Why didn't the GPS work until it landed? Also, when I enter precise coordinates into Google Maps it gives precise location, not just the nearest road. What happened there?
You're playing the same game here. Anyone who calls Obama out over his obvious hard-on for authoritarianism is a teabagger? That's partisan bullshit.
I don't see how falsly attributing something to Obama is "calling him out over his obvious hard-on for authoritarianism," nor how correcting this, for accuracy, is partisan. Maybe Obama is authoritarian, but lying about him isn't evidence of it. This has old-school conservative tactics written all over it... these days, that's the Tea Party's modus operandi.
Find anything anywhere that says Obama, or any liberal, thinks an internet kill switch is a good idea. You will fail. The proposal came from a Republican senator, and this is the second time a Republican has suggested such nonsense. The nanny-staters are in the ranks of the Republican Party and the Tea Party. It's not partisan to point out that someone is attempting to attribute a bad idea to the wrong person.
Amazon either needs to take a loss on eBooks sold on Apple's platform, or else raise prices.
What's the marginal cost of an ebook?
Not sure, but I suspect you have a good point. 70% of the cost of a real book is distribution, and that isn't counting printing and binding. Publishers want to maintain that 70%+ even though eBook "manufacturing" and distribution costs are so small it's difficult to measure. Apple, it seems, wants to skim the publishers' windfall.
Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?
Summary poster attempted to pin it on Obama, saying he was considering it. Nonsense. That was what I meant by partisan BS. Summary Poster is obviously a Republican birther, or some such nonsense. The game is "hate the other side no matter what," and it's garbage. I honestly doubt even McCain, a Republican, would seriously consider it. It's teabaggers. They want to control aspects of our lives, under the banner of "superior morality," that no one has the right to control. And if events in Egypt shows us anything, it's that control is an illusion.
I'm just going to quote the comment above my OP to show you what a silly person you are.
Um...how does Senator Susan Collins, Republican from Main, putting forward a beyond-all-reason-lame bill, somehow equal Obama following Mubarak?
Let me help you understand this a bit... liberals would never propose a kill switch. Obama is a liberal. The idea comes, for a second time, from the ranks of the REPUBLICAN party. FYI Obama is a DEMOCRAT.
"Even as President Obama prepares to follow Mubarak with his own 'internet kill switch',
WTF??? I'm really getting sick and tired of this partisan garbage on slashdot. It's bad enough that it's in posters' comments, do we really have to have it force fed to us in the summaries? Hey lefties... fuck you... but you righties, a special "go fuck yourself" from me, mkay? Arrogant lying assholes... say anything to make the competition look bad, anything at all to win. Stupid, women-hating, fascist money lovers. Bite me.
This moron CEO's statement is worthless. Either he is incorrect and will prove he is a fool, or he is correct and his statement will have no effect and no benefit for Netgear or any other remora-like company. He should have kept his mouth shut, or said the opposite of what he believes. Had he done the former, he might actually have had some influence in accomplishing his goal. As it is, it's an ineffective rant: "Waa! Apple mean! Waa! Waa!"
Mod up. That bridge was paid for decades ago. Upkeep is in tye budget for all roads and bridges in the state. The only reason (and a poor one) to keep tolls is to have jobs for people. Eliminate the jobs, then continuing tolls on such projects is fleecing the locals. I call this municiple greed.
I don't care how many new flaws keep popping up, Windows is still the best OS for insecure computing and rot. Show me an OS that can waste more of your time, proc cycles, harddrive reads&writes or bandwidth... I dare you. Can you imagine the increased unemployment rate if it was actually fixed? Windows is good for the economy, and good for China.
No, seriously. Our fucked-up senile delinquents on the Supreme Court have ruled that everything under the goddamn sun falls under the "interstate commerce clause."
Their argument for the taxation of breast milk makes sense... baby formula is taxed, and if a mother opts to breast feed she is affecting commerce in lost sales of baby formula.
Yes, kidding. But the decision from the case that exploded the power of that interstate commerce clause uses the same logic. If prostitution were legal commerce, masterbation would be taxed as interstate commerce, even if you never crossed state lines to do it.
