This is not definitive (what on/. is???) and I may be totally wrong, but I imagine it is the font information. TrueTypeFont, Windows font files are.ttf.
Since 41 light-years is so far away, would you want a supernova to happen there? Or maybe a quasar to be present there? I certainly wouldn't... I'm pretty sure those events happen much FURTHER away.
Think about it this way, at one point it took ten days to get from St Louis to San Francisco. Now it takes about 2 hours. Hell, at one point it took us several months to get from Portugal to New York, now it takes about 6 hours. Rome used to be incredibly far away from Britain, the outer reaches of the empire. Now most people on this planet think of the two as nearly right on top of each other.
In the grand scheme of things, 41 LY is pretty damned close. The nearest star is 4.2 LY away, this is only ten times further than the absolute closest star to us. We aren't going to find anything more advanced than bacteria any closer than 4.2, to even know that there are PLANETS just ten times further is very nice to know (if you think that it's possible residents are friendly...otherwise it would be nice if they were farther away...).
I didn't say that, actually I very specifically said that there "was some improvement, just not as much as the others."
What part of that statement is not true?
It's not just that the Wii is slower than the 360 or PS3, it also doesn't have a lot of the modern features either of those have (it also doesn't have the incredibly convoluted PPU system they have either, but how difficult the hardware is to program for is another argument altogether). The GPU doesn't have pixel or vertex shader hardware, do you know what the last PC GPU that had a fixed function T&L pipeline was? ATI 7xxx series and Nvidia GeForce 2. On a 90nm process, you could make a GPU of that complexity for very cheap and get it to run far faster than the original 7xxx or GF2. I'm sure there are some console tricks include like in the original Flipper, but don't think you are getting the equivalent of a modern mid-range GPU to the 360/PS3 high-end. It is drastically lower class. The CPU is nearly an off the shelf component too. Lastly, supplying only a minimal amount of memory will also lower costs. They don't have to care about high res, because they won't even connect to a high res device. I don't think any of that matters to the success of the platform, I actually think that Nintendo was really smart. They have learned from the Gameboy (and to a much lesser extent, the GameCube). While you can grab headlines with selling jaw-dropping effects, price and games move units. At the end of the day, I would rather be the 3rd place hardware vendor with the 1st place sales sheet and Nintendo feels the same way.
No previous console generation was only twice as fast/capable as the one before it.
Why do you assume they can't make them for just under $200? This is, after all, little more than a refresh to the GameCube with an improved controller. You could almost argue that what Nintendo is really doing is more like how Sony re-released the PSOne to replace the original PS. Same hardware, just much cheaper to make. This time around, there is definitely some improvement...but nothing like the others are making. I imagine the yields on their CPU/GPUs are nearly perfect, plus everything is nice and low transistor count on a modern process. I think they are laughing all the way to the bank with the 90% of consumers who DON'T have an HDTV.
Charging the same or only a bit less than the base 360 is NOT the way they want to play this thing. They want to be a little bit more than an impulse buy, but not a major investment like the others (which if you figure in an HDTV, they are...without the better display, they aren't any better than the Wii).
Um, wrong. The US president is just as fallible under our system of government as anyone else. Now, in practice, the arrest would probably come AFTER removal of office, but a president can be impeached->removed from office->arrested->convicted.
The only members of our goverment who are immune from arrest are members of Congress on the way to Congress. This is not blanket immunity though, this is really there to prevent people of a certain political persuasion from stopping those members of Congress with the opposite persuasion on their way to an important vote. It has rarely been used for anything other than to get out of traffic tickets though, and that is the modern interpretation of what it is designed to prevent. It doesn't mean that a Senator can kill three people and then get off without charges because he is always "on his way to vote."
All of the special powers our administration has other than this one are in practical use, not technical powers. It is cumbersome to arrest a sitting president, to say the least. Technically, a DC beat cop could legally arrest the president, but it would never happen. Hell, even just ordinary powerful people are given the opportunity to turn themselves in most situations.
