I have a laptop. I have a monitor at my home desk that becomes my second monitor. When I am on the road I live with just having the one monitor. Typically on a plane, I wouldn't have space for two monitors anyway.
If I am in a satellite office, I can typically find a second monitor if I want it.
There is likely a market for this laptop, but I don't really see it being large. Most folks who need to travel want to travel light.
By why is this an 'Ask Slashdot'. This seems like a very straight-forward question that doesn't require opinion to answer. I am not even sure if there are multiple answers. This is one that truly can be answered with a simple Google search. Am I missing something?
Cost absurd? For 400 bucks I took a round trip of about 1,000 miles each way. Total travel time for me was roughly 8 hours round trip including time to the airport, to my hotel, back to the airport and back home.
Time in a car would have been more like 50 hours. If car traveling were free, then I paid around $9/hour for time savings.
Car traveling would have cost around $320 in gas, and more than that in depreciation of the car. The flight is cheaper than the car.
If that is the case, then you shouldn't be on an airplane to begin with. if you fly at 30,000 feet for 2 hours, you will get 60 times the dose from one of those screening machines.
First, kudos to Slashdot. This troll article will get a lot of page views.
Second, as a former developer and current manager, the answer is an unqualified yes. I cannot imagine going back to one monitor. The benefit is huge and the cost is incredibly low. I have developers who cost the company in the low 100k range and even if a second monitor cost me $500 (which it doesn't), I need a 0.1% productivity to justify the cost over a coule years. From experience, it provides a heck of a lot more than that.
Okay, I am late to this story, so doubt I will get a good reply, but here goes anyway
Do we have any idea of the distribution of solar system plane angles relative to our own? We can only see planets using the transit method if they are close to the same plane as our own. The further away a plan from its star, the closer this relative angle must be. We could assume that the planes of rotation are equally distributed to make guesses about what we can't see. But is this a fair assumption? Do we have any clues on the distribution of these angles relative to our own? If so, where do we get this data?
Google just implemented an Alpha version of their new 'do not track'. It appeared on my home page today. There was a link that said Do Not Allow Google to Track My Info. Worked like a charm as far as I can tell.
Actually we just need to balance spending to revenues. The right approach will have to be some combination of spending cuts and tax increases.
Wow. I wish I had thought of that...
"The reality is we need to cut back spending. If we increase taxes, it will cover about 1/3 of our deficit... but we need to return income taxes to pre-Bush levels. We need to seriously evaluate how much we want to spend on social programs and then we need to fund our future. And it should not be in the form of an IOU to China."
Imagine if we had an extra12 Trillion to spend on green energy. We could put $10,000 solar panels on 100M houses - almost every freaking house in the US. I am not saying it is a wise decision. Just saying that is the power of 1 Trillion dollars. That is also about HALF what we will pay in interest on our debt over the next six years.
Just a friendly reminder that the U.S. is getting itself closer and closer to insolvency. Between a grossly over-funding military, entitlements out the ass and a belief that the rich should get more and more tax cuts, we are getting closer to not being able to pay our bills.
Depending on how you look at the budget, we spend 780B to 900B on defense related funding (depends on whether veteran benefits are military or entitlement) Social Security is 750B Income Security is 570B Medicare is 500B Health is 400B Interest is 250B There is about 600B in miscellaneous other areas. And we will run up a tab of $1.6Trillion in the process. Grand total of around 16Trillion in debt.
I am all for funding science. This is an area that has an investment effect in the economy. The military has almost no payback relative to the investment. Other areas listed about don't either.
Yet with the exception of the military you won't see any of the above numbers drop (and military might not either). Interest paid out is expected to double by 2015. So where does science funding end up? It doesn't take a rocket scientist (I see what I did there) to figure it out. Other countries will be able to fund scientists and I surely expect the brain drain effect to take place. The US will lose (continue to lose?) its best and brightest to countries who value science.
If you are a Democrat, you are an idiot. Sorry. This is the truth. If you are a Republican (as I was once a Republican) you are even dumber. The Republicans brag about cutting 40B out of the budget when we are running $1,600B deficits. Democrats cry that we just need to raise income tax on the rich (or return to where they were a few years ago) and things will be hunky-dory. Republicans swear that if we increase taxes, the US will go to hell.
The reality is we need to cut back spending. If we increase taxes, it will cover about 1/3 of our deficit... but we need to return income taxes to pre-Bush levels. We need to seriously evaluate how much we want to spend on social programs and then we need to fund our future. And it should not be in the form of an IOU to China.
