Howell and his colleagues created a four-inch-long chamber filled with cesium gas heated to about 212 degrees Fahrenheit.
I'm guessing that this isn't going to be coming to the desktop anytime soon.... even a major datacenter might balk at the energy costs of doing this versus a parallel traditional solution.
In either case, getting eye candy, a questionable update in the driver/kernel and a higher price tag don't exactly make an 'upgrade' to Vista an obvious choice, at least right now.
Discussion/Debate #101 - When arguing/posting something rather controversial or "unobvious" - give people sources for your information. Thanks for doing that, if after the fact. I think the relevance etc, of the sources as it relates to your original comment more or less speaks for itself.
Yes, because an un-sourced document (Even if written by "Sam Webb,national chairman of the Communist Party USA") is -really- going to convince anyone of anything. I've seen religious tracts with less bias and more facts.
Ask my kids the same question, you will get a different answer altogether. Probably go like this, "I want graduate high school and start college as a junior". The answers reflect the values their parents have taught them.
Well in that case, based upon your lack of articles and/or appropriate pronouns I'd assume that their answer would be "I want graduate school and go to big-big place where go fast in study".
The points you're making in this reply, although admirable are irrelevant to your original statement, namely that "Americans are a bunch of whiney wimps who would rather get rich quick, while being poor, than work hard". I agree with you, 100% about living within means, hepling the poor, etc.
You keep repeating that there is this class of people who have a large amount of items but "don't feel like working for them". I submit to you that in my opinion (and based upon my life's experiences) it's highly unlikely that the majority of working Americans do, in fact, operate this way OR the economy would be worse off than it is.
You claim broad, systemic knowledge of how Americans live and what the economy is "really" based on, yet you offer no proof of what you're saying. On top of that you've "lived in California" all of your life (not exactly the paragon of "normal" Americans to anyone not living there).
Perhaps you should consider that your somewhat limited perceptions could use a...touch... more perspective? I hope so, although I will admit that in some cases simply bashing a large demographic of people because it's chic can be easier than truly thinking.
And in -that-, I suspect you are not in the least bit unique among your peers. Or is that a generalization that is unfair?
Americans are a bunch of whiney wimps who would rather get rich quick, while being poor, than work hard
Ok, I'll bite. You had me up until that statement. You, sir, apparently like to make sweeping generalizations about a group of people you obviously understand little about.
I'll put this in a bite-sized mental morsel for you: There are -some- poor folks who live off the charity of others, and there are -some- rich people who live off their connections. Just like every other country in the world. But that doesen't apply to everyone, there is an extremely large group of hard working middle class folks propping up the economy here, if you really worked hard and came from the background you say you did, you would know that.
Indeed, having a WM with eye-candy is to some degree what E17 is about. Nothing wrong with it if it isn't a resource hog. My complaint (albeit poorly worded pre-coffee) was more that it has always felt like KDE sacrificed a lot of performance to get there, and I'm more about performance over pretty when it all boils down.
Am I the only one that wants a WM, not a Desktop? I'm still using a rather heavily-customized version of E16, and anxiously awaiting E17. Sure, I use a bunch of stuff from the KDE project as drivers (arts anyone?), but I would love to see more options built into the "eye candy overhead" of KDE (i.e. turning off components, etc) to increase perfomance.
That said, the main reason I avoid KDE and GNOME is performance - most of the stuff it does is just overhead I don't need (and why does KDE -not- use the xscreensaver interface instead of their rather....useless wrapper?!!), but if they were able to improve the reliability of KDE, and make it possible to lower it's footprint to something that is, say, just -slightly- more than your average WMW I might consider it.
That's all well and fine until the enemy figures out how to hack your soldier bots and they all start searching for John Conner.
Seriously, who really thinks it's a good idea to put something like that into combat?
"Powerful quakes measuring 7 on the Richter scale have struck southern Taiwan and caused damage to undersea communication cables, disrupting telephone and internet services in several parts of Asia.... Human casualties, however, have been low so far."
when.... the disruption of the internet trumps the part about human casualties!
I like NYCountyLaywer. But..... that headline was terrible. A summary should, in LAYMAN's terms, describe why I should spend a few moments reading about the issue.