It might be worth it after the fact to you, but it sure as hell still isn't worth it for me. Let's expand the analogy, what if the government determines that all this domestic violence (which also results in a lot of deaths) has really gotten out of hand. They determine that a primary contributor to domestic violence is adultery and that the majority of adulterers have a few phone conversations WITH their accomplices, these conversations have a high likelyhood of statistically "standing out" (lots of short "meet me here" calls, the same number called often well after the last phone call of the night, and long conversations during periods where certain OTHER numbers are not being called (spouse out of town...she doesn't call her mother, but you call your girlfriend)). They have this great database they've already built for terrorism, so why not reuse it for other things (there is precedent for this, check out what all has happened with the air travel logs the airlines generated at DHS request). Before long you get a knock on your door because you often call a partner at work after hours which the government has mis-identified as an affair.
You saying the database is worth it just because it might help catch one guy is such a stretch. What freedoms and amount of privacy would you NOT give up if it meant there was a chance that they MIGHT stop something which MIGHT have an effect on your life? You know, there is a chance that editorial pieces in newspapers have code words in them that only the pre-shared terrorist information could decode. Why don't we ban all editorials? Hell, an actual writer for a small town newspaper might even be in on it, why don't we just get rid of all these little newspapers and make just one big national newspaper staffed completely by people who have had security checks? We better go ahead and do the same thing with all the news reporting on television and radio too, too much chance of a terrorist cell's covert communication. The government will give us fair and balanced news anyway, it would just be more safe.
Many times more people die from car wrecks, preventable heart attacks, etc than die from terrorism. 20,000 people in the US alone die every year from influenza and influenza related pneumonia(1), that is about seven times as many as died in the worst terrorist attack this country has ever suffered. (2) Don't misunderstand, I think radical Islam is a developing problem, but I don't think rooting out terrorists will really stop the problem. The way to stop the problem is to basically do the opposite of what we've done in the Middle East, not spy on every citizen in this country building a giant database of phone calls, emails, and snail mail packages. While the average person doesn't care about this now because they think the "terrists is gonna get me" if the same sort of monitoring was proposed in the mid-90s they would be pretty upset. This database is being built using the MOMENTUM of terrorism, not FOR terrorism. While they might actually catch a terrorist using this database, that doesn't make it worth it. If police came to everyone's house every day and searched them for weapons or plans, there would be virtually no violence in this country, there also would be no freedom, no independence, no innovation, and eventually no money. There is a fine line between protecting one's rights and preventing violence, that line shifts depending on the immediate threat. Terrorism doesn't constitute enough of a threat to justify this sort of action. What America really needs is a good "McCarthyism red scare" like event to take place for us to take back our government, my only fear of that is with a big enough database it might be fairly easy to link ANYONE to a terrorist organization...especially when THEY get to define what is a terrorist.
Right now the virus has half of what it needs to become a pandemic killer, it is highly lethal. Now the contagious half has to be filled. This alone means that this thing should be getting plenty of air time.
To put it in another perspective, a highly contagious form of the virus that was almost completely non-fatal would still be getting HUGE publicity because nearly everyone would be catching a virus that is as little as a couple nucleic acids from being a pandemic with a high fatality rate.
It is important to note that even if this was NOT contagious to humans, it would still be extremely important for us simply because of it's impact on the poultry industry. Also, the fact that the virus is spreading like wildfire through the avian population means that absolutely huge numbers of the virus are present, massively magnifying the chances of that random mutation happening.
This is important stuff, I would say if anything it isn't getting ENOUGH coverage. When I can turn on CNN and they talk about Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes' child for twenty minutes and then a possible pandemic that could kill millions of people for three minutes, I think I know which story got too much air time. It is important to note that this may be the first time that mankind has been able to foresee a pandemic and actually prepare for it, while you would say that the ordinary citizen can't exactly do anything about it you would be wrong. The more people are worried about it, the easier it will be for scientists working in this area to get funding, the more funding the more scientists, and the better the chances of having as much ready as possible when this DOES become THE news.
All of the Wal-Mart stores in my area already sell large, decent hard drives. Actually, I think they only brand they stock is Seagate and the smallest one they have is 120 GB and they have a 400+ one too. Not bad prices either really...not as good as the post-rebate prices at more specialized retailers, but not bad.
Does anybody buy bread with any substantial amounts of corn syrup, high fructose or not? Who the hell wants sweet bread (and I'm not refering to sweet breads here...).