If you want to see science funded, we need to get serious about balancing our budget.
Wow. What a horrible idea. Never, ever, donate money to your employer. And even if you take it with you when you quit, you have donated money to your employer.
As a manager, it is MY job to give you the tools to make you more productive. If I am not making the right trade-offs, then I am not doing my job. And if I am not doing my job, you shouldn't make me look good by donating from your own pocket.
I am an IT Manager. It is important to me that our users are productive and making sure that they are not fighting their means of prodcution is critical in this.
If someone's PC truly is the problem, it is replaced. When I first started at this company, folks had one monitor, had outdated equipment and there were a lot of legitimate problems that we prioritized and took care of.
Then you get the whiners. "I need a wireless mouse to be productive". "My coworker has 4GB of RAM and I only have 3GB" (Yeah... I see you playing solitaire two hours a day... I doubt the RAM is your productivity bottleneck). Part of my job is to be the asshole and say no to things. Usually, I win... sometimes I lose:)
So if a worker has to smash a PC to get a legitimate upgrade, there is an IT problem (that may stem from an Accounting problem). But in many cases, it is a whiny worker who needs to be dealt with.
HAving reread the parent post, I see he is NOT stating whether this is a high or low dosage or stating anything about his opinions of nuclear power. I apologie for the knee-jerk reaction. I have seen so much poo-pooing of the situation and references to the XKCD chart that I jumped to this conclusion. Apologies.
I am glad I have Slashdot posters here who can help me determine the risk of radiation leaks from Japan. I take such advice as seriously as I do the sex tips I frequently see posted on Slashdot.
No. your logic is incredibly week. Just because someone draws a parallel between the ethos of a hacker and the ethos of a Christian does not make them the same.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a laptop. I have a monitor at my home desk that becomes my second monitor. When I am on the road I live with just having the one monitor. Typically on a plane, I wouldn't have space for two monitors anyway.
If I am in a satellite office, I can typically find a second monitor if I want it.
There is likely a market for this laptop, but I don't really see it being large. Most folks who need to travel want to travel light.
By why is this an 'Ask Slashdot'. This seems like a very straight-forward question that doesn't require opinion to answer. I am not even sure if there are multiple answers. This is one that truly can be answered with a simple Google search. Am I missing something?
Thanks. I am not an expert, but that sounds like a reasonable explanation.
Cost absurd? For 400 bucks I took a round trip of about 1,000 miles each way. Total travel time for me was roughly 8 hours round trip including time to the airport, to my hotel, back to the airport and back home.
Time in a car would have been more like 50 hours. If car traveling were free, then I paid around $9/hour for time savings.
Car traveling would have cost around $320 in gas, and more than that in depreciation of the car. The flight is cheaper than the car.
If that is the case, then you shouldn't be on an airplane to begin with. if you fly at 30,000 feet for 2 hours, you will get 60 times the dose from one of those screening machines.
You get paid by the hour.
Folks who stand to lose money if the company goes under get equity. Not you.
First, kudos to Slashdot. This troll article will get a lot of page views.
Second, as a former developer and current manager, the answer is an unqualified yes. I cannot imagine going back to one monitor. The benefit is huge and the cost is incredibly low. I have developers who cost the company in the low 100k range and even if a second monitor cost me $500 (which it doesn't), I need a 0.1% productivity to justify the cost over a coule years. From experience, it provides a heck of a lot more than that.
Okay, I am late to this story, so doubt I will get a good reply, but here goes anyway
Do we have any idea of the distribution of solar system plane angles relative to our own? We can only see planets using the transit method if they are close to the same plane as our own. The further away a plan from its star, the closer this relative angle must be. We could assume that the planes of rotation are equally distributed to make guesses about what we can't see. But is this a fair assumption? Do we have any clues on the distribution of these angles relative to our own? If so, where do we get this data?
It was a joke. Get the stick out of your ass.
I love how you got a +5 and I got a Troll mod. Definitely made my day :)
Worse than Goatse.
Google just implemented an Alpha version of their new 'do not track'. It appeared on my home page today. There was a link that said Do Not Allow Google to Track My Info. Worked like a charm as far as I can tell.
I wrote a program to find the nth digit of i^2. It is blazing fast too.
Wow. I wish I had thought of that...
