We have.
Although Rory wasn't present for certain parts of the 5th season, he was for a substantial amount of it and was a companion throughout season 7. Micky Smith was also around for the first couple of seasons whilst Rose Tyler was a companion. In both cases they were probably not as prominent as the female companions but they were there. Unfortunately, the press tend to focus more on the female companions than the male ones. Captain Jack for example wasn't mentioned in the press yet was in four episodes of the first season. Similarly, when Amy Pond was announced, there was no mention of a boyfriend/husband that would also be in the show.
One of the big problems I see (living in the UK) is that so many people expect the government to be doing something. Although I've seen less of this recently, I can remember so often seeing a report of some kind on the news where someone will say 'the government needs to do something about this'. I think this is one of the reasons why see government becoming increasingly bigger as it's forced to take on additional responsibilities. Many of these situations may well be legitimate but there will almost certainly be items like this one where some of us will believe the government is going too far. For now, there's no reason to assume this will be used for anything other than the purpose mentioned. However, you can be sure that sooner or later, the government will come under pressure from a group of one kind or another to capture and monitor other information.
No disrespect but I think it is pretty foolish to cast an entire continent as scientifically illiterate. Let's not forget for a moment that the source of this story is the movement of a part of an European scientific research company to another continent.
As with so many issues today, this issue is a lot more complex than you suggest. The initial objection to GM foods was initially off the back of sensationalist journalism. The term 'Frankenstein foods' has been used quite a lot as a description of them and has certainly put fear into many ordinary members of society. Neither the media or politicians have been able to come up with convincing arguments to create trust of companies like Monsanto. Indeed, the opposite is largely true. It is these people that are most likely to be anti-scientific and have agendas of some kind, not ordinary members of the public.
There are good reasons to be wary of GM foods. Like it or not, a comparison with traditional breeding or hybridisation is not valid. Food is one of the most essential aspects of life and it therefore requires more caution than many other things. From what I have read, it is a fact that there are examples of dangers when associated with GM foods. Whether it is a consequence of the direct modification of genes or as a consequence of an attribute of those genes (such as herbicide resistance). We are right to be cautious. The problem therefore is not an unreasonable amount of caution, it is that there is not ongoing debate. I would like to believe that as our understand increases and techniques improve, we will get to the point where we can produce safe foods and can demonstrate it. However, politicians (who are notoriously black or white on issues) will see this as a debated issue and is now settled.
The way you described your personal preference made me recall the introduction of the Sony Profeel in the '80s. The idea was to sell TVs in the same way as Hi-Fi - you buy just the components you need/want to connect to a high quality monitor. It might have been a good idea but given the limited options it never really took off. In most cases, Profeel monitors were generally used at trade shows as simply a high quality monitor that could accept a video feed. Had the different service options we have now been available back then it might have taken off. However, I don't think so. Although people might want a PVR and access to several internet or satellite feeds the majority do not want the plethora of boxes and cables that might be associated with such services. In practice, as demonstrated by Sky in the UK, people want a one stop shop. In this respect, integrating the available options into the TV is probably the most satisfactory option. It may not suit us nerds (I have an HDDVD player, Laserdisk player, PS3, VHS video recorder, Mythtv box and a Wii huddled under my TV) but I expect it is the way forward for many. In fact, I expect that the TV of the future will simply be a tablet PC where the screen happens to be 40 or 50 inches in size and sits on the wall instead of your lap. No one seems to mind having the myriad of services available in an Ipad.
This is my biggest issue with the whole project. As something to invest in for the country, I believe it's a good idea. But 14 years! I fail to understand how it can take so long to lay a simple railway line. Someone must be taking the p*ss.
Probably not. Certainly ASMLIB isn't going to be certified for RHEL 6 yet and isn't likely to be. As the posted article seems to imply, Oracle would rather you use their product and in this case they would rather you licensed Oracle Linux and not RHEL.
