In fact, I personally would go so far as to say that it's practically non-existant.
Sorry, no. You simply disregarded homo/heterophobia. It happens quite often, it is irrational but exists even when realised and understood, together with it irrationality, and completely kills any attraction to given sex.
Citing a friend: "I'm a homophobe. I understand homosexuals, I don't mind them and I know I have no reason to hate them whatsoever. But as soon as one gets close to me, I grow hostile and problems arise, so I prefer to stay away from them."
I know another guy, who wouldn't stand knowing his gf is bisexual, even if he would like to see her doing it with animals.
Yet another, considering himself a reasonable and intelligent, after a long, long discussion about homosexuality ended it with "Shut up, shut the fuck up! I don't wanna hear it! I don't believe you!" when all his arguments were beaten and lack of reason of his hostility towards homosexuals proven.
But before you can play the music, you must cripple it with some stupid program to let the phone read it - it won't read plain.mp3, but some proprietary Nokia format which is essentially encrypted mp3. Supposedly to make copying mp3s using your phone harder. Practically, making it suck a big time because the program is a huge uncomfortable "media manager" that scans your whole harddrive and creates an encrypted copy of every single mp3 file it finds before you are able to upload a single song to the phone. It also breaks file associations and does some more evil&rude stuff to your disk. Of course you can upload files to the phone using standard "usb storage" interface, but then it acts just as a flash drive. It can't play mp3s. You have to upload the crippled mp3 versions instead. Talking about Nokia 5510. (Luckily there's a simple Linux program that does the conversion of a single pointed-to file without all the nastiness of the original Nokia software, and you can just upload the converted version normally then. Just don't forget to call 'sync' before 'umount' or you'll have fun of fsck'ing the flashdrive, doesn't sync automatically.)
Because they aren't targetting the PC market. They are aiming at people for whom a PC is way too difficult, at those fed up with PC but not ready to shell out enough for a Mac, for these who want a home media center or something alike. Walmart is where you buy home appliances. Dell is where you buy computers. They want to sell an appliance, not a PC.
Be nothing else than a reasonable harddisk (for local caching of photos and email) and a fanless processor with 256MB RAM
Disks are expensive, bulky, fault-prone, noisy, power-hungry etc etc. Maybe not all of them are all of these mentioned, but usually at least some of these factors must be taken into account. On the other hand think lots of dark fibre and container data centers, plus good broadband and a suite of network apps. I guess a single slot for SD/MMC/CF card for storing local files would suffice. No harddrive whatsoever, just enough RAM/flash. Why would you need to download your photos to a local non-removable disk, when viewing them in the remote storage folder takes just as much or shorter? Why keep all the songs on the drive if you can stream them over the net? If the bandwidth allows, stream movies too. Just small removable storage, a little non-volatile to keep local settings, some ROM/flash to keep the bootup+OS and enough RAM to run them all. Fixed storage like harddisk is unnecessary.
I guess it could be done, but through a script of elevated permissions. Either dig in ActiveX, or in internals of Mozilla/Firefox (userScript, extension), or through some kind of smart xmlHttpRequest() headers mangling by bouncing it against some remote host. There's a lot of things that can be done in JS despite people telling you otherwise (and specs saying so too).
Well, they caught ME too! With all 200 or so computers of the intranet (and about 300 users) sharing the same IP! Oh, and they caught my ISP's proxy as well! Bummer, they will have to search about 10000 users to see who accessed the pages.
Somehow Motorola+Commodore avoided all these problems in Amiga. You tell all this as if there was no other, better way. There was. There were way better, more programmer-friendly architectures. Who would worry if special registers are located at 0xA000:0000 or 0xC000:0000 if both meant upper 3rd-4th gigabyte? Who would worry about reogramming the PIC if you had maybe 8 GOOD resolutions predefined in the hardware, each with a good range of colors, and ability to add more by programming the color co-GPU? Just point ECS/AGA at the screen buffer and it does all the reading and timing by itself, sending what it produces to the screen and generating interrupts for you to know when to swap buffers and start filling the other one. With help of Blitter to move bigger areas around. 320x256x6bit at 60fps, easy. CPU 8MHz. RAM was a big common pool with common access for all the hardware, and all the chips were self-sufficient enough that you'd just set them up and they'd keep doing whatever you told them. No need to micromanage the gfx chip, you just tell it to display, and then all you worry about is that the memory area to display contains what you want on screen and that you don't get caught with your pants down writing in the middle of the display area when it is being displayed.
A well written program is fully relocable and doesn't care about segments/location in the memory. Good architecture makes writing relocable programs easier. Good compilers compile code to be relocable. And in the end the "feature" appeared to be a horrible misfeature resulting in XMS, EMS and all these horrible kludges that haunt us till today. Did you know XBox was broken thanks to a security hole dating back to 8080/8086 times and poor workarounds to the problems this horrible "feature" introduced?
