For me it was very helpful to see it posted -- I'm very much aware of the differences but missed the word gigabit in the article when I quickly read it. Reading that post was in fact "inciteful" to me and if I'd had mod points at the moment I'd have marked it so.
Scott M. couldn't have shared power with Steve J. Hell would freeze over first. Imagine the conference room discussions!
Steve: Check this out! Its stunning! It looks great, it works great. Its fast and reliable and it does something nobody else can figure out how to make money with.
Scott: Cool! Lets give it away to piss off microsoft!
Steve: No no, we can SELL this. We can make money on it.
Scott: Yeah, but how does that help our primary goal?
Steve: It does, I just said it would be profitable.
Scott: So what? It doesn't hurt Microsoft! Forget it. Give it away so nobody else can make money with the same kind of thing. In the long run we'll win because we'll hurt Bill.
I recall seeing a documentary on a bio process for dealing with sewage that use some fairly minor pre-treatment and made use of UV light to kill much of the nasty germs, but then essentially used a man made wetlands area that ultimately fed a stream and a very large lake. As I recall, the result was so clean that salmon had begun to repopulate teh stream (and I understand they are a very sensitive species).
My memory is hazy on it, but I think it may even have been Chicago or Detroit that was the source of waste -- I can't recall that for sure, however.
The question that comes to my mind is how much surface area do you need to disperse the exhaust emissions of the power plant through in order to have a significant enough level of C02 for the algea without too high a level for it to thrive, and for that emmission gas to move fast enough through the algea bed to avoid a rapid accumulation of either heat or backpressure? Doesn't the plant produce waste gas at a high enough volume that the algea beds would quickly be overwhelmed?
Not necessarily in order, these are some top picks based on how they've changed or are changing our entire technology culture:
Linux. Duh. How much of everything else is built on this fantastic platform for the back end? I'm not personally in support of rolling out desktops to users, but as a server platform its amazing and flexible. More important, it empowers developers to build EVERYTHING.
Asterisk. If you use an IP phone service, you already have a small hint at how this changes things. If you've developed software that uses SIP or IAX2 to connect things and move streaming traffic you're starting to get the hint. IMO, this is a paradigm shifting technology just at the start of a giant curve up in its attention by the industry.
Sourceforce. For obvious reasons, this has empowered so many projects.
Apache, and the things its led to -- like Tomcat, etc.
Eclipse -- Wow, an open sourced (even if originally sponsored, driven, and to some extent built by IBM) rich user context framework and complete IDE for development that's absolutely a rival to Visual Studio.
I know I'm forgetting a ton -- but these in particular are real industry driving tools that changed or are about to change (in the case of Asterisk) large segments of the tech world.
As a firefighter and first responder I can state that there's a big problem with the safety crash test ratings most consumers see. These 4 star and 5 star ratings don't tell the real story at all.
These tests emphasise not just the human safety but also the cost of repair. To some extent, the cost of human repair is the factor added to the vehicle repair to make the rating. Interesting data, but not what most of us care about, and it results in very poor decision making information.
Example: I have seen personally how effective "crumple zones" combined with airbags and safety brackets on hoods which prevent the hood from sliding directly back into the windshield in the case of a head on collision can work. I see completely destroyed cars all the time where the occupants are well protected and suffer only minor injuries. That's because much of the force of impact is used up in the act of crumpling the car. These crumple zones are amazingly effective.
The problem for insurrance companies is that crumple zones and the like TRADE vehicle damage for human damage. The low-speed destruction of bumpers, fenders, hoods, and entire engine compartments mean that these cars are a "total loss" much more frequently.
If you REALLY want to promote SAFETY -- and like me, you could care less about the damage to the vehicle if the humans are better protected -- than we need a safety rating system which ignores all things other than damage to the occupants of the vehicles.
I'd love to see airports, train stations, and maybe a few other places have short term rentable units even smaller.
Imagine a space 9 feet long, 3 feet high, and 3 feet deep. At one end, a 2 foot wide by 2 foot deep table on which could be placed a carry on bag. An electrical outlet could be available for charging laptops and such. The other 7 feet in length (2.13 meters) would be a padded, easily cleanable surface. Set in the wall at the back would be two one time use cleaning rags, a one time use pillow, and a cheap sheet & blanket. Well filtered airflow with a CO and CO2 alarm built in would be a requirement of course.