Ms. Lindor complained that the Report could be read to imply that 'the mere presence of a shared files folder on an individual's computer would... satisfy the requirements of 17 USC 106(3)', saying that the Report of Magistrate Robert M. Levy could not be so read, since '[t]he report and recommendation does not comment on whether or not the mere presence of a shared files folder satisfies 17 USC 106(3).
Seriously, do you really think that 95% of the readers are going to know off the top of their heads what 17 USC 106(3) is? I like playing armchair laywer, so I bothered to find out, but that headline made my eyes bleed. I suspect I would have started channeling Lewis Black if I hadn't posted this.
Agreed! But what if they say "oh, wait, we're going to charge you 5$ for that"? Given the lengths people will go to save themselves 3 cents a gallon on one fillup of gasoline.... *?*
I see the use, I just don't see it worth any money at all. But then again, I'm not everyone. I'd like to see the eventual market research on it though, if only for curiosity's sake.
And I'm sure you're the type who buys the Best Buy Service plan becasue it's cheaper than replacing the unit?
My point wasn't that it was expensive, my point was that -any- expense seems like it would make the point of having it in the first place totally irrelevant.
Firstly... the browser is _not_ going to be a portal for "finding other Nintendo goodness". The Wii _comes_ with a Shopping Channel that allows you to buy stuff (including retro games... and this browser when it's released).
Think reviews, FAQs on games, etc. This isn't to say it would be the primary focus, but still...
What I wan't to know is why you think the browser should be free? Opera is the browser of choice here because they have built considerable functionality in for displaying web pages on resolution and input limited devices (cell phones, PDAs, the OLPC and now the Wii). Are you saying that all of their work isn't worth anything? I mean, we are just talking about $5 here..
Not at all. I'm saying that it's interesting that Nintendo isn't willing to adapt F/OSS software to this task and include it as part of their platform, given the potential for additional sales/interest. I have a browser on my computer, so why would I want one on a videogame console?
Look... I love Linux/OSS/Free software as much as anyone... and I also enjoy getting most of it for free (as in money). But, what is everyone's aversion to paying for some software? As a computer scientist I know how much work goes into making good software, and I don't understand why people around here think it should always be free (as in money).
I agree that there is value for charging reasonably for software - but this is more a question of who pays and what's in Nintendo's best interest. If, indeed, Opera is charging them a license fee, the question still remains what the value would be to Nintendo in charging for something that is widely available for free on other platforms versus the value recieved (in terms of sales and goodwill, etc) by providing it standard.
Well, at least we know about WW IV....
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." -- Albert Einstein
They probably use a variant of the following line of thought: We are in business to make a profit.
Snarky! But charging for functionality that is free elsewhere is like, well, Opera:) My point is I can't imagine that Nintendo will make much profit on Opera, and they'd likely only increase their appeal by offering a free browser platform. It may be splitting hairs, but $5 per browser install seems like it's the sort of nickle/dime profiteering that people were originally concerned about with the download system.
Of course, that's not absolutely a bad thing, Nintendo is a company out to provide a service in exchange for income. But charging for something that people can get for most platforms seems like less of a good deal than providing a platform as an incentive for people who may not be early-adopters to buy the system.
Also, the browser isn't necessary to use the Nintendo online features. That's built in already. The browser is for porn.
Interesting.... I find myself wondering how the Wii-mote figures into that:)
How exactly does Nintendo justify paying for a browser? I don't own the console, but I would expect that if web browsing is a feature/portal to finding other Nintendo goodness they'd want you to have it for free (post summer 2007;) ). Is it a licensing issue, and if so why not use an OSS browser platform? Am I missing something?
Slashdot Mirror
Well...ok, but...
Howell and his colleagues created a four-inch-long chamber filled with cesium gas heated to about 212 degrees Fahrenheit.
I'm guessing that this isn't going to be coming to the desktop anytime soon.... even a major datacenter might balk at the energy costs of doing this versus a parallel traditional solution.
and there's no good reason to not use it in favor of XP. Well.... aside from the $400 price tag for the non-crippleware version?
...... trial period where they work the kinks out.