That is incredibly generalistic and probably wrong more than correct (the first statement, the second one is a generalization but is probably correct most of the time). The truth is that people have a hard time relating to people's work that they don't understand, this isn't an American thing, this is a human thing. I work in a hospital's lab, this is both a service industry and requires scientific and technical knowledge, according to you I should be treated like a leper. I also live in Arkansas, which isn't that well known for it's learned culture (I live in a college town where things are a bit different, but all of my family lives in "The South") When I first started this job and people asked me what I did, I told them exactly what I do. After a few blank stares (mostly from family), I realized for me to do what I do requires a hell of a lot of education in a fairly specialized area and none of these people had that knowledge. Even so, they never treated me like a leper, they just never asked about my work again. After I made that realization, I started putting what I do into more general terms and explaining what it MEANS to them. Now the same family members ask how work is and if I've seen anything interesting pretty much all the time, several have said that they think I have the most interesting job in the family (it is far from the best paying, so that isn't the reason either...). At most family gatherings I'm asked to relate some interesting anecdote. Most of my wife's friends think the same thing too and she definitely doesn't work in science (she works in a business office).
The point of this whole diatribe is that if I would have continued to tell people EXACTLY what I did in a way that they couldn't understand they would have thought I was snotty or elitist. When I started explaining what I did using more familiar language and terminology they accepted it completely and even became very curious. This is what is different between what I did and most computer tech people. Most CS people I know have a hard time explaining what they do without geek terminology and even more REFUSE to do it, they WANT to feel special. They think their knowledge of the inner workings of Microsoft's monstrosity and IBM/Intel/AMDs amalgam of hardware makes them special somehow and better than most. They don't realize that it simply makes them more knowledgeable than most in that one area. Most of the tech people I've known have also had a hard time relating to people well BEFORE they were actually in the tech industry or had any real education, so to say that these are WHY they aren't well liked isn't really possible.
A final example to drive this whole issue home is the medical doctor. The MD (excluding surgeons for the most part;) ) is a rare combination of the very well educated and the people oriented. They both have extreme amounts of education and also work in a completely service oriented business, but to do that they have to have extremely good communication skills. Most doctors are very well liked and have a huge group of close friends. Almost to the last one, every doctor I know that ISN'T well liked, doesn't have those communication skills and is a specialist (or a surgeon;) that doesn't interact with people all that much.
While I understand your sentiment, professionally designed WMDs can be very dangerous and are very effective. Tell me that a 10 kiloton nuke couldn't kill thousands of people with almost no planning and hundreds of thousands with only a marginal plan. There is a big difference between a terrorist organization and a government though. There isn't just the money, there is the rationale and expertise. Terrorists want to be showy, if it isn't scary to think about it isn't terrorism. Governments don't really care about being showy (well, they do, but in the large political scale not in the "every shot counts" way). A crate of CO2 tubes let go in a dense subway tunnel would kill a lot more than 12 people, but it isn't nearly as scary as a sarin gas attack. Just like the concept of a suitcase nuke is so much more scary the the one in the back of a semi truck. It takes top notch engineering to make a small and clean nuke, it takes a library card, some electricians, and some uranium to make a bigger and dirty one.
I want to add an addendum that I personally don't lose sleep over the threat of a terrorist attack. More people die every day in car wrecks or from heart attacks than in any terrorist attack. While I eat a pretty healthy diet, I drive rush hour traffic every day and don't drive slow. My risk from that is about a thousand times worse than any sort of terrorist attack, especially if I were to figure in that I don't exactly live in a top 10 list of potential targets (or top 1000 for that matter). I just wish more people would think about the simple statistics instead of the "fear factor" and terrorists would be out of the proverbial job.
You are comparing OS level emulators to virtual machines. The competition in this space is VMWare. Using this sort of software, you actually NEED Windows. You boot up a VM and then proceed to install an OS just like a real machine. This is massively unlike Wine and is somewhat different from VPC too.
Also, remember, VM products aren't designed to run the latest and greatest games or something. They are designed to fill two niches, extremely secure testbeds for software where you want crashes to be easy to recover and server virtualization where one machine imitates several.
I've got one...well, it is a dark grey case, but it still fits the description. I have my TV in a corner in the LR and the PC is behind it. To go ahead and complete the nerd picture, I have a small webserver (and other nefarious uses...) (which is about to melt after I post the address) which runs 24/7 in the cabinet under the TV.
Not to be pedantic (because you are basically right), but if you are scraping ice off of a windshield then the dew point would have been pretty close to the ambient temp at some point (meaning the relative humidity was high). In a 20% RH environment, there will not be any condensation unless the surface where the ice forms is MUCH cooler than ambient.