IMO, the largest glaring mistake was not utilizing the legislative majority correctly... by starting with the most difficult thing (healthcare), this President and that Congress missed out on blazing trails with a thousand easier to pass bills, that were likely also important. They should have dedicated the first few months of that cycle to knock out a ton of crap that needed passed, or fixed, then moved on to healthcare.
Einstein's theories dictate that nothing can go as fast as c.
Actually, no: they are based on the observation that the speed of light relative to you doesn't change as you accelerate,
Nice.
which of course means that you can never catch it.
could be better... "of course?"... not obvious, but can't catch it because as you accelerate towards it, your mass increases (and other weird effect like for you time slows), so you need more energy to get there... sorry this is fragmented... but you know what I mean, if you could reach c, you'd have infinite energy to do it, and infinite mass when you reach it, and time for you would stop completely (you know... all... impossible, or at least inscrutable, IMO).
And of course your statement is incorrect anyway, as light is something and goes as fast as c. So do all massless particles, for that matter. So do chances in electromagnetic and gravitational fields.
well... I wanna say things for me have mass. But that's not quite right... and then I take a turn and say when anyone is talking or thinking about anything.... because the atom is mostly vacuum... the almost entirety of what anyone could be thinking or talking about... its not that it doesn't exist, it's that all of it truly is mostly nothing at all. Everything is really (to understate it) mostly nothing, literally. Anyway... in a pinch, all things have mass... things that don't have mass, we designate as massless things... so... I'm screwing with the meaning of the word "thing." Things don't mean massless things... those are other things, and even though the same word was used, they don't all belong in the same set together under the heading "Things," (heh, but they do!). Sure... massless things can reach c. But that's not right either, because it's not like they're changing speed in a vacuum, they're c-velocity all the time. But if most everything is nothing... and nothing is massless... this is ridiculous, is it not? Even if we grant that we both totally understand all Einstein ever did (bear with me)... our language is impoverished... perhaps even language itself is the problem. I honestly don't want to get into the math even if I could, but I expect, and hope, that there things (oh, boy) don't get mixed up... like things can't be both logically possible and logically impossible at the same time.
Relativity says nothing about faster than c.
Relativity states that to go faster than c is to travel in time.
well... it says that to travel at all is to travel in time... space and time are one (because c is constant).
In other words, things going faster than c will violate causality.
True... but I don't see how that's saying the same thing in other words... oh, unless... yes... we're talking about the same thing... that here is something that follows... a because of
That's pretty much up there with point out that something results in perpetual motion engines, as far as strength of refutations go.
meh... metaphor.
I'm sticking to my guns.
Einstein never talked about "faster" than c.
c is the speed limit, in a vacuum... beyond that, you (or anyone) are (attempting badly) to add to his work, and most anyone is going to look foolish if you try (unless you're effectively him... you know... like him... supercreativelybrilliantandperceptiveandetcetc... which there probably are some, a few like that... pretty unlikely you or I... idk, maybe, I don't know you (jeez did you see some of those posts in the recent summary concerning P and NP and what what? Awesomely entertaining, even if we might not cruise at those vast heights).
It's all we can do to convince others that we understand a little. I'd just like to avoid the blatantly obviously not quite right...
HA! Forget it Don Quixote... unless you don't have a lot of money to blow and can bend those stability, performance and security requirements, Windows is just about as close as your ever gonna get.
it certainly concerns me that someone who makes such unfounded statements is doing this research in the same way I would be concerned about a paramedic performing a neurosurgical procedure.
Take it easy and give the paramedic a break... it's a shitty job, he has to put up with all sorts of crazies and mangled bodies and body parts... and for what it's worth, it's not rocket science.
Well... if nothing can exceed c, then does the state of things beyond that really matter to us?
Technically incorrect, and for some reason this is a common mistake. Einstein's theories dictate that nothing can go as fast as c . I'm not saying there is anything that can go faster, just that that's not what his theories say. Relativity says nothing about faster than c.
2000 was the best version of Windows that MS ever made
Still... it's a dubious honor.
IMHO, Windows Servers have a purpose... to help administrate lots of Wndows Desktops with Active-Directory, and, of course, Exchange. When running Exchange, you need a couple or three compentant administrators, that do nothing else, who are constantly on top of things... because it doesn't run by itself.