You put in a credit card, it snaps a picture of the unit and then it opens. You are agreeing to a contract that says:
1. If its not clean, you have 1 minute to decide that and reject the unit. 2. You agree to use it for $x/hour. 3. You agree to a $50 fee if you do not leave it clean.
Assuming it opens, and is clean, you take the first of the two cleaning rags and wipe it down. Toss the rag, and pull out the sheet and blanket, the one time pillow and you've got a bed. Plug in the laptop to charge, pull the door closed behind you and sleep. Both you and the laptop get a couple of hours rest and recharging.
On leaving, you toss the sheets and pillow away, wipe down the bed with the other rag, take your stuff and leave. When you close the door another picture is taken of the "finished" state of the unit in case you've left a mess. A short cleaning cycle runs using fresh air, UV light, and who knows what else. The unit is ready for the next person.
Given most of these places have enough height to them, you could easily stack two.
In an airport, having them in the secure part of the terminal combined with good strong wall makes the security threat pretty minimal.
There are many times in airports I'd have been willing to pay $30 or more for a few hours that way.
...You're using the text with its own quotes, as testaments to itself!
I get emails all the time and they swear in thier own text that they are not spam. Oddly, many are in fact spam. Imagine that.
Look, I'm pleased as can be that you've found comfort for whatever ails or worries you in a belief system that if followed in a reasonably enlightened manner represents a generally good way of behaving toward others. So does the rule book of most of the other faiths with which I am aware.
I once had a conversation about the need for this with a Minister at a church in Waco where my sister was married. Of course, I was on my best behavior and wasn't tossing rude little bombs as I am here. It was my sister's wedding and they people had been good to her. She'd also warned them of the futility and the scene which would likely result if they pushed me with attempts to bring me to their belief system - as a result we all got along just fine. In any case, we had both been a little surprised that of all the toasts and advice being given, his and mine were the most similar. In fact, the way we both lived our lives with respect to how we treat other people and our own responsibilities were very similar. He asked me, then, why I didn't take the next step and believe as he does. My answer was quite simply that I do not need an entire mythos as a reason to behave well and do good things. It was enough for me to do good things because they are good things. To define them as good things (in other words, a source for moral direction) was simply that they were at worst harmless and at best helpful without being an imposition on those around me. By that definition, my morals mostly matched his. The problem, however, is that to accept his belief system I had to accept a great deal of what I find to be contradictory definitions of right and wrong, and a belief system enforced by rules and consequences which are themselves contradictory to those very rules. All of which, of course, is entirely superfluous. The very rules which govern the physical universe, whether you believe them to be predetermined by a supreme being or simply a result of random action, are such that simplicity is favored in all rules and explanations. The more simple the rule or law of nature, the more likely it is correct. The requirement for an entire mythos to explain its creation, and the very complexity of that explanation is itself a violation of those rules.
As long as you do good things and hurt nobody, please enjoy your belief system and if in the end you are right and I am wrong; I suppose you'll have the last laugh as I burn eternally in hell as retribution for not believing as you do -- regardless of how I've lived my life.
Of course, if you're having that laugh, it would be a "sin" under your belief system -- and if I'm burning forever in hell, I believe that whosoever made that happen would also be guilty of several "sins" under that same system. Perhaps those or He or makes those rules are above or better then them.
In the mean time, I'll continue to raise healthy, safe, and kind children; to volunteer my time as a firefighter; and to live my life in a manner which at worst hurts no one, and at best helps a few.
I love that quote. Show me any evidence at all that the book you mention (which, by the way, is a mistranslation for political reasons of a mistranslation for political reasons of a bunch of documents compiled over hundreds of years by many different hands -- and that's just the New Testatment) has any supporting facts to indicate it was in fact written by the creator of our planet (why must there by a creator of our planet, by the way?) and I'll eat my hat.
By the way, "Because a lot of people believe it to be true" is not in fact proof of anything other than the fact that a lot of people believe it.
As someone who had been making clone PC's since the mid 80's, I remember being surprised by the "Intel Inside" slogan and stickers when I first saw them. REALLY soon after that I realized how brilliant it was when I started having to ask people who wanted to know if it had "the Intel" in it why they cared? At the time I was using Cyrix and AMD chips more frequently.
Its really taken a long time for AMD to become a serious competitor again -- and they've only been able to do that because of trully significant improvements that overwhelm Intel on a few fronts (like heat & power).
As a side note -- for the first time I can recall, I really do feel like I'd be better off on my next build for my desk to use an AMD processor. I have a P4 2.8ghz HT which I like, but runs very hot and really sucks down the juice.