Well, both points true. Now what about: "Internet is just a passing fancy"?
BTW, if you today make a statement of "2gb ought to be enough for anyone" that doesn't mean the right approach is to design the system in such a way that developers will have to go through countless hoops to address anything above 2gb. Couldn't IBM make page offset interval == page length and claim the 65520 unused values are "reserved for future use" (and be able to address 4GB of RAM out of the box) instead of wasting them all on overlaying pages of memory, creating additional problems for the developers?
Various mathematical functions sit in the bar, drinking. Suddenly x^2 bursts in and yells: The Great Derivative is coming! Run or you'll be differentiated!!! So all the functions rush to the exit, just the exponent remains at the bar, unshaken, finishing his beer. And then The Great Derivative enters the bar. - I AM THE GREAT DERIVATIVE YOU SHALL BE DIFFERENTIATED. - Oh, but I'm e^x and I'm not afraid of you, differentiate all you want. - Oh, yes? And I'm an y derivative, sucker.
remove "genetically" from "genetically distinct". Twins are two distinct (separate) organisms, but taken only genetically (so - in the meaning of "gene pool") they aren't distinct. Say, a theoretical, on more than one level, situation, if a girl is screwed by your twin brother and you in a threesome orgy, there is absolutely no way to tell who's the father.
in physical space, distinct != unique. In case of information space, data (like genes) is distinct only if unique, otherwise it's just an instance of the same data. Unless you promote your sperm cells to human beings.
Not -just- simply that. Putting windows into screensaver mode means way more than just displaying funny stuff instead of normal desktop, while not interacting with the user. It's a clean-up time. Less used things get swapped out of main memory, disk buffers undergo some tidying up (sync, free up older unused buffers etc.), idle processes get their priorities lowered so that active processes get more CPU time, generally the computer gets less desktop-like and more server-like. Some hardware may be put in power-save mode too. That's why on slow boxes exiting the screensaver mode may take up to a minute... and that's why the screensaver exe has LOTS of resources at its disposal.
There are some more things considered when it comes to accepting an article than just "the news being important". Like the style of writing, grammar, correctness, the submitter not being a troll and not sounding like an arrogant bastard. If the article was written in similar tone as this post, no wonder it was rejected. Be more humble.
So adding extra safety checks and multipling the redundancy in a failed design has proven to be a wrong approach. What's the right approach? Redesigning the device almost from scratch, then making it safe not by adding devices minimizing damages in case of failure but by reducing the chances of failure by rugged, simple, fault-proof design, then proving it's safe by lots of successful cargo flights ("lots of" possible only when profitable = inexpensive).
Instead of providing a fault-prone original and 3 spares plus a system to automatically switch between them provide one original that won't break no matter what. Nobody builds a second bridge below a bridge so in case the bridge collapses, people won't drown but will land on the second bridge among the rubble. You just build a bridge that will withstand multiples of the maximum weight it would ever carry.
1) Various parties had their business in putting their parts in the shuttle, and cost and quality were often on a far place when considering priorities (political friendships being most important). They often need checking, replacing, in short they suck. A commercial-made shuttle won't have this kind of weight attached. Middle ground between safety and price is the key value. And good-bye all the 60's - based parts still kept for political reasons. 2) The shuttles have -enormous- amount of redundancy/safety features because of all the publicity related to astronaut deaths. Commercial solution for own use should be just secure enough to pay itself back and give profit. Likely some/lots of the redundancy will be removed. Cheaper, easier, simpler, lighter. And lesser chance of -any- part failing (if there are 4 sensors instead of two, sure, in flight 3 will still work if one fails, instead of one, and two instead of none, but on Earth you need 4 checks instead of two, the chance that at least one sensor will be broken doubles and so do costs associated with them.) In short, astronauts are a bit more disposable... 3) If it's not cost-effective, it will just end up in bankruptcy of this company and taking over the market by others. Not in stalling progress for decades by pumping billions into failed design just to keep it flying for showoff. These guys get paid for actually delivering stuff to the orbit, not for providing some parts that may or may not quite work like intended but uncle governor said they should be used.
Slashdot Mirror
In fact, I personally would go so far as to say that it's practically non-existant.
Sorry, no. You simply disregarded homo/heterophobia. It happens quite often, it is irrational but exists even when realised and understood, together with it irrationality, and completely kills any attraction to given sex.
Citing a friend: "I'm a homophobe. I understand homosexuals, I don't mind them and I know I have no reason to hate them whatsoever. But as soon as one gets close to me, I grow hostile and problems arise, so I prefer to stay away from them."