Any IT professional that insists running Internet-facing web servers on Windows is just as good as anything else is ____________________________ [I can't say it... please, responders, fill in the blank].
BAD METAPHORE TIME: Hardcore Microsoft-loyalist Windows Admins saw the movie first, and insist it was better than the book. The rest of us actually appreciate literature.
I used to be a blacksmith, and I still have all my tools. If someone can produce an intact example of one of these delightful screws, I'll bet I can produce a screwdriver for it.
Screw that! But you can still help... broad swords... we need lots and lots of broad swords.
I had been given a different impression of their government. It sounded like they did some things correct. For example, in the US, when, say, a bridge is built and it's determined a toll is needed to pay for the bridge for ten years, that toll remains forever. In AU, once they pay for the bridge, the tolls go away. It sounded like their government was more honest and didn't attempt to hang on to revenue generation that was unfounded. I believe Microsoft technologies can be hardened and secure at the desktop level, and Active Directory is simply the best thing to come out of Redmond, Exchange a distant second, and there seem to be few technologies that can duplicate all it's functionality. However, to say that switching to Windows in the data center is a money saving decision is ridiculously short sighted. Just babysitting a Windows Server can cost a small fortune in IT hours alone, forgetting for a second that every few years Microsoft will want you to upgrade software and licensing, without really adding any functionality, reliability or security (due to backwards compatibility, the flaws will remain). To hear about this is somewhat disconcerting to me, and I wonder what really happened here. It's so painfully obvious that in the data center that Linux or a BSD (Free, Net or Open) is quite obviously far more secure, far more stable (no Windows rot), and far less expensive than Microsoft solutions, on any scale. Homogenizing the entire government on a single OS is a bad idea (all your eggs in one basket), and that it's Windows seems to me insanely stupid (Meet the AU botnets!).
I believe you exaggerate. Not logically impossible, perhaps very improbable (hopefully), but still possible. The containers are good, I assume, but no way to know, exactly, 200 years from now what the state of that container will be, nor where or what, exactly, the water table is doing in a specific area... just really good speculation.
Just noticed your nick. Dig it. I've had a DL, a DL wagon, and I'm currently storing my low milage 242 factory intercooled turbo until I can afford, well... a new turbo clutch (long story, not my fault), a decent replacement water-cooled dual stage ceramic turbo, an entirely new suspension, and their version of the LSD from the last years the 240 was made... and a few other things... it's been a crappy couple of years, what can I say... but I am looking forward to that day I can zoom around in my (wow, now 'classic') '84 242ti... perhaps we can meet and drag Mad Max-style after the obviously rapidly approaching nuclear apocalypse.;)
What concerns me is the half-life. I realize a tanker of gasoline exploding could instantly vaporize a small town, but at least once the fire is extinguished, the danger is pretty much passed. Even with toxic chemicals, the site may be uninhabitable for a decade or two... but with nuclear waste, and even more so with the recycled nuclear waste, we're talking, extremely conservatively, a thousand years of toxicity.
I have faith that the complexity of a reactor could be mitigated with future innovations, that danger of meltdowns, China Syndrome, could become so improbable that it could never happen. And I would marry nuclear power if we would stop white washing the waste problem. Don't play it down... it is a problem and it is not solved yet. And I'm not comfortable with pushing the waste solution to the future. Before we go balls to the wall nuclear, we really need that to be solved —definatively and unquestionably solved.. And neither Yucca Mountain nor breeder reactors are a true solution to the waste from fission.
As a footnote, what really really disturbs me about nuclear power is why we know so much about it, what it was that had driven it forward, was weoponization. Had our government put a tenth of the resources they spent on figuring out the best way to make fuel for bombs into cleaner energies, we would not have the energy crisis we have today. We won a phantom war against The USSR... but they fooled us into our arsenal. They had a hollow pagent, a show, but we really blew all those massive resources, man-centuries of work, because of fear... irrational fear of something that couldn't have happened, and our safety umbrella was, absurdly enough, assured mutual destruction. They fooled us good.
Slashdot Mirror
Why didn't the GPS work until it landed? Also, when I enter precise coordinates into Google Maps it gives precise location, not just the nearest road. What happened there?