So, Intel -- dumb move to drop the "Intel Inside" logo and campaign. It was a really great ad campaign in that it made consumers care for the first time (and for no good reason) who made their processor.
You have two choices in figuring out the origin of the most basic form of life. It either spontaneously arose from some soup of chemicals we haven't quite figured out yet, or it was created by some other form of life, thought, or energy (or whatever).
So, you have a bit of a leap of faith in either case. You either have a single leap, which is that some chemicals could get together and accidentially (a one in billions of years shot) come up with a stable enough reaction to be the basis of life.....Or, you have the other flying leap of faith which requires you to invent an entire mythos, a super-being of a father figure, (and of course beg off the question of the origination of THAT life form -- its Turtles all the way down I suppose).
Personally, I choose the former. If not that, then perhaps its really all about the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Maybe the Hokey-Pokey really is what its all about.
Most ISP's include a hosted web area where users can share files and pictures. Granted, its a simplistic environment without database or back end scripting capability -- but as you say, simple.
The simple fact is the way they provide $30 broadband, is to assume non commercial use as the basis for their own build out. Their contract for the service reflects this, and they expect to hold you to those terms.
Since they've found that locking out ports doesn't work, that contracts don't work, and saying please doesn't work, they've resorted to severe limits on upload speed. This blows for those of us with home connections and hosted servers because it can take 10 times as long to move content upstream to the hosted environment for distribution now - and all because people can't abide by the rules they sign up for.
ISP's would love to control what you do with the connection. They'd love to give preferential speed for sites who pay for that right. It will only fly a little way...
First, ISP services are getting more and more competitive. The old bell companies are getting better at providing higher speed over their copper, the cable companies are getting more reliable, the cell providers are getting broadband rolled out (I've used Verizon's and gotton 1mb download rates according to dsl reports in two cities), and the power companies are soon to be providing IP over that network. In short, ISP's will find that those who restrict access will gain less customers.
As far as providing higher speed for those companies that pay for it? Well, I could see some premium content going that way -- when NBC starts "releasing" a 60 minute ER with commercials embedded in it for PC based viewers instead of broadcasting it at one time, sure, they may well pay Time Warner for higher bandwidth access to that market. Beyond that? It would have to either be extremely broad and cheap -- in which case sites will host at dedicated centers like ServerBeach more often or else it won't fly because the majority of content people want will be at other sites. If its narrow, it will fail. If its wide, who cares?
The only comment I'd make in support of some of these rules -- the right to host is NOT in your consumer braodband contract. If you want to host, lease a T1 or sign a commercial contract with your broadband carrier. Its a cost of doing business. You are either in business or not. Decide. I used to pay for a business grade "hosting allowed" connection to my home. As server space has become a commodity item, I now have a home user connection and house my customer facing stuff on a rented linux box at ServerBeach. Both are valid ways to go.
In terms of trusting medical studies, I'd rank it like this:
1. Japan 2. Germany 3. India 4. U.S. (Normally I'd rank us at #1, but with the current administration, we've outsourced the chicken farming to the foxes).
In terms of skill and serious attention to detail, the Japanese have proven themselves time and again. They've proven as good at detailed study and refinement as the Americans have proven at inventing crazy ways to do things with less physical labor. Lazyness, clearly, being the mother of invention. Now, that leaves the French. Insert your own joke here, I'm on overload.
There must be at least two standards, and they must be at "WAR" all the time. What will the industry press write about otherwise?
There once was a lawyer who moved to a small town in Vermont. As there were no other lawyers in town, he assumed he'd make a fortune. Nobody called. Finally, he convinced a friend from law school to open another law firm in town. They've been busy ever since.
Seems to me the best way to discourage uninteresting content is to stop reading it and stop posting replies. Like this one, in fact, which does nothing for you but piss you off, nothing for me but waste my time, and nothing for the site but increase the response generated overall by an article neither of us is interested in. Ah well.
1. End users lie. They don't mean to lie. Often, they don't know they've lied. But they lie. Don't believe anything they tell you.
2. If someone says "I didn't change anything" it is a lie. If nothing changed, it would still work. They simply don't know what they changed, or don't want to admit it.
3. A temporary solution for a few users is never temporary and never ends up being for a few users. If you let a temporary solution onto your server for those few users, you will be supporting it as production code forever.
4. There will always be a big plan in progress to replace what you're currently doing. 90% will fail, having served the sole purpose of delaying your funding for needed fixes and updates to the present (working) solution.