I'm not sure I'd use a word processor as an example of a GUI application. The first word processors I used were character based (although not true command line). They were incapable of showing text in a format appropriate for the attribute applied. That didn't stop them from producing documents that contained multiple fonts, italics, bold etc. They simply tagged anything that was non-standard so that you could see that they had an attribute applied. Now WYSIWYG was clearly a step forward but even a modern word process isn't really that much different to the character based processors I first used. Perhaps the only innovation present today that couldn't have been achieved would be to embed graphics and images.
As with other similarly minded people I've seen responses to, I don't see this as an issue regarding your choice of interface. I like GUIs. One of the biggest benefits I first got from such an interface was the ability to have far more terminal windows than I'd been able to use with a real terminal. Even today, I don't think I work so differently from the day I first got Windows 3.11 on my desk. I like what a GUI gives. I'm also prepared to consider that new innovations could improve the way I do my work. Certainly I use more genuinely GUI tools than I did with 3.11. The main problem I see, as has been pointed out, that these new GUIs are somewhat revolutionary. Gnome 3 looks little like Gnome 2. You could not say the same thing when transitioning from Gnome 1 to Gnome 2. I happen to like Gnome which is one of the reasons I adopted Ubuntu. Given what I've read today, it seems I might finally be convinced to go toward KDE as it provides an interface I'm more likely to be comfortable with. I've only just started using Gnome 3 but it does seem to be geared toward closing off functionality. Why for example would you want more than one terminal window open? Sure, it can do it with a middle click but why should the default behavior be to only allow one window. I'm prepared to be convinced. Smartphone interfaces are something I'm impressed with and happy to use. I just don't do the same things on my phone as I do on my workstation.
The problem with alternatives to the ipod isn't that they may or may not be better, it's down to hardware support. How many Zune docks are out there? How many cars support Zune as a device that can be controlled by the car's stereo system?
It is worth remembering that although the company may be BSkyB (as a result of the merger between Sky and British Satellite Broadcasting) they in fact use the name Sky as their brand name. Don't get me wrong, I think this is rediculous but the comparison should be between Sky and Skype.
I'm not sure I entirely agree with this. To some extent it also shows that sighting an analogy doesn't always work.
In reality, the ISP's know that certain times of the day they will have more demand than they can fill. Rather than ensure they can fill the peak demand, they simply don't buy the necessary bandwidth for the peak. I think that internet service is much better compared to other utilities such as electricity or gas. These companies have to be able to ensure that they are able to cope with the peak demands. At least, they have to be able to deal with the regular peaks and this is what the ISP's are failing to do.
RAID5 can work with 3 disks. What was described however was the use of 3 disks, 1 of which was a dedicated parity disk. In other words, 2 disks are data and 1 is partity for the 2 disks. That is a RAID3 configuration. Note that it's not that there are 3 disks that makes it RAID3, it's the configuration (dedicated parity disks) that makes it so. You can use RAID3 for any number of disks above 2 in fact. You could have 5 disks that use RAID3 - 4 data disks and 1 parity disk. Anything above 5 requires more than one parity disk however (in principle you get nothing for using 6 disks). RAID3 does have it's uses but I personally think (and I'm sure do many other people) that it's not the best use of your group of disks because of the potential performance problems. It's not so pronounced with a 3 disk config but if you took a 5 disk config, it would mean that any data write would always require the dedicated parity disk to be writen to as well. In other words, the parity disk is 4 times busier than any other disk in the array. It's probably for this reason that RAID5 was introduced. RAID5 has virtually all the same constraints as RAID3 except that the parity data is deliberately distributed to all disks in the array. The available storage from the array is the same and the raitio of parity to data is the same but the hot parity disk is eliminated. RAID5 is still not optimal for performance but it's a good deal better than RAID3.
Just a small point here. You're description of a 3 disk config is actually RAID3 not RAID5. The difference is that RAID3 uses dedicated parity disk(s) whilst RAID5 uses all disks equally for parity and data. The basic reasoning behind this is that in a RAID3 array, you can end up with a situation quite easily where the performance of the array is never fully realised because the parity disk(s) are a bottleneck.