You're playing the same game here. Anyone who calls Obama out over his obvious hard-on for authoritarianism is a teabagger? That's partisan bullshit.
I don't see how falsly attributing something to Obama is "calling him out over his obvious hard-on for authoritarianism," nor how correcting this, for accuracy, is partisan. Maybe Obama is authoritarian, but lying about him isn't evidence of it. This has old-school conservative tactics written all over it... these days, that's the Tea Party's modus operandi.
Find anything anywhere that says Obama, or any liberal, thinks an internet kill switch is a good idea. You will fail. The proposal came from a Republican senator, and this is the second time a Republican has suggested such nonsense. The nanny-staters are in the ranks of the Republican Party and the Tea Party. It's not partisan to point out that someone is attempting to attribute a bad idea to the wrong person.
Amazon either needs to take a loss on eBooks sold on Apple's platform, or else raise prices.
What's the marginal cost of an ebook?
Not sure, but I suspect you have a good point. 70% of the cost of a real book is distribution, and that isn't counting printing and binding. Publishers want to maintain that 70%+ even though eBook "manufacturing" and distribution costs are so small it's difficult to measure. Apple, it seems, wants to skim the publishers' windfall.
Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?
Summary poster attempted to pin it on Obama, saying he was considering it. Nonsense. That was what I meant by partisan BS. Summary Poster is obviously a Republican birther, or some such nonsense. The game is "hate the other side no matter what," and it's garbage. I honestly doubt even McCain, a Republican, would seriously consider it. It's teabaggers. They want to control aspects of our lives, under the banner of "superior morality," that no one has the right to control. And if events in Egypt shows us anything, it's that control is an illusion.
I'm just going to quote the comment above my OP to show you what a silly person you are.
Um...how does Senator Susan Collins, Republican from Main, putting forward a beyond-all-reason-lame bill, somehow equal Obama following Mubarak?
Let me help you understand this a bit... liberals would never propose a kill switch. Obama is a liberal. The idea comes, for a second time, from the ranks of the REPUBLICAN party. FYI Obama is a DEMOCRAT.
thanks for seeing through my idiotic rage. I'm feeling much better now.
OK, I lashed out... wish I didn't but I did. My bad. I'll try to keep that reigned in a little.
"Even as President Obama prepares to follow Mubarak with his own 'internet kill switch',
WTF??? I'm really getting sick and tired of this partisan garbage on slashdot. It's bad enough that it's in posters' comments, do we really have to have it force fed to us in the summaries? Hey lefties... fuck you... but you righties, a special "go fuck yourself" from me, mkay? Arrogant lying assholes... say anything to make the competition look bad, anything at all to win. Stupid, women-hating, fascist money lovers. Bite me.
First modern tool that comes to mind that won't be getting much use anymore is Paul Allen's yacht's helocopter
This moron CEO's statement is worthless. Either he is incorrect and will prove he is a fool, or he is correct and his statement will have no effect and no benefit for Netgear or any other remora-like company. He should have kept his mouth shut, or said the opposite of what he believes. Had he done the former, he might actually have had some influence in accomplishing his goal. As it is, it's an ineffective rant: "Waa! Apple mean! Waa! Waa!"
Mod up. That bridge was paid for decades ago. Upkeep is in tye budget for all roads and bridges in the state. The only reason (and a poor one) to keep tolls is to have jobs for people. Eliminate the jobs, then continuing tolls on such projects is fleecing the locals. I call this municiple greed.
nice. LOL
I don't care how many new flaws keep popping up, Windows is still the best OS for insecure computing and rot. Show me an OS that can waste more of your time, proc cycles, harddrive reads&writes or bandwidth... I dare you. Can you imagine the increased unemployment rate if it was actually fixed? Windows is good for the economy, and good for China.
No, seriously. Our fucked-up senile delinquents on the Supreme Court have ruled that everything under the goddamn sun falls under the "interstate commerce clause."
Their argument for the taxation of breast milk makes sense... baby formula is taxed, and if a mother opts to breast feed she is affecting commerce in lost sales of baby formula.
Yes, kidding. But the decision from the case that exploded the power of that interstate commerce clause uses the same logic. If prostitution were legal commerce, masterbation would be taxed as interstate commerce, even if you never crossed state lines to do it.
so, what happened?