5. When the "Next Generation" project is complete, it will end up being much more similar to the existing generation than to the original "Big Idea" which lead to the "Next Generation" product. That is to say, all new projects end up leaning further and further toward incremental changes the longer they go on.
6. If you outsource your project work to low bid suppliers, you'll get exactly what you asked for. It will not, however, do what you thought it would do. A good supplier will instead work with you to understand what you want, not what you say you want.
7. Most project managers aren't. They're budget managers. The more technical ones think they're project managers and end up causing huge problems. If someone is really a good project manager, they're not holding down a a mid-level salary as a department manager in cube farm. The skills are too rare and valuable. It would be like accidentally finding diamonds mixed with the plastic beads at the dollar store.
8. Most hardware failures are not. They are configuration or software errors that someone couldn't figure out. Replacing the hardware worked because it forced a reinstall.
9. Sometimes, servers just crash. Its sad, but true. Call it cosmic rays interacting with the RAM chips (Which in theory, does happen from time to time). Start by just rebooting the damn thing and waiting for it to happen again. If it doesn't, problem solved. Don't take it offline for 24 hours to figure it out.
10. The most active data is the most likely to be destroyed. This is the same reason why your old cassette deck in your 1984 Chevette always ate your favorite tape -- because that's the one that was in the deck. The old tape you won't admit to have owned from "KC & The Sunshine Band" never got destroyed because it was in the back of the glove compartment hidden under the registration where the deck couldn't get at it.
DRM is "workable" so far only because it really impacts a minority. A growing minority, but a minority anyway. For most people, iTunes is seen as a "reasonable compromise" and they assume some unknown group they call "hackers" probably still "pirates" music.
Joe six pack couldn't care less.
Soon, however, you'll need a special monitor or a special TV to watch high quality video. That crosses the line. The industry as a whole is going to find out that you DO NOT MESS WITH THE TV. That, in the US, is sacred. Mess with the TV and you're a "damn govm't commie".
I predict that the requirement for special viewing hardware to "Close the analog hole" will go over about the same way Microsoft's attempt to tell I.T. directors they had to upgrade within 6 months or pay full retail. Anyone else remember that mistake?
All its going to do is wake up people who presently don't care to how over-reaching the policy is. The backlash will be fun to watch.
Fair enough - and you're right. But step back and see how the article proclaims being able to drive over this fabric without harming it. Since the fabric is an input device, lets compare it with those. Can you drive over you mouse? How about your keyboard? Game controller? Microphone?
That's a great description of tire pressure and such -- assuming its accurate, and I have no real reason to think otherwise -- but it hardly completes the picture.
I would also point out, that 30psi can be quite a lot when there are lots of inches squared to deal with. The surface of the tire, lets say 25 square inches in contact with the road -- a 5x5 patch (which I don't know is accurate, but seems reasonable) would produce 750 pounds of pressure on the garment. That makes sense given that four times 750 is 3000 pounds -- heavy for a car, but keep in mind the tire doesn't contact the road unformly anyway. In any case, the patch of tire is uniform enough that the parts of the material absorbing the pressure could not spread out or flatten because the neighboring areas would also be under pressure.
To understand that side of the psi equation, take your laptop to the kitchen table. Get a scale. Put your thumb on the scale and feel what 25 pounds of pressure feels like, then push that hard on the closed laptop screen. Didn't break? Excellent. Now, put it beneath the wheel of your SUV and drive over it. Let me know how that works out.
Repeatedly wrong in one directly despite evidence
on
Forbes Fictional 15
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
...when a magazine and writer are repeatedly wrong in the same direction against the same products year after year even when showed evidence to the contrary each time, yes. They're off my read-list.
When that same writer repeatedly stands up for astroturfing analyst firms whos editorial process includes calling the superiors of a blogger and attempting to have the person fired, they're off my read-list.
Forbes printing fiction. Nothing new here.
on
Forbes Fictional 15
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Hell, everything they write about technology seems to me to be entirely agenda driven and certainly manageds to avoid inconvenient facts. They've declared Notes dead a half dozen times in teh last 15 years for a variety of reasons. They've come out against blogs, then blogged. Dan Lyons is a great example of this. Search google on Dan Lyons and Domino and see what people are saying (or click here hostit1.connectria.com/twduff/home.nsf/plinks/TDUF -6CC4UD for a rundown).
Slashdot Mirror
....Didn't see that as I replied. Now they're useless in this thread. Damn my eyes.
