I'd like to know how can they tell whether the energy has been ate by the browser, the scheduler, the idle process or whatever else is in a Windows OS!!!
If only there was an electrical device you could connect to a computer and see instantaneous power usage. That way you cold open a page in IE, look at the power. Open the same page in Firefox, look at the power, etc.
I guess we'll all have to wait at least another century for a technology as advanced as that, though.
Worse than 'a generalization': if this conjecture is true, FLT is a trivial consequence. That's a clue that Beal's conjecture is likely significantly harder than Fermat's.
...or easier. Beal removes a constraint from Fermat's theorum.
All you need to do is find one exception and you've won. Removing a constraint makes that search easier.
Don't get me wrong, I like the added features, but I hope nobody expects laptops that can be used for multiple days in a row without recharging (with sleep mode enabled between sessions of course) or next-gen smart phones that can go a week without recharging. They will figure out how to use that extra power somewhere, leaving us at around the same runtime as before.
I'm much more interested in it for electric cars.
Four times the batter life in a cellphone? Meh - mine already lasts for days.
Four times the range of electric cars? World-changing technology.
So what happens when the body of the plane is taken over and the pilot is told that if he doesn't let the hijackers into the cabin they'll kill every passanger slowly and in the most possibly painful manner?
How is that worse than flying it into a building full of people?
Instead of making folks discard completely non-threatening items, TSA should look into *actual* security.
The airport should have a series of series of checkpoints. Every vehicle that pulls onto the property goes past a guard that asks you how your day is going (screen #1). At the ticket counter, a friendly agent asks if you are enjoying the weather (screen #2). Drop off your bags, some other random, friendly question (screen #3). Lastly, at the x-ray / metal detector / body scanner, the attending agent looks you in the eye and chats with you again (screen #4). Every station should be manned by trained security personel empowered to flag you for greater scrutiny.
The terrorists can just pop a couple of Xanax before they go through - suppress their emotional response.
Remember: The police have no interest in proving innocence, only in proving guilt.
Everything they say, everything they ask, it's all designed to prove guilt. You only have to use one wrong word and you're in for a miserable time. The police love it when people protest their innocence and/or try to explain things away, it just gives them more ammunition.
Far better to just say nothing (or "I don't know, officer" to a direct question like "Do you know how fast you were going?").
Slashdot Mirror
The phone's CPU could have a special PIN number that comes on a scratch card in the box when you buy it.
If your phone gets stolen you call your operator and read them the PIN. They send out a "kill" signal and the phone commits suicide.
This is impossible for hackers to fake - they can never know the PIN.
I imagine people will get wise to that one real fast...
How about an old fashioned fuse inside the chip? Blow the fuse, job done...
Did you know that people are still using COBOL?
(And for the same reasons...)
How much ActiveX can you see out there? I see much more Javascript and HTML5 ...
It's the "out there" part of your answer that worries me.
The OP clearly said "core business apps", ie. internal stuff.
I'd like to know how can they tell whether the energy has been ate by the browser, the scheduler, the idle process or whatever else is in a Windows OS!!!
If only there was an electrical device you could connect to a computer and see instantaneous power usage. That way you cold open a page in IE, look at the power. Open the same page in Firefox, look at the power, etc.
I guess we'll all have to wait at least another century for a technology as advanced as that, though.
Oh, wait: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_A_Watt
You forget ActiveX!
The fiends at Microsoft are one step ahead of you!!
I fail to see how using IE over the other major browsers yields a net saving...
...so therefore it can't be true?
Must be nice to be omniscient.
Well..certainly not one that would allow their employees to have two extra cups of tea per week.
...a certain desperation to Microsoft's IE marketing efforts
Not at all. If you run a company with 10,000 PCs then it's a significant saving.
They only bought Java because they thought they could sue Google (ie. Android) over the API.
It's almost like he *wants* a decent percentage of us to go to Hell, right?
Clue: Europe is a union. What the summary is talking about is like people committing crimes in another state in the USA.
Last I heard, the USA has laws to prevent people hopping state borders and going "neener, neener" from the other side.
Similarly, these laws won't affect people who hack from tax havens, etc.
Clue: Hackers don't have to live in the same country where they hack (in fact they often don't...)
Murderers, corrupt politicians wrecking the economy? Not so much.
How did people ever manage without electronic devices to numb their kids' brains?
Worse than 'a generalization': if this conjecture is true, FLT is a trivial consequence. That's a clue that Beal's conjecture is likely significantly harder than Fermat's.
...or easier. Beal removes a constraint from Fermat's theorum.
All you need to do is find one exception and you've won. Removing a constraint makes that search easier.
Don't get me wrong, I like the added features, but I hope nobody expects laptops that can be used for multiple days in a row without recharging (with sleep mode enabled between sessions of course) or next-gen smart phones that can go a week without recharging. They will figure out how to use that extra power somewhere, leaving us at around the same runtime as before.
I'm much more interested in it for electric cars.
Four times the batter life in a cellphone? Meh - mine already lasts for days.
Four times the range of electric cars? World-changing technology.
Anti-anxiety meds work very well against somebody "looking you in the eye".
How many terrorists have the Israelis caught at airports?
I don't mean that as a rhetorical question, but I don't remember them doing so any time in the last couple of decades.
They sat an air-marshal next to the shoe bomber because they didn't like the look of him. Nothing happened on that flight.
So what happens when the body of the plane is taken over and the pilot is told that if he doesn't let the hijackers into the cabin they'll kill every passanger slowly and in the most possibly painful manner?
How is that worse than flying it into a building full of people?
Instead of making folks discard completely non-threatening items, TSA should look into *actual* security.
The airport should have a series of series of checkpoints. Every vehicle that pulls onto the property goes past a guard that asks you how your day is going (screen #1). At the ticket counter, a friendly agent asks if you are enjoying the weather (screen #2). Drop off your bags, some other random, friendly question (screen #3). Lastly, at the x-ray / metal detector / body scanner, the attending agent looks you in the eye and chats with you again (screen #4). Every station should be manned by trained security personel empowered to flag you for greater scrutiny.
The terrorists can just pop a couple of Xanax before they go through - suppress their emotional response.
Nah, it's just a tennis ball with a hole in it.
Remember: The police have no interest in proving innocence, only in proving guilt.
Everything they say, everything they ask, it's all designed to prove guilt. You only have to use one wrong word and you're in for a miserable time. The police love it when people protest their innocence and/or try to explain things away, it just gives them more ammunition.
Far better to just say nothing (or "I don't know, officer" to a direct question like "Do you know how fast you were going?").
The problem is that Apple makes more than that off just the iPhone.
GM makes money selling cars, too, but I'm not about to replace my desktop PC with a station wagon.
I think that given MS office and LibreOffice are in XML, it shouldn't be difficult at all to reverse engineer in the future.
You know how I know you haven't read the OOXML standard?