Not that I'm aware of although there is a farily rigorous process undertaken when new hardware is chosen. The issue though will be one of support. Although we might think that a vm is equally compatible with real hardware, when there are problems people will doubt the vm whether it's legitimate or not. Ironically, we are (like many firms) looking to utlise VMs in the datacentre.
Where I work there has been usage of workstations but that has slowly died out. Partly because desks have got smaller as a consequence of trying to cram more people into the same space. However, there is fundemental inefficiency when you have a workstation for doing your unix admin and a PC for everything else. It's difficult to avoid the everything else and ultimately they tend to be the corporate applications you've got to have. The alternatives, and they are available in my firm, are Exceed and a RHES vmware image. Both of which are run on your existing desktop PC and fit in nicely with the corporate strategy. Someone above mentioned having the alternative of a Linux build on the PC with Windows running in a virtual machine. In my place at least, that wouldn't wash as the firm has a custom desktop build that I expect would have a few problems running in vmware.
You make many good points here. From my point of view, I've had three dell laptops and, although I mainly use Linux (99% of the time), I dual boot. Indeed, if Dell did offer Linux pre-loaded, I would probably still pay to have Windows and load Linux myself. I think though that the most valid thing Dell could do is to produce a machine with Linux compatible hardware. This to me is the big issue. On the graphics card side this is mostly ok. What I would like though is to see good support for wireless cards (no need for ndiswrapper although I think it's a great package) as well as properly supported acpi. This to me is probably more important than Dell actually putting the Linux distro on the machine although I would expect that once they had the hardware support sorted they would also would also install linux as well.
I thinnk that the point being made was that there is numerical or chronologic order to the European date format. Although the US format may have some linguistic merit (as indicated many times previously), it doesn't follow that it's logical. Of course, I am a European so take my comments for what you will. H
The problem though is more about the potential impact to local broadcasters. If a producer of a program starts to sell that program directly via the internet, then you may be undermining a local broadcaster who won't get the ratings they require to sell advertising. As I'm often in the habit of reminding people, with one or two exceptions, the rest of the broadcast TV industry uses our favourite TV programs as bait to watch adverts. This is often the reason why we see programs we enjoy disapear. It's all about ratings and ratings means people watching adverts. It really is a sorry state to be honest and is the reason why the whole TV industry needs a serious shake up. Now, I realise that producers also make money off selling the programs but the broadcasters are not always producers and the smaller a broadcaster is, the more they rely on someone elses productions.
You're right of course. However, I don't see why it would need Exxon to pay them so that they produce an opposite point of view. The impression given here is that Exxon's purpose isn't to give an opposite perspective but to undermine the paper. That is not likely to generate an opportunity based upon the facts and just add to the confusion. Where a clear perspective helps those who believe we are affecting global temperatures, confusion helps people like Exxon.
Oracle 9i and newer supports row compression. Apart from the obvious space usage benefits, there can, under appropriate circumstances be benefits in performance as well. This tends to be in applications that compression is most needed such as large datawarehouses where queries can have a huge overhead in i/o and memory usage as the blocks remain in compressed form even when in memory. The downside is the potential increase in processing required but as large queries tend to be disk bound, it is often the case that the increase in CPU usage is in no way detrimental.
This is true in quite an obvious way in the UK. We are seeing road signs with electronic displays appearing that are powered by a combination of a small wind generator and a solar panel that's about a foot square. Admitedly, the road signs are pretty anoying as they do things like remind you of the speed limit if you're detected speeding but they are self powered and would probably have been prohibitively expensive if they needed to be connected to the grid.
Yep, that's the bit that anoyed me too. I don't want to have to reboot. When I play quake 4, I can have something running at a low priority in the background and it has no effect on gameplay. If I have to reboot to just play a game then I have to abandon the other things I'm doing as well. I suppose that I should also be able to afford several machines so that I can dedicate one to games playing too! This is clearly one thing that seprates these reviewers from the real world.