For me it was very helpful to see it posted -- I'm very much aware of the differences but missed the word gigabit in the article when I quickly read it. Reading that post was in fact "inciteful" to me and if I'd had mod points at the moment I'd have marked it so.
Scott M. couldn't have shared power with Steve J. Hell would freeze over first. Imagine the conference room discussions!
Steve: Check this out! Its stunning! It looks great, it works great. Its fast and reliable and it does something nobody else can figure out how to make money with.
Scott: Cool! Lets give it away to piss off microsoft!
Steve: No no, we can SELL this. We can make money on it.
Scott: Yeah, but how does that help our primary goal?
Steve: It does, I just said it would be profitable.
Scott: So what? It doesn't hurt Microsoft! Forget it. Give it away so nobody else can make money with the same kind of thing. In the long run we'll win because we'll hurt Bill.
****** End of merger plan *******
I recall seeing a documentary on a bio process for dealing with sewage that use some fairly minor pre-treatment and made use of UV light to kill much of the nasty germs, but then essentially used a man made wetlands area that ultimately fed a stream and a very large lake. As I recall, the result was so clean that salmon had begun to repopulate teh stream (and I understand they are a very sensitive species).
My memory is hazy on it, but I think it may even have been Chicago or Detroit that was the source of waste -- I can't recall that for sure, however.
The question that comes to my mind is how much surface area do you need to disperse the exhaust emissions of the power plant through in order to have a significant enough level of C02 for the algea without too high a level for it to thrive, and for that emmission gas to move fast enough through the algea bed to avoid a rapid accumulation of either heat or backpressure? Doesn't the plant produce waste gas at a high enough volume that the algea beds would quickly be overwhelmed?
Not necessarily in order, these are some top picks based on how they've changed or are changing our entire technology culture:
Linux. Duh. How much of everything else is built on this fantastic platform for the back end? I'm not personally in support of rolling out desktops to users, but as a server platform its amazing and flexible. More important, it empowers developers to build EVERYTHING.
Asterisk. If you use an IP phone service, you already have a small hint at how this changes things. If you've developed software that uses SIP or IAX2 to connect things and move streaming traffic you're starting to get the hint. IMO, this is a paradigm shifting technology just at the start of a giant curve up in its attention by the industry.
Sourceforce. For obvious reasons, this has empowered so many projects.
Apache, and the things its led to -- like Tomcat, etc.
Eclipse -- Wow, an open sourced (even if originally sponsored, driven, and to some extent built by IBM) rich user context framework and complete IDE for development that's absolutely a rival to Visual Studio.
I know I'm forgetting a ton -- but these in particular are real industry driving tools that changed or are about to change (in the case of Asterisk) large segments of the tech world.
As a firefighter and first responder I can state that there's a big problem with the safety crash test ratings most consumers see. These 4 star and 5 star ratings don't tell the real story at all.
These tests emphasise not just the human safety but also the cost of repair. To some extent, the cost of human repair is the factor added to the vehicle repair to make the rating. Interesting data, but not what most of us care about, and it results in very poor decision making information.
Example: I have seen personally how effective "crumple zones" combined with airbags and safety brackets on hoods which prevent the hood from sliding directly back into the windshield in the case of a head on collision can work. I see completely destroyed cars all the time where the occupants are well protected and suffer only minor injuries. That's because much of the force of impact is used up in the act of crumpling the car. These crumple zones are amazingly effective.
The problem for insurrance companies is that crumple zones and the like TRADE vehicle damage for human damage. The low-speed destruction of bumpers, fenders, hoods, and entire engine compartments mean that these cars are a "total loss" much more frequently.
If you REALLY want to promote SAFETY -- and like me, you could care less about the damage to the vehicle if the humans are better protected -- than we need a safety rating system which ignores all things other than damage to the occupants of the vehicles.
AP
....If we're ever going to stop global warming!
I'd love to see airports, train stations, and maybe a few other places have short term rentable units even smaller.
Imagine a space 9 feet long, 3 feet high, and 3 feet deep. At one end, a 2 foot wide by 2 foot deep table on which could be placed a carry on bag. An electrical outlet could be available for charging laptops and such. The other 7 feet in length (2.13 meters) would be a padded, easily cleanable surface. Set in the wall at the back would be two one time use cleaning rags, a one time use pillow, and a cheap sheet & blanket. Well filtered airflow with a CO and CO2 alarm built in would be a requirement of course.