So if you said, when I lived in ND and went out to get the mail in my boxers and didn't get cold because of 15% RH versus freezing my sack off in pants doing the same in Tennessee in 80-100% RH (early morning likely except in really dry times) even though it was far colder in ND, then you would be right. But then you have to figure that it is generally far windier in ND than TN, except for some of the mountainous areas, but that is an entirely different discussion.
Ironically, most people realize this, but only in the form of "hot air" without thinking about the ramifications of humidity at cold temps. Most people know that sticking your hand into a 350F oven doesn't really hurt for quite some time (assuming you don't touch something inside...), but touching a 212F column of steam will hurt quite quickly. Or that 95F in Orlando feels a hell of a lot hotter than 110F in Phoenix.
Also, light is almost infinitely more focusable than radio frequencies (well, at least until we figure out how to built a laser equivalent at all frequencies...). That means (for us now, at least) light uses LESS energy to deliver a set wattage at a given target. Not to mention that a beam of light is inherently more secure than an omnidirectional beacon of radio emmision.
Damned, it must be cheap to live in Columbia, MD. I live in Fayetteville, AR and there is only a 2.4x multiplier. Then again, land prices around here ARE really starting to skyrocket. I made more hypothetical wealth last year on a 25 acre piece of land my grandfather left me than I did at my job and I have a pretty decent job and the land is pretty far away from any development. My house appraises for almost twice what I paid for it just four years ago.
That is because there is a distinct difference between wanting to kill oneself and wanting the world to THINK you wanted to kill yourself, aka a call for help. The numbers are also skewed somewhat because many young girls attempt suicide on more than one occasion, whereas if you are successful that pretty much means it is your last attempt.
Many women kill themselves in violent "reliable" ways, they truly wanted to die, and of course many of the women who took a bunch of pills truly DID want to die, but most who slash their wrists in a very shallow way or who take pills are really making a call for help. They do not truly wish to die and so should be differentiated somewhat from actual suicide attempts that failed (such as botched gunshot wounds, many people attempt to shoot themselves without realizing the parts of their brains which are actually essential, that should most certainly be considered an actual attempt).
I'm not so sure I would call the Goddard Institute for Space Sciences a liberal media source. Unless of course you think that ALL media except Fox News is liberal, Fox is moderate, and only a handful of fringe blogs are actually conservative.
You point out the problem in your own statement, you are using just three sampling points. Where I live (Fayetteville, AR), if the forecast for the remainder of the month holds up, this will end up being the warmest January ever recorded. This same trend applies to most of Arkansas, Oklahoma, and north Texas (see source). Again, a very small sample of the world's climate, but a demonstration that at least some places in the world ARE getting warmer. Still though, this sort of science doesn't look at extremes like this, it looks at the average temps for huge numbers of places. Show me a scientific article that uses actual data to say that 2005 was the coldest year on record (for the Earth, not a localized place) and I'll take a look at it. The only sources that I've seen say anything like that at all are just journalists take on something, not an actual article with data to back them up.
AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE TULSA OK 252 PM CST TUE JAN 24 2006.DISCUSSION... TRULY AN INCREDIBLE MID WINTER DAY. 100 PERCENT SUN...LIGHT WIND...TEMPERATURES IN THE LOW AND MID 60S. FORECAST TEMPS THROUGH JAN 31ST...ADDED TO PREVIOUS 24 DAYS THIS MONTH..SET AN ALL TIME RECORD FOR WARMEST JANUARY ON RECORD IN TULSA. (THAT COMES WITH THE MEP GUARANTEE).
Slashdot Mirror
This is not definitive (what on /. is???) and I may be totally wrong, but I imagine it is the font information. TrueTypeFont, Windows font files are .ttf.
4 CPU cores x 4 GPU cores
These systems are designed to handle the dual SLI systems the GFX companies are starting to push.
Since 41 light-years is so far away, would you want a supernova to happen there? Or maybe a quasar to be present there? I certainly wouldn't... I'm pretty sure those events happen much FURTHER away.
Think about it this way, at one point it took ten days to get from St Louis to San Francisco. Now it takes about 2 hours. Hell, at one point it took us several months to get from Portugal to New York, now it takes about 6 hours. Rome used to be incredibly far away from Britain, the outer reaches of the empire. Now most people on this planet think of the two as nearly right on top of each other.
