen or a control then go *darnit* No mouseover! It's not a huge change most of the time. If the article wasn't so "OMG!" over the top, it might have actually been insightful.
Tell me now what your justification is for attempting to discipline the student for performing whatever act in his own home.... Explain why no criminal or disciplinary action was taken...
There is no justification, nor explanation, so far as I can tell. I am not defending the school at all. I'm just pointing out that there is more to this case than some school administrator randomly spying on students.
VERY interesting.
Did the district remotely access any laptops which were not lost, missing or stolen?
No.
Aha! So why was the laptop reported lost/missing/stolen if the student had it? It seems like the administration had a legitimate reason for turning on the security software! If this is true, it complicates things. I do not fault the school system for putting security software on the system. Especially since they claim that 42 were reported lost/missing/stolen and they recovered 18 of them.
The details about this will be very interesting...
I just have to chime-in and agree. For my crowd, we treated the local community college as 13th grade. The kids who went there rarely even finished their AA degrees, were into drugs, and goofed-off. They played games all day long. This is absolutely NOT where we should be sending intelligent but immature students.
The worst part is that if we do this, then it fails, it will make it look like the entire idea of acceleration is a bad idea, instead of pointing out how stupidly it was implemented.
Also -- why is this program even needed? I thought that if a student took their SATs, took the college entrance exams, that a college could choose to accept them. I thought that the law required anyone under 15? 16? to be enrolled in school - I didn't think it specifically said it has to be a high school.
I own several, and I've always called them "mod chips" because it contains a "chip" and it modifies the function of the device. I suppose then someone could call any DS game a "mod chip" by my definition. But "flash cart" doesn't seem right since all games are flash carts too.
Given the choice, "mod chip" better describes what it does. So until a new term arises, I'll stick with that.
I wrote a fairly popular DS app a few years ago, but I saw the writing on the wall for this platform. Between Nintendo making it harder to get these chips, and cell phones becoming more open, I don't see much point in writing for the DS. It's a shame: I think Nintendo could be where Apple is today with the iPhone, had they opened the DS. It had so much potential. Now, it is simply out of date.
It isn't?
Agreed, the ideal solution is to break the duopolies. But that isn't realistic. No one in congress has even proposed it.
I apologize if this sounds jaded, I don't think competition would help. The corporations would probably band together to lock-out anyone who provided a neutral experience. The DOJ would find out and sue them, but the court case would last 20 years and be thrown out by congress passing an amnesty law because the ISPs would contribute to their campaigns too much. And the customers who should be outraged at the non-neutral coverage would get all their news and information through their ISPs, who would make it hard to even find out that anything non-neutral is happening. And even if the users did find out, the ISP would promise to raise their bandwidth to YouTube by 5% if they sit down and shut up. And how many consumers will turn down that deal in order to get unbiased accurate bandwidth? Probably not enough to change things.
Competition only works if the consumers are educated and make good decisions. In this case, I don't think they would know or care. So I don't think it would work.
Thats just as horrible as electric utilities making you pay per Killowatt/hour of power.
What's wrong with that?
I didn't even know cheap sound cards still existed. I did a quick search on newegg and I see that you are correct. But the reviews on them are horrible, and some even warn people just to use the on-board sound. I don't even understand why someone would purchase a cheap sound card at all. Even the tiny embedded boards my employer orders for medical devices come with AC '97 audio chips.
I was playing a bit of a devil's advocate here. I happen to agree on storage: It is absolutely unforgivable that the iPhone does not have an SD card slot.
Initially I used SSH and created a directory...applications on Cydia...
We were talking about a non-jailbroken iPhone.
Yeah, but that trick is so common I can't imagine spammers haven't figured out how to chop off everything after the + sign and get to your main account.