IMO, the largest glaring mistake was not utilizing the legislative majority correctly... by starting with the most difficult thing (healthcare), this President and that Congress missed out on blazing trails with a thousand easier to pass bills, that were likely also important. They should have dedicated the first few months of that cycle to knock out a ton of crap that needed passed, or fixed, then moved on to healthcare.
Actually, no: they are based on the observation that the speed of light relative to you doesn't change as you accelerate,
Nice.
which of course means that you can never catch it.
could be better... "of course?"... not obvious, but can't catch it because as you accelerate towards it, your mass increases (and other weird effect like for you time slows), so you need more energy to get there... sorry this is fragmented... but you know what I mean, if you could reach c, you'd have infinite energy to do it, and infinite mass when you reach it, and time for you would stop completely (you know... all ... impossible, or at least inscrutable, IMO).
And of course your statement is incorrect anyway, as light is something and goes as fast as c. So do all massless particles, for that matter. So do chances in electromagnetic and gravitational fields.
well... I wanna say things for me have mass. But that's not quite right... and then I take a turn and say when anyone is talking or thinking about anything.... because the atom is mostly vacuum... the almost entirety of what anyone could be thinking or talking about... its not that it doesn't exist, it's that all of it truly is mostly nothing at all. Everything is really (to understate it) mostly nothing, literally. Anyway... in a pinch, all things have mass... things that don't have mass, we designate as massless things... so... I'm screwing with the meaning of the word "thing." Things don't mean massless things... those are other things, and even though the same word was used, they don't all belong in the same set together under the heading "Things," (heh, but they do!). Sure... massless things can reach c. But that's not right either, because it's not like they're changing speed in a vacuum, they're c-velocity all the time. But if most everything is nothing... and nothing is massless... this is ridiculous, is it not? Even if we grant that we both totally understand all Einstein ever did (bear with me)... our language is impoverished... perhaps even language itself is the problem. I honestly don't want to get into the math even if I could, but I expect, and hope, that there things (oh, boy) don't get mixed up... like things can't be both logically possible and logically impossible at the same time.
Relativity says nothing about faster than c.
Relativity states that to go faster than c is to travel in time.
well... it says that to travel at all is to travel in time... space and time are one (because c is constant).
In other words, things going faster than c will violate causality.
True... but I don't see how that's saying the same thing in other words... oh, unless... yes... we're talking about the same thing... that here is something that follows... a because of
That's pretty much up there with point out that something results in perpetual motion engines, as far as strength of refutations go.
meh... metaphor.
I'm sticking to my guns.
Einstein never talked about "faster" than c.
c is the speed limit, in a vacuum... beyond that, you (or anyone) are (attempting badly) to add to his work, and most anyone is going to look foolish if you try (unless you're effectively him... you know... like him... supercreativelybrilliantandperceptiveandetcetc... which there probably are some, a few like that... pretty unlikely you or I... idk, maybe, I don't know you (jeez did you see some of those posts in the recent summary concerning P and NP and what what? Awesomely entertaining, even if we might not cruise at those vast heights).
It's all we can do to convince others that we understand a little. I'd just like to avoid the blatantly obviously not quite right...
HA! Forget it Don Quixote... unless you don't have a lot of money to blow and can bend those stability, performance and security requirements, Windows is just about as close as your ever gonna get.
it certainly concerns me that someone who makes such unfounded statements is doing this research in the same way I would be concerned about a paramedic performing a neurosurgical procedure.
Take it easy and give the paramedic a break... it's a shitty job, he has to put up with all sorts of crazies and mangled bodies and body parts... and for what it's worth, it's not rocket science.
Well... if nothing can exceed c, then does the state of things beyond that really matter to us?
Technically incorrect, and for some reason this is a common mistake. Einstein's theories dictate that nothing can go as fast as c . I'm not saying there is anything that can go faster, just that that's not what his theories say. Relativity says nothing about faster than c.
2000 was the best version of Windows that MS ever made
Still... it's a dubious honor.
IMHO, Windows Servers have a purpose... to help administrate lots of Wndows Desktops with Active-Directory, and, of course, Exchange. When running Exchange, you need a couple or three compentant administrators, that do nothing else, who are constantly on top of things... because it doesn't run by itself.