Slashdot Mirror
We have. Although Rory wasn't present for certain parts of the 5th season, he was for a substantial amount of it and was a companion throughout season 7. Micky Smith was also around for the first couple of seasons whilst Rose Tyler was a companion. In both cases they were probably not as prominent as the female companions but they were there. Unfortunately, the press tend to focus more on the female companions than the male ones. Captain Jack for example wasn't mentioned in the press yet was in four episodes of the first season. Similarly, when Amy Pond was announced, there was no mention of a boyfriend/husband that would also be in the show.
One of the big problems I see (living in the UK) is that so many people expect the government to be doing something. Although I've seen less of this recently, I can remember so often seeing a report of some kind on the news where someone will say 'the government needs to do something about this'. I think this is one of the reasons why see government becoming increasingly bigger as it's forced to take on additional responsibilities. Many of these situations may well be legitimate but there will almost certainly be items like this one where some of us will believe the government is going too far. For now, there's no reason to assume this will be used for anything other than the purpose mentioned. However, you can be sure that sooner or later, the government will come under pressure from a group of one kind or another to capture and monitor other information.
I would. NeXT were going no where, even with Steve Jobs still at the helm. It needed someone like Apple to take it on.
No disrespect but I think it is pretty foolish to cast an entire continent as scientifically illiterate. Let's not forget for a moment that the source of this story is the movement of a part of an European scientific research company to another continent. As with so many issues today, this issue is a lot more complex than you suggest. The initial objection to GM foods was initially off the back of sensationalist journalism. The term 'Frankenstein foods' has been used quite a lot as a description of them and has certainly put fear into many ordinary members of society. Neither the media or politicians have been able to come up with convincing arguments to create trust of companies like Monsanto. Indeed, the opposite is largely true. It is these people that are most likely to be anti-scientific and have agendas of some kind, not ordinary members of the public. There are good reasons to be wary of GM foods. Like it or not, a comparison with traditional breeding or hybridisation is not valid. Food is one of the most essential aspects of life and it therefore requires more caution than many other things. From what I have read, it is a fact that there are examples of dangers when associated with GM foods. Whether it is a consequence of the direct modification of genes or as a consequence of an attribute of those genes (such as herbicide resistance). We are right to be cautious. The problem therefore is not an unreasonable amount of caution, it is that there is not ongoing debate. I would like to believe that as our understand increases and techniques improve, we will get to the point where we can produce safe foods and can demonstrate it. However, politicians (who are notoriously black or white on issues) will see this as a debated issue and is now settled.
The way you described your personal preference made me recall the introduction of the Sony Profeel in the '80s. The idea was to sell TVs in the same way as Hi-Fi - you buy just the components you need/want to connect to a high quality monitor. It might have been a good idea but given the limited options it never really took off. In most cases, Profeel monitors were generally used at trade shows as simply a high quality monitor that could accept a video feed. Had the different service options we have now been available back then it might have taken off. However, I don't think so. Although people might want a PVR and access to several internet or satellite feeds the majority do not want the plethora of boxes and cables that might be associated with such services. In practice, as demonstrated by Sky in the UK, people want a one stop shop. In this respect, integrating the available options into the TV is probably the most satisfactory option. It may not suit us nerds (I have an HDDVD player, Laserdisk player, PS3, VHS video recorder, Mythtv box and a Wii huddled under my TV) but I expect it is the way forward for many. In fact, I expect that the TV of the future will simply be a tablet PC where the screen happens to be 40 or 50 inches in size and sits on the wall instead of your lap. No one seems to mind having the myriad of services available in an Ipad.
This is my biggest issue with the whole project. As something to invest in for the country, I believe it's a good idea. But 14 years! I fail to understand how it can take so long to lay a simple railway line. Someone must be taking the p*ss.
Probably not. Certainly ASMLIB isn't going to be certified for RHEL 6 yet and isn't likely to be. As the posted article seems to imply, Oracle would rather you use their product and in this case they would rather you licensed Oracle Linux and not RHEL.