I know another guy, who wouldn't stand knowing his gf is bisexual, even if he would like to see her doing it with animals.
Yet another, considering himself a reasonable and intelligent, after a long, long discussion about homosexuality ended it with "Shut up, shut the fuck up! I don't wanna hear it! I don't believe you!" when all his arguments were beaten and lack of reason of his hostility towards homosexuals proven.
Don't underestimate the power of -phobias.
But before you can play the music, you must cripple it with some stupid program to let the phone read it - it won't read plain .mp3, but some proprietary Nokia format which is essentially encrypted mp3. Supposedly to make copying mp3s using your phone harder. Practically, making it suck a big time because the program is a huge uncomfortable "media manager" that scans your whole harddrive and creates an encrypted copy of every single mp3 file it finds before you are able to upload a single song to the phone. It also breaks file associations and does some more evil&rude stuff to your disk.
Of course you can upload files to the phone using standard "usb storage" interface, but then it acts just as a flash drive. It can't play mp3s. You have to upload the crippled mp3 versions instead.
Talking about Nokia 5510.
(Luckily there's a simple Linux program that does the conversion of a single pointed-to file without all the nastiness of the original Nokia software, and you can just upload the converted version normally then. Just don't forget to call 'sync' before 'umount' or you'll have fun of fsck'ing the flashdrive, doesn't sync automatically.)
Hardware: Google PC to Hit Walmart?
Yes, I'm pretty sure the Google PC as a competitor to Walmart's $200 Windows PC will hit Walmart badly.
optionally, Amaya.
Because they aren't targetting the PC market. They are aiming at people for whom a PC is way too difficult, at those fed up with PC but not ready to shell out enough for a Mac, for these who want a home media center or something alike. Walmart is where you buy home appliances. Dell is where you buy computers. They want to sell an appliance, not a PC.
Be nothing else than a reasonable harddisk (for local caching of photos and email) and a fanless processor with 256MB RAM
Disks are expensive, bulky, fault-prone, noisy, power-hungry etc etc. Maybe not all of them are all of these mentioned, but usually at least some of these factors must be taken into account.
On the other hand think lots of dark fibre and container data centers, plus good broadband and a suite of network apps.
I guess a single slot for SD/MMC/CF card for storing local files would suffice. No harddrive whatsoever, just enough RAM/flash. Why would you need to download your photos to a local non-removable disk, when viewing them in the remote storage folder takes just as much or shorter? Why keep all the songs on the drive if you can stream them over the net? If the bandwidth allows, stream movies too. Just small removable storage, a little non-volatile to keep local settings, some ROM/flash to keep the bootup+OS and enough RAM to run them all. Fixed storage like harddisk is unnecessary.
Well, mr Governor, I have this little piece of truth about you. How much is it worth to you?
I guess it could be done, but through a script of elevated permissions. Either dig in ActiveX, or in internals of Mozilla/Firefox (userScript, extension), or through some kind of smart xmlHttpRequest() headers mangling by bouncing it against some remote host.
There's a lot of things that can be done in JS despite people telling you otherwise (and specs saying so too).
Well, they caught ME too! With all 200 or so computers of the intranet (and about 300 users) sharing the same IP!
Oh, and they caught my ISP's proxy as well! Bummer, they will have to search about 10000 users to see who accessed the pages.
Somehow Motorola+Commodore avoided all these problems in Amiga. You tell all this as if there was no other, better way. There was. There were way better, more programmer-friendly architectures. Who would worry if special registers are located at 0xA000:0000 or 0xC000:0000 if both meant upper 3rd-4th gigabyte? Who would worry about reogramming the PIC if you had maybe 8 GOOD resolutions predefined in the hardware, each with a good range of colors, and ability to add more by programming the color co-GPU? Just point ECS/AGA at the screen buffer and it does all the reading and timing by itself, sending what it produces to the screen and generating interrupts for you to know when to swap buffers and start filling the other one. With help of Blitter to move bigger areas around. 320x256x6bit at 60fps, easy. CPU 8MHz. RAM was a big common pool with common access for all the hardware, and all the chips were self-sufficient enough that you'd just set them up and they'd keep doing whatever you told them. No need to micromanage the gfx chip, you just tell it to display, and then all you worry about is that the memory area to display contains what you want on screen and that you don't get caught with your pants down writing in the middle of the display area when it is being displayed.
A well written program is fully relocable and doesn't care about segments/location in the memory. Good architecture makes writing relocable programs easier. Good compilers compile code to be relocable. And in the end the "feature" appeared to be a horrible misfeature resulting in XMS, EMS and all these horrible kludges that haunt us till today.
