I did. What part of that quote implies a 'denial of freedom of information'? All it implied was that these and other public-facing sites might be affected by this infrastructure change and no one knows for sure how they would be affected.
No one implied a 'denial of freedom of information' except for you. Fewer access points might mean that public-facing government sites might have performance issues. Or it might not -- it depends on how they implemented it. That's all the summary said -- no one knows how the infrastructure changes will affect public-facing sites because no one knows the design and implementation details yet.
1) How much toxic materials will be required to create and maintain a 92-by-92-mile square grid. 92 *MILES*, people. like parent said, the size of New Jersey.
And the vast majority of the American Southwest is completely unoccupied by people or farms or really much of anything.
For you environmentalist types who can't tolerate the thought of drilling for oil off the coast, what do you think a 92 square mile solar blanket will do to the native wildlife?
That would have to be studied, of course, but we're talking about a relatively small area of the American Southwest, which is mostly high desert.
3) How will this power be transmitted to consumers? Voltage loss is a real issue for long-distance transmission.
Actually, a study was done recently (with a summary published in Discover magazine about 2-3 months ago) that confirms that only a 10-15% or so increase in efficiency is required for the long-distance transmission and that the study's authors, all experts in the field, felt that this was possible by 2020.
But when Apple and Linux distros do it, it's okay? And it was okay for MS to do it BEFORE they lost their monopoly court case? Okay, now I'm clear.
Well, I assume you're trolling, but I'll answer you anyway (feel free to mod me down) -- Linux vendors and Apple are not bundling apps in order to put competitors out of business.
Microsoft bundled DoubleSpace/DriveSpace to put Stac out of business, they bundled EMM386 to put Quarterdeck out of business, they bundled Internet Explorer to put Netscape out of business, and they bundled Media Player to get Apple to stop making QuickTime for Windows (I believe the testimony given in court was they told Apple to "knife the baby" in regards to QuickTime for Windows).
You might like Microsoft's products, that's fine, but if you agree with their business practices then you're no better than they are.
Man, M$ is running scared on this one...I never though I'd see they day they'd go to intentionally design an OS that works better on a less powerful computer.
No, we're complaining that it sucks when the OEM doesn't. We don't have a problem with OEMs bundling apps with their hardware (something that major OEMS like Apple, Dell and HP do all the time), we just have a problem with OS vendors who are convicted monopolies with 90+% of the market bundling a bunch of crap in an attempt to put their competitors out of business.
This is where ASUS can come in a kickass, but bundling all the Windows versions of popular open source apps, like OpenOffice.org, GIMP, Inkscape, Audacity, MPlayer, etc.
Add in a little splash screen blurb that all of this stuff ALSO comes on the Linux EEE, which runs faster, more reliably, etc.
Yes, there are companies where the IT personnel are on a power trip, but IME, that's the exception rather than the rule. Most of the time, IT's policies are put in place for a reason.
As someone who has worked on both sides of this fence, I have to say many IT policies are put in place to make life easier for the admins, not the end-users. And, yes, sometimes there are very good reasons for these policies, but not always.
The problem is that in any company, there are groups that genuinely need solutions that are different somehow from what the rest of the company is doing. Typical IT thinking is that if it doesn't fit in their cookie-cutter one-size-fits-all mentality, then it's not needed. The cookie-cutter model is great for probably 80%-90% of your userbase, and therefore is a success for those 80%-90%.
OTOH, for the other 10-20%, I've seen situations where groups needed a either a COTS app that needed heavy customization and therefore didn't fit the model or a custom app that IT organizations aren't always equipped to develop in-house. So they throw one of their project managers on it, who outsources the IT work to contractors, and then IT steps in and says "Whoa! That doesn't fit into our cookie-cutter model!" cries "skunkworks!" and immediately tries to get the project shut down.
Except, here's the thing: the need for the custom app or customized COTS app commonly generated by a legitimate business need. That's why upper management often approves the skunkworks project without IT's approval and when IT tries to shut it down, things might get ugly as different factions in upper management duke it out.
The bottom line is that IT needs to do what they do, but if they aren't addressing a legitimate business need and the users are going outside to get the legitimate business need met, well they need to step out of their box and act like a solutions provider and not like a bunch of rent-a-cop droids.
. In fact, ANY time there is ANY light source brighter than the panel at your back, you will have glare.
It depends all on angles and lighting. In a properly designed work environment, glare will never be a problem because there should never be any direct lighting that can't be repositioned by the end-user.