In the grand scheme of things, 41 LY is pretty damned close. The nearest star is 4.2 LY away, this is only ten times further than the absolute closest star to us. We aren't going to find anything more advanced than bacteria any closer than 4.2, to even know that there are PLANETS just ten times further is very nice to know (if you think that it's possible residents are friendly...otherwise it would be nice if they were farther away...).
Since you did it three time, I'll assume it wasn't a typo. The name of the outsource fab is Chartered Semiconductor, not "Chartred."
I didn't say that, actually I very specifically said that there "was some improvement, just not as much as the others."
What part of that statement is not true?
It's not just that the Wii is slower than the 360 or PS3, it also doesn't have a lot of the modern features either of those have (it also doesn't have the incredibly convoluted PPU system they have either, but how difficult the hardware is to program for is another argument altogether). The GPU doesn't have pixel or vertex shader hardware, do you know what the last PC GPU that had a fixed function T&L pipeline was? ATI 7xxx series and Nvidia GeForce 2. On a 90nm process, you could make a GPU of that complexity for very cheap and get it to run far faster than the original 7xxx or GF2. I'm sure there are some console tricks include like in the original Flipper, but don't think you are getting the equivalent of a modern mid-range GPU to the 360/PS3 high-end. It is drastically lower class. The CPU is nearly an off the shelf component too. Lastly, supplying only a minimal amount of memory will also lower costs. They don't have to care about high res, because they won't even connect to a high res device. I don't think any of that matters to the success of the platform, I actually think that Nintendo was really smart. They have learned from the Gameboy (and to a much lesser extent, the GameCube). While you can grab headlines with selling jaw-dropping effects, price and games move units. At the end of the day, I would rather be the 3rd place hardware vendor with the 1st place sales sheet and Nintendo feels the same way.
No previous console generation was only twice as fast/capable as the one before it.
Why do you assume they can't make them for just under $200? This is, after all, little more than a refresh to the GameCube with an improved controller. You could almost argue that what Nintendo is really doing is more like how Sony re-released the PSOne to replace the original PS. Same hardware, just much cheaper to make. This time around, there is definitely some improvement...but nothing like the others are making. I imagine the yields on their CPU/GPUs are nearly perfect, plus everything is nice and low transistor count on a modern process. I think they are laughing all the way to the bank with the 90% of consumers who DON'T have an HDTV.
Charging the same or only a bit less than the base 360 is NOT the way they want to play this thing. They want to be a little bit more than an impulse buy, but not a major investment like the others (which if you figure in an HDTV, they are...without the better display, they aren't any better than the Wii).
Um, wrong. The US president is just as fallible under our system of government as anyone else. Now, in practice, the arrest would probably come AFTER removal of office, but a president can be impeached->removed from office->arrested->convicted.
The only members of our goverment who are immune from arrest are members of Congress on the way to Congress. This is not blanket immunity though, this is really there to prevent people of a certain political persuasion from stopping those members of Congress with the opposite persuasion on their way to an important vote. It has rarely been used for anything other than to get out of traffic tickets though, and that is the modern interpretation of what it is designed to prevent. It doesn't mean that a Senator can kill three people and then get off without charges because he is always "on his way to vote."
All of the special powers our administration has other than this one are in practical use, not technical powers. It is cumbersome to arrest a sitting president, to say the least. Technically, a DC beat cop could legally arrest the president, but it would never happen. Hell, even just ordinary powerful people are given the opportunity to turn themselves in most situations.
It might be worth it after the fact to you, but it sure as hell still isn't worth it for me. Let's expand the analogy, what if the government determines that all this domestic violence (which also results in a lot of deaths) has really gotten out of hand. They determine that a primary contributor to domestic violence is adultery and that the majority of adulterers have a few phone conversations WITH their accomplices, these conversations have a high likelyhood of statistically "standing out" (lots of short "meet me here" calls, the same number called often well after the last phone call of the night, and long conversations during periods where certain OTHER numbers are not being called (spouse out of town...she doesn't call her mother, but you call your girlfriend)). They have this great database they've already built for terrorism, so why not reuse it for other things (there is precedent for this, check out what all has happened with the air travel logs the airlines generated at DHS request). Before long you get a knock on your door because you often call a partner at work after hours which the government has mis-identified as an affair.