Or perhaps it's because they've finally managed to copy the Macintosh's interface design more closely with Aero? Not to say that it dosen't make sense since every major and minor player out there has been offering better alt-tab and/or 3d functions on their desktop for some time. The only -touted- difference is the new driver model (which is why DX10 can't work on XP), but I'm going to go out on a limb here and bet that once DX10 cards actually start coming out there's going to be a bit of a
In either case, getting eye candy, a questionable update in the driver/kernel and a higher price tag don't exactly make an 'upgrade' to Vista an obvious choice, at least right now.
Discussion/Debate #101 - When arguing/posting something rather controversial or "unobvious" - give people sources for your information. Thanks for doing that, if after the fact. I think the relevance etc, of the sources as it relates to your original comment more or less speaks for itself.
This is all well and fine, until the next upgraded model starts searching for Sarah Conner. Then we're all in for it.
Yes, because an un-sourced document (Even if written by "Sam Webb,national chairman of the Communist Party USA") is -really- going to convince anyone of anything. I've seen religious tracts with less bias and more facts.
Go crawl back under your bridge.
Ask my kids the same question, you will get a different answer altogether. Probably go like this, "I want graduate high school and start college as a junior".
The answers reflect the values their parents have taught them.
Well in that case, based upon your lack of articles and/or appropriate pronouns I'd assume that their answer would be "I want graduate school and go to big-big place where go fast in study".
It's just basic economic - supply and demand.
The points you're making in this reply, although admirable are irrelevant to your original statement, namely that "Americans are a bunch of whiney wimps who would rather get rich quick, while being poor, than work hard". I agree with you, 100% about living within means, hepling the poor, etc.
You keep repeating that there is this class of people who have a large amount of items but "don't feel like working for them". I submit to you that in my opinion (and based upon my life's experiences) it's highly unlikely that the majority of working Americans do, in fact, operate this way OR the economy would be worse off than it is.
You claim broad, systemic knowledge of how Americans live and what the economy is "really" based on, yet you offer no proof of what you're saying. On top of that you've "lived in California" all of your life (not exactly the paragon of "normal" Americans to anyone not living there).
Perhaps you should consider that your somewhat limited perceptions could use a...touch... more perspective? I hope so, although I will admit that in some cases simply bashing a large demographic of people because it's chic can be easier than truly thinking.
And in -that-, I suspect you are not in the least bit unique among your peers. Or is that a generalization that is unfair?
Americans are a bunch of whiney wimps who would rather get rich quick, while being poor, than work hard
Ok, I'll bite. You had me up until that statement. You, sir, apparently like to make sweeping generalizations about a group of people you obviously understand little about.
I'll put this in a bite-sized mental morsel for you: There are -some- poor folks who live off the charity of others, and there are -some- rich people who live off their connections. Just like every other country in the world. But that doesen't apply to everyone, there is an extremely large group of hard working middle class folks propping up the economy here, if you really worked hard and came from the background you say you did, you would know that.
Indeed, having a WM with eye-candy is to some degree what E17 is about. Nothing wrong with it if it isn't a resource hog. My complaint (albeit poorly worded pre-coffee) was more that it has always felt like KDE sacrificed a lot of performance to get there, and I'm more about performance over pretty when it all boils down.
Am I the only one that wants a WM, not a Desktop? I'm still using a rather heavily-customized version of E16, and anxiously awaiting E17. Sure, I use a bunch of stuff from the KDE project as drivers (arts anyone?), but I would love to see more options built into the "eye candy overhead" of KDE (i.e. turning off components, etc) to increase perfomance.
That said, the main reason I avoid KDE and GNOME is performance - most of the stuff it does is just overhead I don't need (and why does KDE -not- use the xscreensaver interface instead of their rather....useless wrapper?!!), but if they were able to improve the reliability of KDE, and make it possible to lower it's footprint to something that is, say, just -slightly- more than your average WMW I might consider it.
In general, it has to have been posted on Slashdot previously.
That's all well and fine until the enemy figures out how to hack your soldier bots and they all start searching for John Conner.
Seriously, who really thinks it's a good idea to put something like that into combat?
Signed.
"Powerful quakes measuring 7 on the Richter scale have struck southern Taiwan and caused damage to undersea communication cables, disrupting telephone and internet services in several parts of Asia.... Human casualties, however, have been low so far."
when.... the disruption of the internet trumps the part about human casualties!