"The reality is we need to cut back spending. If we increase taxes, it will cover about 1/3 of our deficit... but we need to return income taxes to pre-Bush levels. We need to seriously evaluate how much we want to spend on social programs and then we need to fund our future. And it should not be in the form of an IOU to China."
Imagine if we had an extra12 Trillion
Not sure how the typo got there.... 1 Trillion, not 12 Trillion
Hi,
Imagine if we had an extra12 Trillion to spend on green energy. We could put $10,000 solar panels on 100M houses - almost every freaking house in the US. I am not saying it is a wise decision. Just saying that is the power of 1 Trillion dollars. That is also about HALF what we will pay in interest on our debt over the next six years.
Just a friendly reminder that the U.S. is getting itself closer and closer to insolvency. Between a grossly over-funding military, entitlements out the ass and a belief that the rich should get more and more tax cuts, we are getting closer to not being able to pay our bills.
Depending on how you look at the budget, we spend 780B to 900B on defense related funding (depends on whether veteran benefits are military or entitlement)
Social Security is 750B
Income Security is 570B
Medicare is 500B
Health is 400B
Interest is 250B
There is about 600B in miscellaneous other areas. And we will run up a tab of $1.6Trillion in the process. Grand total of around 16Trillion in debt.
I am all for funding science. This is an area that has an investment effect in the economy. The military has almost no payback relative to the investment. Other areas listed about don't either.
Yet with the exception of the military you won't see any of the above numbers drop (and military might not either). Interest paid out is expected to double by 2015. So where does science funding end up? It doesn't take a rocket scientist (I see what I did there) to figure it out. Other countries will be able to fund scientists and I surely expect the brain drain effect to take place. The US will lose (continue to lose?) its best and brightest to countries who value science.
If you are a Democrat, you are an idiot. Sorry. This is the truth. If you are a Republican (as I was once a Republican) you are even dumber. The Republicans brag about cutting 40B out of the budget when we are running $1,600B deficits. Democrats cry that we just need to raise income tax on the rich (or return to where they were a few years ago) and things will be hunky-dory. Republicans swear that if we increase taxes, the US will go to hell.
The reality is we need to cut back spending. If we increase taxes, it will cover about 1/3 of our deficit... but we need to return income taxes to pre-Bush levels. We need to seriously evaluate how much we want to spend on social programs and then we need to fund our future. And it should not be in the form of an IOU to China.
If you want to see science funded, we need to get serious about balancing our budget.
Wow. What a horrible idea. Never, ever, donate money to your employer. And even if you take it with you when you quit, you have donated money to your employer.
As a manager, it is MY job to give you the tools to make you more productive. If I am not making the right trade-offs, then I am not doing my job. And if I am not doing my job, you shouldn't make me look good by donating from your own pocket.
I am an IT Manager. It is important to me that our users are productive and making sure that they are not fighting their means of prodcution is critical in this.
If someone's PC truly is the problem, it is replaced. When I first started at this company, folks had one monitor, had outdated equipment and there were a lot of legitimate problems that we prioritized and took care of.
Then you get the whiners. "I need a wireless mouse to be productive". "My coworker has 4GB of RAM and I only have 3GB" (Yeah... I see you playing solitaire two hours a day... I doubt the RAM is your productivity bottleneck). Part of my job is to be the asshole and say no to things. Usually, I win... sometimes I lose :)
So if a worker has to smash a PC to get a legitimate upgrade, there is an IT problem (that may stem from an Accounting problem). But in many cases, it is a whiny worker who needs to be dealt with.
You already are in the "no sex" control group. Thanks for your contribution.
HAving reread the parent post, I see he is NOT stating whether this is a high or low dosage or stating anything about his opinions of nuclear power. I apologie for the knee-jerk reaction. I have seen so much poo-pooing of the situation and references to the XKCD chart that I jumped to this conclusion. Apologies.
The key to the chart
"(However, keep in mind that I am not a radiation expert, and this chart is intended for general public informational use only.)"
So, yes, please make your judgements based on a web comic.
Hi,
I am glad I have Slashdot posters here who can help me determine the risk of radiation leaks from Japan. I take such advice as seriously as I do the sex tips I frequently see posted on Slashdot.
Anyone else getting a download dialog when clicking on the link?
And I swear it was an accident... I wasn't trying to read the article, honest!
Almost as weak as my spelling of "weak".
No. your logic is incredibly week. Just because someone draws a parallel between the ethos of a hacker and the ethos of a Christian does not make them the same.