You put in a credit card, it snaps a picture of the unit and then it opens. You are agreeing to a contract that says:
1. If its not clean, you have 1 minute to decide that and reject the unit.
2. You agree to use it for $x/hour.
3. You agree to a $50 fee if you do not leave it clean.
Assuming it opens, and is clean, you take the first of the two cleaning rags and wipe it down. Toss the rag, and pull out the sheet and blanket, the one time pillow and you've got a bed. Plug in the laptop to charge, pull the door closed behind you and sleep. Both you and the laptop get a couple of hours rest and recharging.
On leaving, you toss the sheets and pillow away, wipe down the bed with the other rag, take your stuff and leave. When you close the door another picture is taken of the "finished" state of the unit in case you've left a mess. A short cleaning cycle runs using fresh air, UV light, and who knows what else. The unit is ready for the next person.
Given most of these places have enough height to them, you could easily stack two.
In an airport, having them in the secure part of the terminal combined with good strong wall makes the security threat pretty minimal.
There are many times in airports I'd have been willing to pay $30 or more for a few hours that way.
...You're using the text with its own quotes, as testaments to itself!
I get emails all the time and they swear in thier own text that they are not spam. Oddly, many are in fact spam. Imagine that.
Look, I'm pleased as can be that you've found comfort for whatever ails or worries you in a belief system that if followed in a reasonably enlightened manner represents a generally good way of behaving toward others. So does the rule book of most of the other faiths with which I am aware.
I once had a conversation about the need for this with a Minister at a church in Waco where my sister was married. Of course, I was on my best behavior and wasn't tossing rude little bombs as I am here. It was my sister's wedding and they people had been good to her. She'd also warned them of the futility and the scene which would likely result if they pushed me with attempts to bring me to their belief system - as a result we all got along just fine. In any case, we had both been a little surprised that of all the toasts and advice being given, his and mine were the most similar. In fact, the way we both lived our lives with respect to how we treat other people and our own responsibilities were very similar. He asked me, then, why I didn't take the next step and believe as he does. My answer was quite simply that I do not need an entire mythos as a reason to behave well and do good things. It was enough for me to do good things because they are good things. To define them as good things (in other words, a source for moral direction) was simply that they were at worst harmless and at best helpful without being an imposition on those around me. By that definition, my morals mostly matched his. The problem, however, is that to accept his belief system I had to accept a great deal of what I find to be contradictory definitions of right and wrong, and a belief system enforced by rules and consequences which are themselves contradictory to those very rules. All of which, of course, is entirely superfluous. The very rules which govern the physical universe, whether you believe them to be predetermined by a supreme being or simply a result of random action, are such that simplicity is favored in all rules and explanations. The more simple the rule or law of nature, the more likely it is correct. The requirement for an entire mythos to explain its creation, and the very complexity of that explanation is itself a violation of those rules.
As long as you do good things and hurt nobody, please enjoy your belief system and if in the end you are right and I am wrong; I suppose you'll have the last laugh as I burn eternally in hell as retribution for not believing as you do -- regardless of how I've lived my life.
Of course, if you're having that laugh, it would be a "sin" under your belief system -- and if I'm burning forever in hell, I believe that whosoever made that happen would also be guilty of several "sins" under that same system. Perhaps those or He or makes those rules are above or better then them.
In the mean time, I'll continue to raise healthy, safe, and kind children; to volunteer my time as a firefighter; and to live my life in a manner which at worst hurts no one, and at best helps a few.
AP
I love that quote. Show me any evidence at all that the book you mention (which, by the way, is a mistranslation for political reasons of a mistranslation for political reasons of a bunch of documents compiled over hundreds of years by many different hands -- and that's just the New Testatment) has any supporting facts to indicate it was in fact written by the creator of our planet (why must there by a creator of our planet, by the way?) and I'll eat my hat.
By the way, "Because a lot of people believe it to be true" is not in fact proof of anything other than the fact that a lot of people believe it.
As someone who had been making clone PC's since the mid 80's, I remember being surprised by the "Intel Inside" slogan and stickers when I first saw them. REALLY soon after that I realized how brilliant it was when I started having to ask people who wanted to know if it had "the Intel" in it why they cared? At the time I was using Cyrix and AMD chips more frequently.
Its really taken a long time for AMD to become a serious competitor again -- and they've only been able to do that because of trully significant improvements that overwhelm Intel on a few fronts (like heat & power).
As a side note -- for the first time I can recall, I really do feel like I'd be better off on my next build for my desk to use an AMD processor. I have a P4 2.8ghz HT which I like, but runs very hot and really sucks down the juice.