You saying the database is worth it just because it might help catch one guy is such a stretch. What freedoms and amount of privacy would you NOT give up if it meant there was a chance that they MIGHT stop something which MIGHT have an effect on your life? You know, there is a chance that editorial pieces in newspapers have code words in them that only the pre-shared terrorist information could decode. Why don't we ban all editorials? Hell, an actual writer for a small town newspaper might even be in on it, why don't we just get rid of all these little newspapers and make just one big national newspaper staffed completely by people who have had security checks? We better go ahead and do the same thing with all the news reporting on television and radio too, too much chance of a terrorist cell's covert communication. The government will give us fair and balanced news anyway, it would just be more safe.
Many times more people die from car wrecks, preventable heart attacks, etc than die from terrorism. 20,000 people in the US alone die every year from influenza and influenza related pneumonia(1), that is about seven times as many as died in the worst terrorist attack this country has ever suffered. (2) Don't misunderstand, I think radical Islam is a developing problem, but I don't think rooting out terrorists will really stop the problem. The way to stop the problem is to basically do the opposite of what we've done in the Middle East, not spy on every citizen in this country building a giant database of phone calls, emails, and snail mail packages. While the average person doesn't care about this now because they think the "terrists is gonna get me" if the same sort of monitoring was proposed in the mid-90s they would be pretty upset. This database is being built using the MOMENTUM of terrorism, not FOR terrorism. While they might actually catch a terrorist using this database, that doesn't make it worth it. If police came to everyone's house every day and searched them for weapons or plans, there would be virtually no violence in this country, there also would be no freedom, no independence, no innovation, and eventually no money. There is a fine line between protecting one's rights and preventing violence, that line shifts depending on the immediate threat. Terrorism doesn't constitute enough of a threat to justify this sort of action. What America really needs is a good "McCarthyism red scare" like event to take place for us to take back our government, my only fear of that is with a big enough database it might be fairly easy to link ANYONE to a terrorist organization...especially when THEY get to define what is a terrorist.
w ww.nfid.org/library/influenza/acknowledgements/inf luenza.pdf+influenza+deaths+2001+united+states&hl= en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3t tacks
1. http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:rbUOIN2Yy8sJ:
2.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11,_2001_a
Right now the virus has half of what it needs to become a pandemic killer, it is highly lethal. Now the contagious half has to be filled. This alone means that this thing should be getting plenty of air time.
To put it in another perspective, a highly contagious form of the virus that was almost completely non-fatal would still be getting HUGE publicity because nearly everyone would be catching a virus that is as little as a couple nucleic acids from being a pandemic with a high fatality rate.
It is important to note that even if this was NOT contagious to humans, it would still be extremely important for us simply because of it's impact on the poultry industry. Also, the fact that the virus is spreading like wildfire through the avian population means that absolutely huge numbers of the virus are present, massively magnifying the chances of that random mutation happening.
This is important stuff, I would say if anything it isn't getting ENOUGH coverage. When I can turn on CNN and they talk about Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes' child for twenty minutes and then a possible pandemic that could kill millions of people for three minutes, I think I know which story got too much air time. It is important to note that this may be the first time that mankind has been able to foresee a pandemic and actually prepare for it, while you would say that the ordinary citizen can't exactly do anything about it you would be wrong. The more people are worried about it, the easier it will be for scientists working in this area to get funding, the more funding the more scientists, and the better the chances of having as much ready as possible when this DOES become THE news.
All of the Wal-Mart stores in my area already sell large, decent hard drives. Actually, I think they only brand they stock is Seagate and the smallest one they have is 120 GB and they have a 400+ one too. Not bad prices either really...not as good as the post-rebate prices at more specialized retailers, but not bad.
Does anybody buy bread with any substantial amounts of corn syrup, high fructose or not? Who the hell wants sweet bread (and I'm not refering to sweet breads here...).
That is incredibly generalistic and probably wrong more than correct (the first statement, the second one is a generalization but is probably correct most of the time). The truth is that people have a hard time relating to people's work that they don't understand, this isn't an American thing, this is a human thing. I work in a hospital's lab, this is both a service industry and requires scientific and technical knowledge, according to you I should be treated like a leper. I also live in Arkansas, which isn't that well known for it's learned culture (I live in a college town where things are a bit different, but all of my family lives in "The South") When I first started this job and people asked me what I did, I told them exactly what I do. After a few blank stares (mostly from family), I realized for me to do what I do requires a hell of a lot of education in a fairly specialized area and none of these people had that knowledge. Even so, they never treated me like a leper, they just never asked about my work again. After I made that realization, I started putting what I do into more general terms and explaining what it MEANS to them. Now the same family members ask how work is and if I've seen anything interesting pretty much all the time, several have said that they think I have the most interesting job in the family (it is far from the best paying, so that isn't the reason either...). At most family gatherings I'm asked to relate some interesting anecdote. Most of my wife's friends think the same thing too and she definitely doesn't work in science (she works in a business office).