Did you know XBox was broken thanks to a security hole dating back to 8080/8086 times and poor workarounds to the problems this horrible "feature" introduced?
I bet he had enough materials at least to produce 500 tons of mustard. And another 800 tons of mayonaise.
I've seen a nice one. In place of the banner killed by adblock:
"The site won't survive without money from ads. Switch off that adblock, please."
Well, both points true. Now what about:
"Internet is just a passing fancy"?
BTW, if you today make a statement of "2gb ought to be enough for anyone" that doesn't mean the right approach is to design the system in such a way that developers will have to go through countless hoops to address anything above 2gb.
Couldn't IBM make page offset interval == page length and claim the 65520 unused values are "reserved for future use" (and be able to address 4GB of RAM out of the box) instead of wasting them all on overlaying pages of memory, creating additional problems for the developers?
Screwing it would scratch the screen. Don't screw it.
Various mathematical functions sit in the bar, drinking. Suddenly x^2 bursts in and yells: The Great Derivative is coming! Run or you'll be differentiated!!!
So all the functions rush to the exit, just the exponent remains at the bar, unshaken, finishing his beer.
And then The Great Derivative enters the bar.
- I AM THE GREAT DERIVATIVE YOU SHALL BE DIFFERENTIATED.
- Oh, but I'm e^x and I'm not afraid of you, differentiate all you want.
- Oh, yes? And I'm an y derivative, sucker.
hey, while the equations of how C2H5OH interact with neuroproteins may not be as pretty, the effects are definitely more spectacular.
nope, and pass on the joint.
That's probably a new anti-slashdotting tactic :)
remove "genetically" from "genetically distinct". Twins are two distinct (separate) organisms, but taken only genetically (so - in the meaning of "gene pool") they aren't distinct. Say, a theoretical, on more than one level, situation, if a girl is screwed by your twin brother and you in a threesome orgy, there is absolutely no way to tell who's the father.
in physical space, distinct != unique. In case of information space, data (like genes) is distinct only if unique, otherwise it's just an instance of the same data. Unless you promote your sperm cells to human beings.
Not -just- simply that. Putting windows into screensaver mode means way more than just displaying funny stuff instead of normal desktop, while not interacting with the user. It's a clean-up time. Less used things get swapped out of main memory, disk buffers undergo some tidying up (sync, free up older unused buffers etc.), idle processes get their priorities lowered so that active processes get more CPU time, generally the computer gets less desktop-like and more server-like. Some hardware may be put in power-save mode too. That's why on slow boxes exiting the screensaver mode may take up to a minute... and that's why the screensaver exe has LOTS of resources at its disposal.
There are some more things considered when it comes to accepting an article than just "the news being important". Like the style of writing, grammar, correctness, the submitter not being a troll and not sounding like an arrogant bastard. If the article was written in similar tone as this post, no wonder it was rejected. Be more humble.
'cause asking questions that can't be answered is pointless.
So adding extra safety checks and multipling the redundancy in a failed design has proven to be a wrong approach. What's the right approach? Redesigning the device almost from scratch, then making it safe not by adding devices minimizing damages in case of failure but by reducing the chances of failure by rugged, simple, fault-proof design, then proving it's safe by lots of successful cargo flights ("lots of" possible only when profitable = inexpensive).
Instead of providing a fault-prone original and 3 spares plus a system to automatically switch between them provide one original that won't break no matter what. Nobody builds a second bridge below a bridge so in case the bridge collapses, people won't drown but will land on the second bridge among the rubble. You just build a bridge that will withstand multiples of the maximum weight it would ever carry.
1) Various parties had their business in putting their parts in the shuttle, and cost and quality were often on a far place when considering priorities (political friendships being most important). They often need checking, replacing, in short they suck. A commercial-made shuttle won't have this kind of weight attached. Middle ground between safety and price is the key value. And good-bye all the 60's - based parts still kept for political reasons.
2) The shuttles have -enormous- amount of redundancy/safety features because of all the publicity related to astronaut deaths. Commercial solution for own use should be just secure enough to pay itself back and give profit. Likely some/lots of the redundancy will be removed. Cheaper, easier, simpler, lighter. And lesser chance of -any- part failing (if there are 4 sensors instead of two, sure, in flight 3 will still work if one fails, instead of one, and two instead of none, but on Earth you need 4 checks instead of two, the chance that at least one sensor will be broken doubles and so do costs associated with them.) In short, astronauts are a bit more disposable...
3) If it's not cost-effective, it will just end up in bankruptcy of this company and taking over the market by others. Not in stalling progress for decades by pumping billions into failed design just to keep it flying for showoff. These guys get paid for actually delivering stuff to the orbit, not for providing some parts that may or may not quite work like intended but uncle governor said they should be used.