So, Intel -- dumb move to drop the "Intel Inside" logo and campaign. It was a really great ad campaign in that it made consumers care for the first time (and for no good reason) who made their processor.
You have two choices in figuring out the origin of the most basic form of life. It either spontaneously arose from some soup of chemicals we haven't quite figured out yet, or it was created by some other form of life, thought, or energy (or whatever).
So, you have a bit of a leap of faith in either case. You either have a single leap, which is that some chemicals could get together and accidentially (a one in billions of years shot) come up with a stable enough reaction to be the basis of life.....Or, you have the other flying leap of faith which requires you to invent an entire mythos, a super-being of a father figure, (and of course beg off the question of the origination of THAT life form -- its Turtles all the way down I suppose).
Personally, I choose the former. If not that, then perhaps its really all about the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Maybe the Hokey-Pokey really is what its all about.
Most ISP's include a hosted web area where users can share files and pictures. Granted, its a simplistic environment without database or back end scripting capability -- but as you say, simple.
The simple fact is the way they provide $30 broadband, is to assume non commercial use as the basis for their own build out. Their contract for the service reflects this, and they expect to hold you to those terms.
Since they've found that locking out ports doesn't work, that contracts don't work, and saying please doesn't work, they've resorted to severe limits on upload speed. This blows for those of us with home connections and hosted servers because it can take 10 times as long to move content upstream to the hosted environment for distribution now - and all because people can't abide by the rules they sign up for.
Ah well.
ISP's would love to control what you do with the connection. They'd love to give preferential speed for sites who pay for that right. It will only fly a little way...
First, ISP services are getting more and more competitive. The old bell companies are getting better at providing higher speed over their copper, the cable companies are getting more reliable, the cell providers are getting broadband rolled out (I've used Verizon's and gotton 1mb download rates according to dsl reports in two cities), and the power companies are soon to be providing IP over that network. In short, ISP's will find that those who restrict access will gain less customers.
As far as providing higher speed for those companies that pay for it? Well, I could see some premium content going that way -- when NBC starts "releasing" a 60 minute ER with commercials embedded in it for PC based viewers instead of broadcasting it at one time, sure, they may well pay Time Warner for higher bandwidth access to that market. Beyond that? It would have to either be extremely broad and cheap -- in which case sites will host at dedicated centers like ServerBeach more often or else it won't fly because the majority of content people want will be at other sites. If its narrow, it will fail. If its wide, who cares?
The only comment I'd make in support of some of these rules -- the right to host is NOT in your consumer braodband contract. If you want to host, lease a T1 or sign a commercial contract with your broadband carrier. Its a cost of doing business. You are either in business or not. Decide. I used to pay for a business grade "hosting allowed" connection to my home. As server space has become a commodity item, I now have a home user connection and house my customer facing stuff on a rented linux box at ServerBeach. Both are valid ways to go.
AP
In terms of trusting medical studies, I'd rank it like this:
1. Japan
2. Germany
3. India
4. U.S. (Normally I'd rank us at #1, but with the current administration, we've outsourced the chicken farming to the foxes).
In terms of skill and serious attention to detail, the Japanese have proven themselves time and again. They've proven as good at detailed study and refinement as the Americans have proven at inventing crazy ways to do things with less physical labor. Lazyness, clearly, being the mother of invention. Now, that leaves the French. Insert your own joke here, I'm on overload.
There must be at least two standards, and they must be at "WAR" all the time. What will the industry press write about otherwise?
There once was a lawyer who moved to a small town in Vermont. As there were no other lawyers in town, he assumed he'd make a fortune. Nobody called. Finally, he convinced a friend from law school to open another law firm in town. They've been busy ever since.
Seems to me the best way to discourage uninteresting content is to stop reading it and stop posting replies. Like this one, in fact, which does nothing for you but piss you off, nothing for me but waste my time, and nothing for the site but increase the response generated overall by an article neither of us is interested in. Ah well.
Andrew's List of Project & Server Truths
1. End users lie. They don't mean to lie. Often, they don't know they've lied. But they lie. Don't believe anything they tell you.
2. If someone says "I didn't change anything" it is a lie. If nothing changed, it would still work. They simply don't know what they changed, or don't want to admit it.
3. A temporary solution for a few users is never temporary and never ends up being for a few users. If you let a temporary solution onto your server for those few users, you will be supporting it as production code forever.