;) ) is a rare combination of the very well educated and the people oriented. They both have extreme amounts of education and also work in a completely service oriented business, but to do that they have to have extremely good communication skills. Most doctors are very well liked and have a huge group of close friends. Almost to the last one, every doctor I know that ISN'T well liked, doesn't have those communication skills and is a specialist (or a surgeon ;) that doesn't interact with people all that much.
The point of this whole diatribe is that if I would have continued to tell people EXACTLY what I did in a way that they couldn't understand they would have thought I was snotty or elitist. When I started explaining what I did using more familiar language and terminology they accepted it completely and even became very curious. This is what is different between what I did and most computer tech people. Most CS people I know have a hard time explaining what they do without geek terminology and even more REFUSE to do it, they WANT to feel special. They think their knowledge of the inner workings of Microsoft's monstrosity and IBM/Intel/AMDs amalgam of hardware makes them special somehow and better than most. They don't realize that it simply makes them more knowledgeable than most in that one area. Most of the tech people I've known have also had a hard time relating to people well BEFORE they were actually in the tech industry or had any real education, so to say that these are WHY they aren't well liked isn't really possible.
A final example to drive this whole issue home is the medical doctor. The MD (excluding surgeons for the most part
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/03/27/D8GK1QTO
"
Bloggers would be entitled to the same exemption from the campaign finance law that newspapers and other traditional forms of media receive.
"There will be no second class citizens among members of the media," Toner (FEC chairman) said.
"
I realize that this is in an entirely difference sphere of influence, but it could definitely be used as an argument against Apple's case.
Damn it, you mean I ruined my floor with all that sand for NOTHING???
Well, at least the cat likes it there...
While I understand your sentiment, professionally designed WMDs can be very dangerous and are very effective. Tell me that a 10 kiloton nuke couldn't kill thousands of people with almost no planning and hundreds of thousands with only a marginal plan. There is a big difference between a terrorist organization and a government though. There isn't just the money, there is the rationale and expertise. Terrorists want to be showy, if it isn't scary to think about it isn't terrorism. Governments don't really care about being showy (well, they do, but in the large political scale not in the "every shot counts" way). A crate of CO2 tubes let go in a dense subway tunnel would kill a lot more than 12 people, but it isn't nearly as scary as a sarin gas attack. Just like the concept of a suitcase nuke is so much more scary the the one in the back of a semi truck. It takes top notch engineering to make a small and clean nuke, it takes a library card, some electricians, and some uranium to make a bigger and dirty one.
I want to add an addendum that I personally don't lose sleep over the threat of a terrorist attack. More people die every day in car wrecks or from heart attacks than in any terrorist attack. While I eat a pretty healthy diet, I drive rush hour traffic every day and don't drive slow. My risk from that is about a thousand times worse than any sort of terrorist attack, especially if I were to figure in that I don't exactly live in a top 10 list of potential targets (or top 1000 for that matter). I just wish more people would think about the simple statistics instead of the "fear factor" and terrorists would be out of the proverbial job.
You should add that aluminum oxide is both non-porous and very tough stuff.
You are comparing OS level emulators to virtual machines. The competition in this space is VMWare. Using this sort of software, you actually NEED Windows. You boot up a VM and then proceed to install an OS just like a real machine. This is massively unlike Wine and is somewhat different from VPC too.
Also, remember, VM products aren't designed to run the latest and greatest games or something. They are designed to fill two niches, extremely secure testbeds for software where you want crashes to be easy to recover and server virtualization where one machine imitates several.
I've got one...well, it is a dark grey case, but it still fits the description. I have my TV in a corner in the LR and the PC is behind it. To go ahead and complete the nerd picture, I have a small webserver (and other nefarious uses...) (which is about to melt after I post the address) which runs 24/7 in the cabinet under the TV.
http://wormaldotkicks-assdotorg/slashdot/ Remove and replace the "dot" obviously.