I'm not sure I'd use a word processor as an example of a GUI application. The first word processors I used were character based (although not true command line). They were incapable of showing text in a format appropriate for the attribute applied. That didn't stop them from producing documents that contained multiple fonts, italics, bold etc. They simply tagged anything that was non-standard so that you could see that they had an attribute applied. Now WYSIWYG was clearly a step forward but even a modern word process isn't really that much different to the character based processors I first used. Perhaps the only innovation present today that couldn't have been achieved would be to embed graphics and images. As with other similarly minded people I've seen responses to, I don't see this as an issue regarding your choice of interface. I like GUIs. One of the biggest benefits I first got from such an interface was the ability to have far more terminal windows than I'd been able to use with a real terminal. Even today, I don't think I work so differently from the day I first got Windows 3.11 on my desk. I like what a GUI gives. I'm also prepared to consider that new innovations could improve the way I do my work. Certainly I use more genuinely GUI tools than I did with 3.11. The main problem I see, as has been pointed out, that these new GUIs are somewhat revolutionary. Gnome 3 looks little like Gnome 2. You could not say the same thing when transitioning from Gnome 1 to Gnome 2. I happen to like Gnome which is one of the reasons I adopted Ubuntu. Given what I've read today, it seems I might finally be convinced to go toward KDE as it provides an interface I'm more likely to be comfortable with. I've only just started using Gnome 3 but it does seem to be geared toward closing off functionality. Why for example would you want more than one terminal window open? Sure, it can do it with a middle click but why should the default behavior be to only allow one window. I'm prepared to be convinced. Smartphone interfaces are something I'm impressed with and happy to use. I just don't do the same things on my phone as I do on my workstation.
Not only is this subject quite well covered at the park, they have a memorial to the Polish coders. I believe they also have an annual Polish Day.
The problem with alternatives to the ipod isn't that they may or may not be better, it's down to hardware support. How many Zune docks are out there? How many cars support Zune as a device that can be controlled by the car's stereo system?
It is worth remembering that although the company may be BSkyB (as a result of the merger between Sky and British Satellite Broadcasting) they in fact use the name Sky as their brand name. Don't get me wrong, I think this is rediculous but the comparison should be between Sky and Skype.
I'm not sure I entirely agree with this. To some extent it also shows that sighting an analogy doesn't always work. In reality, the ISP's know that certain times of the day they will have more demand than they can fill. Rather than ensure they can fill the peak demand, they simply don't buy the necessary bandwidth for the peak. I think that internet service is much better compared to other utilities such as electricity or gas. These companies have to be able to ensure that they are able to cope with the peak demands. At least, they have to be able to deal with the regular peaks and this is what the ISP's are failing to do.
Quiet true. And it also doesn't have a parking lot either, it has a car park.
RAID5 can work with 3 disks. What was described however was the use of 3 disks, 1 of which was a dedicated parity disk. In other words, 2 disks are data and 1 is partity for the 2 disks. That is a RAID3 configuration. Note that it's not that there are 3 disks that makes it RAID3, it's the configuration (dedicated parity disks) that makes it so. You can use RAID3 for any number of disks above 2 in fact. You could have 5 disks that use RAID3 - 4 data disks and 1 parity disk. Anything above 5 requires more than one parity disk however (in principle you get nothing for using 6 disks). RAID3 does have it's uses but I personally think (and I'm sure do many other people) that it's not the best use of your group of disks because of the potential performance problems. It's not so pronounced with a 3 disk config but if you took a 5 disk config, it would mean that any data write would always require the dedicated parity disk to be writen to as well. In other words, the parity disk is 4 times busier than any other disk in the array. It's probably for this reason that RAID5 was introduced. RAID5 has virtually all the same constraints as RAID3 except that the parity data is deliberately distributed to all disks in the array. The available storage from the array is the same and the raitio of parity to data is the same but the hot parity disk is eliminated. RAID5 is still not optimal for performance but it's a good deal better than RAID3.
Just a small point here. You're description of a 3 disk config is actually RAID3 not RAID5. The difference is that RAID3 uses dedicated parity disk(s) whilst RAID5 uses all disks equally for parity and data. The basic reasoning behind this is that in a RAID3 array, you can end up with a situation quite easily where the performance of the array is never fully realised because the parity disk(s) are a bottleneck.