4. There will always be a big plan in progress to replace what you're currently doing. 90% will fail, having served the sole purpose of delaying your funding for needed fixes and updates to the present (working) solution.
5. When the "Next Generation" project is complete, it will end up being much more similar to the existing generation than to the original "Big Idea" which lead to the "Next Generation" product. That is to say, all new projects end up leaning further and further toward incremental changes the longer they go on.
6. If you outsource your project work to low bid suppliers, you'll get exactly what you asked for. It will not, however, do what you thought it would do. A good supplier will instead work with you to understand what you want, not what you say you want.
7. Most project managers aren't. They're budget managers. The more technical ones think they're project managers and end up causing huge problems. If someone is really a good project manager, they're not holding down a a mid-level salary as a department manager in cube farm. The skills are too rare and valuable. It would be like accidentally finding diamonds mixed with the plastic beads at the dollar store.
8. Most hardware failures are not. They are configuration or software errors that someone couldn't figure out. Replacing the hardware worked because it forced a reinstall.
9. Sometimes, servers just crash. Its sad, but true. Call it cosmic rays interacting with the RAM chips (Which in theory, does happen from time to time). Start by just rebooting the damn thing and waiting for it to happen again. If it doesn't, problem solved. Don't take it offline for 24 hours to figure it out.
10. The most active data is the most likely to be destroyed. This is the same reason why your old cassette deck in your 1984 Chevette always ate your favorite tape -- because that's the one that was in the deck. The old tape you won't admit to have owned from "KC & The Sunshine Band" never got destroyed because it was in the back of the glove compartment hidden under the registration where the deck couldn't get at it.
-- Andrew
DRM is "workable" so far only because it really impacts a minority. A growing minority, but a minority anyway. For most people, iTunes is seen as a "reasonable compromise" and they assume some unknown group they call "hackers" probably still "pirates" music.
Joe six pack couldn't care less.
Soon, however, you'll need a special monitor or a special TV to watch high quality video. That crosses the line. The industry as a whole is going to find out that you DO NOT MESS WITH THE TV. That, in the US, is sacred. Mess with the TV and you're a "damn govm't commie".
I predict that the requirement for special viewing hardware to "Close the analog hole" will go over about the same way Microsoft's attempt to tell I.T. directors they had to upgrade within 6 months or pay full retail. Anyone else remember that mistake?
All its going to do is wake up people who presently don't care to how over-reaching the policy is. The backlash will be fun to watch.
Fair enough - and you're right. But step back and see how the article proclaims being able to drive over this fabric without harming it. Since the fabric is an input device, lets compare it with those. Can you drive over you mouse? How about your keyboard? Game controller? Microphone?
See my point?
That's a great description of tire pressure and such -- assuming its accurate, and I have no real reason to think otherwise -- but it hardly completes the picture.
I would also point out, that 30psi can be quite a lot when there are lots of inches squared to deal with. The surface of the tire, lets say 25 square inches in contact with the road -- a 5x5 patch (which I don't know is accurate, but seems reasonable) would produce 750 pounds of pressure on the garment. That makes sense given that four times 750 is 3000 pounds -- heavy for a car, but keep in mind the tire doesn't contact the road unformly anyway. In any case, the patch of tire is uniform enough that the parts of the material absorbing the pressure could not spread out or flatten because the neighboring areas would also be under pressure.
To understand that side of the psi equation, take your laptop to the kitchen table. Get a scale. Put your thumb on the scale and feel what 25 pounds of pressure feels like, then push that hard on the closed laptop screen. Didn't break? Excellent. Now, put it beneath the wheel of your SUV and drive over it. Let me know how that works out.
...when a magazine and writer are repeatedly wrong in the same direction against the same products year after year even when showed evidence to the contrary each time, yes. They're off my read-list.
When that same writer repeatedly stands up for astroturfing analyst firms whos editorial process includes calling the superiors of a blogger and attempting to have the person fired, they're off my read-list.
Hell, everything they write about technology seems to me to be entirely agenda driven and certainly manageds to avoid inconvenient facts. They've declared Notes dead a half dozen times in teh last 15 years for a variety of reasons. They've come out against blogs, then blogged. Dan Lyons is a great example of this. Search google on Dan Lyons and Domino and see what people are saying (or click here hostit1.connectria.com/twduff/home.nsf/plinks/TDUF -6CC4UD for a rundown).
I won't even link to a Forbes article any more.
He threatened people, threatened to bomb government buildings, etc. What exactly was the six years for then?