Not to be pedantic (because you are basically right), but if you are scraping ice off of a windshield then the dew point would have been pretty close to the ambient temp at some point (meaning the relative humidity was high). In a 20% RH environment, there will not be any condensation unless the surface where the ice forms is MUCH cooler than ambient.
So if you said, when I lived in ND and went out to get the mail in my boxers and didn't get cold because of 15% RH versus freezing my sack off in pants doing the same in Tennessee in 80-100% RH (early morning likely except in really dry times) even though it was far colder in ND, then you would be right. But then you have to figure that it is generally far windier in ND than TN, except for some of the mountainous areas, but that is an entirely different discussion.
Ironically, most people realize this, but only in the form of "hot air" without thinking about the ramifications of humidity at cold temps. Most people know that sticking your hand into a 350F oven doesn't really hurt for quite some time (assuming you don't touch something inside...), but touching a 212F column of steam will hurt quite quickly. Or that 95F in Orlando feels a hell of a lot hotter than 110F in Phoenix.
Noises hell, they publicly announced the merger the first week of March. All that remains now is approval and that will be easy to obtain.
Also, light is almost infinitely more focusable than radio frequencies (well, at least until we figure out how to built a laser equivalent at all frequencies...). That means (for us now, at least) light uses LESS energy to deliver a set wattage at a given target. Not to mention that a beam of light is inherently more secure than an omnidirectional beacon of radio emmision.
Damned, it must be cheap to live in Columbia, MD. I live in Fayetteville, AR and there is only a 2.4x multiplier. Then again, land prices around here ARE really starting to skyrocket. I made more hypothetical wealth last year on a 25 acre piece of land my grandfather left me than I did at my job and I have a pretty decent job and the land is pretty far away from any development. My house appraises for almost twice what I paid for it just four years ago.
r vlet?pid=200&tool=salarycalculator&previousPage=11 6&cid=homefair&fromState=AR&toState=CA&salary=1000 00&fromCity=0523290&toCity=0606000&ownrent=own
http://www.homefair.com/homefair/servlet/ActionSe
That is because there is a distinct difference between wanting to kill oneself and wanting the world to THINK you wanted to kill yourself, aka a call for help. The numbers are also skewed somewhat because many young girls attempt suicide on more than one occasion, whereas if you are successful that pretty much means it is your last attempt.
Many women kill themselves in violent "reliable" ways, they truly wanted to die, and of course many of the women who took a bunch of pills truly DID want to die, but most who slash their wrists in a very shallow way or who take pills are really making a call for help. They do not truly wish to die and so should be differentiated somewhat from actual suicide attempts that failed (such as botched gunshot wounds, many people attempt to shoot themselves without realizing the parts of their brains which are actually essential, that should most certainly be considered an actual attempt).
I'm not so sure I would call the Goddard Institute for Space Sciences a liberal media source. Unless of course you think that ALL media except Fox News is liberal, Fox is moderate, and only a handful of fringe blogs are actually conservative.
= TSA&date=20060124205219
.DISCUSSION...
You point out the problem in your own statement, you are using just three sampling points. Where I live (Fayetteville, AR), if the forecast for the remainder of the month holds up, this will end up being the warmest January ever recorded. This same trend applies to most of Arkansas, Oklahoma, and north Texas (see source). Again, a very small sample of the world's climate, but a demonstration that at least some places in the world ARE getting warmer. Still though, this sort of science doesn't look at extremes like this, it looks at the average temps for huge numbers of places. Show me a scientific article that uses actual data to say that 2005 was the coldest year on record (for the Earth, not a localized place) and I'll take a look at it. The only sources that I've seen say anything like that at all are just journalists take on something, not an actual article with data to back them up.
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/printable.php?pil=AFD&sid
FXUS64 KTSA 242052
AFDTSA
AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION
NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE TULSA OK
252 PM CST TUE JAN 24 2006
TRULY AN INCREDIBLE MID WINTER DAY. 100
PERCENT SUN...LIGHT WIND...TEMPERATURES
IN THE LOW AND MID 60S. FORECAST TEMPS
THROUGH JAN 31ST...ADDED TO PREVIOUS 24
DAYS THIS MONTH..SET AN ALL TIME RECORD
FOR WARMEST JANUARY ON RECORD IN TULSA.
(THAT COMES WITH THE MEP GUARANTEE).