Any IT professional that insists running Internet-facing web servers on Windows is just as good as anything else is ____________________________ [I can't say it... please, responders, fill in the blank].
BAD METAPHORE TIME: Hardcore Microsoft-loyalist Windows Admins saw the movie first, and insist it was better than the book. The rest of us actually appreciate literature.
I used to be a blacksmith, and I still have all my tools. If someone can produce an intact example of one of these delightful screws, I'll bet I can produce a screwdriver for it.
Screw that! But you can still help... broad swords... we need lots and lots of broad swords.
The same kind of screw was used, I believe, for 4 screws in the Compact Macs.
I had been given a different impression of their government. It sounded like they did some things correct. For example, in the US, when, say, a bridge is built and it's determined a toll is needed to pay for the bridge for ten years, that toll remains forever. In AU, once they pay for the bridge, the tolls go away. It sounded like their government was more honest and didn't attempt to hang on to revenue generation that was unfounded. I believe Microsoft technologies can be hardened and secure at the desktop level, and Active Directory is simply the best thing to come out of Redmond, Exchange a distant second, and there seem to be few technologies that can duplicate all it's functionality. However, to say that switching to Windows in the data center is a money saving decision is ridiculously short sighted. Just babysitting a Windows Server can cost a small fortune in IT hours alone, forgetting for a second that every few years Microsoft will want you to upgrade software and licensing, without really adding any functionality, reliability or security (due to backwards compatibility, the flaws will remain). To hear about this is somewhat disconcerting to me, and I wonder what really happened here. It's so painfully obvious that in the data center that Linux or a BSD (Free, Net or Open) is quite obviously far more secure, far more stable (no Windows rot), and far less expensive than Microsoft solutions, on any scale. Homogenizing the entire government on a single OS is a bad idea (all your eggs in one basket), and that it's Windows seems to me insanely stupid (Meet the AU botnets!).
I believe you exaggerate. Not logically impossible, perhaps very improbable (hopefully), but still possible. The containers are good, I assume, but no way to know, exactly, 200 years from now what the state of that container will be, nor where or what, exactly, the water table is doing in a specific area... just really good speculation.
Just noticed your nick. Dig it. I've had a DL, a DL wagon, and I'm currently storing my low milage 242 factory intercooled turbo until I can afford, well... a new turbo clutch (long story, not my fault), a decent replacement water-cooled dual stage ceramic turbo, an entirely new suspension, and their version of the LSD from the last years the 240 was made... and a few other things... it's been a crappy couple of years, what can I say... but I am looking forward to that day I can zoom around in my (wow, now 'classic') '84 242ti... perhaps we can meet and drag Mad Max-style after the obviously rapidly approaching nuclear apocalypse. ;)
What concerns me is the half-life. I realize a tanker of gasoline exploding could instantly vaporize a small town, but at least once the fire is extinguished, the danger is pretty much passed. Even with toxic chemicals, the site may be uninhabitable for a decade or two... but with nuclear waste, and even more so with the recycled nuclear waste, we're talking, extremely conservatively, a thousand years of toxicity.
I have faith that the complexity of a reactor could be mitigated with future innovations, that danger of meltdowns, China Syndrome, could become so improbable that it could never happen. And I would marry nuclear power if we would stop white washing the waste problem. Don't play it down... it is a problem and it is not solved yet. And I'm not comfortable with pushing the waste solution to the future. Before we go balls to the wall nuclear, we really need that to be solved —definatively and unquestionably solved.. And neither Yucca Mountain nor breeder reactors are a true solution to the waste from fission.
As a footnote, what really really disturbs me about nuclear power is why we know so much about it, what it was that had driven it forward, was weoponization. Had our government put a tenth of the resources they spent on figuring out the best way to make fuel for bombs into cleaner energies, we would not have the energy crisis we have today. We won a phantom war against The USSR... but they fooled us into our arsenal. They had a hollow pagent, a show, but we really blew all those massive resources, man-centuries of work, because of fear... irrational fear of something that couldn't have happened, and our safety umbrella was, absurdly enough, assured mutual destruction. They fooled us good.