...like the Sun has PMS.
Please keep in mind that I personally -do- appreciate all that you're doing in the face of the vileness that is the RIAA :)
I like NYCountyLaywer. But..... that headline was terrible. A summary should, in LAYMAN's terms, describe why I should spend a few moments reading about the issue.
... satisfy the requirements of 17 USC 106(3)', saying that the Report of Magistrate Robert M. Levy could not be so read, since '[t]he report and recommendation does not comment on whether or not the mere presence of a shared files folder satisfies 17 USC 106(3).
Ms. Lindor complained that the Report could be read to imply that 'the mere presence of a shared files folder on an individual's computer would
Seriously , do you really think that 95% of the readers are going to know off the top of their heads what 17 USC 106(3) is? I like playing armchair laywer, so I bothered to find out, but that headline made my eyes bleed. I suspect I would have started channeling Lewis Black if I hadn't posted this.
Agreed! But what if they say "oh, wait, we're going to charge you 5$ for that"? Given the lengths people will go to save themselves 3 cents a gallon on one fillup of gasoline.... *?*
I see the use, I just don't see it worth any money at all. But then again, I'm not everyone. I'd like to see the eventual market research on it though, if only for curiosity's sake.
And I'm sure you're the type who buys the Best Buy Service plan becasue it's cheaper than replacing the unit?
My point wasn't that it was expensive, my point was that -any- expense seems like it would make the point of having it in the first place totally irrelevant.
Firstly... the browser is _not_ going to be a portal for "finding other Nintendo goodness". The Wii _comes_ with a Shopping Channel that allows you to buy stuff (including retro games... and this browser when it's released).
Think reviews, FAQs on games, etc. This isn't to say it would be the primary focus, but still...
What I wan't to know is why you think the browser should be free? Opera is the browser of choice here because they have built considerable functionality in for displaying web pages on resolution and input limited devices (cell phones, PDAs, the OLPC and now the Wii). Are you saying that all of their work isn't worth anything? I mean, we are just talking about $5 here..
Not at all. I'm saying that it's interesting that Nintendo isn't willing to adapt F/OSS software to this task and include it as part of their platform, given the potential for additional sales/interest. I have a browser on my computer, so why would I want one on a videogame console?
Look... I love Linux/OSS/Free software as much as anyone... and I also enjoy getting most of it for free (as in money). But, what is everyone's aversion to paying for some software? As a computer scientist I know how much work goes into making good software, and I don't understand why people around here think it should always be free (as in money).
I agree that there is value for charging reasonably for software - but this is more a question of who pays and what's in Nintendo's best interest. If, indeed, Opera is charging them a license fee, the question still remains what the value would be to Nintendo in charging for something that is widely available for free on other platforms versus the value recieved (in terms of sales and goodwill, etc) by providing it standard.
Well, at least we know about WW IV....
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." -- Albert Einstein
They probably use a variant of the following line of thought: We are in business to make a profit. :) My point is I can't imagine that Nintendo will make much profit on Opera, and they'd likely only increase their appeal by offering a free browser platform. It may be splitting hairs, but $5 per browser install seems like it's the sort of nickle/dime profiteering that people were originally concerned about with the download system.
:)
Snarky! But charging for functionality that is free elsewhere is like, well, Opera
Of course, that's not absolutely a bad thing, Nintendo is a company out to provide a service in exchange for income. But charging for something that people can get for most platforms seems like less of a good deal than providing a platform as an incentive for people who may not be early-adopters to buy the system.
Also, the browser isn't necessary to use the Nintendo online features. That's built in already. The browser is for porn.
Interesting.... I find myself wondering how the Wii-mote figures into that
How exactly does Nintendo justify paying for a browser? I don't own the console, but I would expect that if web browsing is a feature/portal to finding other Nintendo goodness they'd want you to have it for free (post summer 2007 ;) ). Is it a licensing issue, and if so why not use an OSS browser platform? Am I missing something?
Cressey added that he couldn't imagine a scenario where the reports would be valuable to terrorists.
Except, say, if they're trying to pick a quality cell phone provider?