Not that I'm aware of although there is a farily rigorous process undertaken when new hardware is chosen. The issue though will be one of support. Although we might think that a vm is equally compatible with real hardware, when there are problems people will doubt the vm whether it's legitimate or not. Ironically, we are (like many firms) looking to utlise VMs in the datacentre.
Where I work there has been usage of workstations but that has slowly died out. Partly because desks have got smaller as a consequence of trying to cram more people into the same space. However, there is fundemental inefficiency when you have a workstation for doing your unix admin and a PC for everything else. It's difficult to avoid the everything else and ultimately they tend to be the corporate applications you've got to have. The alternatives, and they are available in my firm, are Exceed and a RHES vmware image. Both of which are run on your existing desktop PC and fit in nicely with the corporate strategy. Someone above mentioned having the alternative of a Linux build on the PC with Windows running in a virtual machine. In my place at least, that wouldn't wash as the firm has a custom desktop build that I expect would have a few problems running in vmware.
You make many good points here. From my point of view, I've had three dell laptops and, although I mainly use Linux (99% of the time), I dual boot. Indeed, if Dell did offer Linux pre-loaded, I would probably still pay to have Windows and load Linux myself. I think though that the most valid thing Dell could do is to produce a machine with Linux compatible hardware. This to me is the big issue. On the graphics card side this is mostly ok. What I would like though is to see good support for wireless cards (no need for ndiswrapper although I think it's a great package) as well as properly supported acpi. This to me is probably more important than Dell actually putting the Linux distro on the machine although I would expect that once they had the hardware support sorted they would also would also install linux as well.
I thinnk that the point being made was that there is numerical or chronologic order to the European date format. Although the US format may have some linguistic merit (as indicated many times previously), it doesn't follow that it's logical. Of course, I am a European so take my comments for what you will. H
The problem though is more about the potential impact to local broadcasters. If a producer of a program starts to sell that program directly via the internet, then you may be undermining a local broadcaster who won't get the ratings they require to sell advertising. As I'm often in the habit of reminding people, with one or two exceptions, the rest of the broadcast TV industry uses our favourite TV programs as bait to watch adverts. This is often the reason why we see programs we enjoy disapear. It's all about ratings and ratings means people watching adverts. It really is a sorry state to be honest and is the reason why the whole TV industry needs a serious shake up. Now, I realise that producers also make money off selling the programs but the broadcasters are not always producers and the smaller a broadcaster is, the more they rely on someone elses productions.
You're right of course. However, I don't see why it would need Exxon to pay them so that they produce an opposite point of view. The impression given here is that Exxon's purpose isn't to give an opposite perspective but to undermine the paper. That is not likely to generate an opportunity based upon the facts and just add to the confusion. Where a clear perspective helps those who believe we are affecting global temperatures, confusion helps people like Exxon.
Call me a cynic but as anyone other than a KDE user, I can.
Oracle 9i and newer supports row compression. Apart from the obvious space usage benefits, there can, under appropriate circumstances be benefits in performance as well. This tends to be in applications that compression is most needed such as large datawarehouses where queries can have a huge overhead in i/o and memory usage as the blocks remain in compressed form even when in memory. The downside is the potential increase in processing required but as large queries tend to be disk bound, it is often the case that the increase in CPU usage is in no way detrimental.
This is true in quite an obvious way in the UK. We are seeing road signs with electronic displays appearing that are powered by a combination of a small wind generator and a solar panel that's about a foot square. Admitedly, the road signs are pretty anoying as they do things like remind you of the speed limit if you're detected speeding but they are self powered and would probably have been prohibitively expensive if they needed to be connected to the grid.
Yep, that's the bit that anoyed me too. I don't want to have to reboot. When I play quake 4, I can have something running at a low priority in the background and it has no effect on gameplay. If I have to reboot to just play a game then I have to abandon the other things I'm doing as well. I suppose that I should also be able to afford several machines so that I can dedicate one to games playing too! This is clearly one thing that seprates these reviewers from the real world.