If this isn't the case for you, then your work environment is substandard and a threat to your health, especially your eyes. In which case, you should notify your employer, with all of the appropriate hints that if they don't fix it, you'll sue them.
In fairness, Wikipedia tends to cover some topics in more depth, as they can afford more space than a paper encyclopedia...Wikipedia itself has a "No Original Research" policy, of course, so if the article is good it should provide a reference for every fact you might want to cite. Yep. That's 100% correct, although not all entries meet Wikipedia's standards. Some will eventually, others might not ever.
Wikipedia is what it is. You can't fault Wikipedia for being what it is, you can only fault students who make the mistake of citing it as a primary source.
Seriously, I see third year college students who still don't know what plagerism is. You can't convince me that they all know better than to use an encyclopedia as a primary source. They should. At least, if they're doing what they did back when I was a first-year college student. That is, beat into your head what is and is not acceptable as primary and secondary sources in a scholarly research paper. Along with what is and what is not plagiarism, formatting of citations, proper number of citations, paper structure (narrative vs. argument vs. comparison-contrast, etc.)...
If you can't write a proper paper by the end of your first-year in college, you should just drop out because college is clearly not for you.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention the potential for Obamasms by pointing out that Barrack Obama has a blog while W doesn't (well, not a real one anyway) or that Obama has a MySpace page, etc.
;)
Why, I can just see people modding me up +5, Informative right now!
Please excuse me while I go wash my mind out...
I did. What part of that quote implies a 'denial of freedom of information'? All it implied was that these and other public-facing sites might be affected by this infrastructure change and no one knows for sure how they would be affected.
You are reading stuff that isn't there.
No, they are itemizing Cisco Pix firewalls at $500,000 a pop. Not including labor.
No one implied a 'denial of freedom of information' except for you. Fewer access points might mean that public-facing government sites might have performance issues. Or it might not -- it depends on how they implemented it. That's all the summary said -- no one knows how the infrastructure changes will affect public-facing sites because no one knows the design and implementation details yet.
And yet, strangely enough, I don't have to pay for support for browsing web pages or playing video files, despite the fact that I use Ubuntu. Hmph.
Sure. I mean, what's a Windows XP CD weigh anyways? About an ounce?
Microsoft bundled DoubleSpace/DriveSpace to put Stac out of business, they bundled EMM386 to put Quarterdeck out of business, they bundled Internet Explorer to put Netscape out of business, and they bundled Media Player to get Apple to stop making QuickTime for Windows (I believe the testimony given in court was they told Apple to "knife the baby" in regards to QuickTime for Windows).
You might like Microsoft's products, that's fine, but if you agree with their business practices then you're no better than they are.
Why should Microsoft dictate what ASUS preloads on their PCs?
Oh, yeah, forgot. Convicted monopoly, never punished due to new Justice Department attorneys installed by corrupt new Attorney General. Nevermind.
No, we're complaining that it sucks when the OEM doesn't. We don't have a problem with OEMs bundling apps with their hardware (something that major OEMS like Apple, Dell and HP do all the time), we just have a problem with OS vendors who are convicted monopolies with 90+% of the market bundling a bunch of crap in an attempt to put their competitors out of business.
This is where ASUS can come in a kickass, but bundling all the Windows versions of popular open source apps, like OpenOffice.org, GIMP, Inkscape, Audacity, MPlayer, etc.
Add in a little splash screen blurb that all of this stuff ALSO comes on the Linux EEE, which runs faster, more reliably, etc.
C'mon ASUS, whatdya say?
w00t! Where do I sign up for my Medal of Honor?
Bah. C++. Go talk to the KDE people. ;)
The problem is that in any company, there are groups that genuinely need solutions that are different somehow from what the rest of the company is doing. Typical IT thinking is that if it doesn't fit in their cookie-cutter one-size-fits-all mentality, then it's not needed. The cookie-cutter model is great for probably 80%-90% of your userbase, and therefore is a success for those 80%-90%.
OTOH, for the other 10-20%, I've seen situations where groups needed a either a COTS app that needed heavy customization and therefore didn't fit the model or a custom app that IT organizations aren't always equipped to develop in-house. So they throw one of their project managers on it, who outsources the IT work to contractors, and then IT steps in and says "Whoa! That doesn't fit into our cookie-cutter model!" cries "skunkworks!" and immediately tries to get the project shut down.
Except, here's the thing: the need for the custom app or customized COTS app commonly generated by a legitimate business need. That's why upper management often approves the skunkworks project without IT's approval and when IT tries to shut it down, things might get ugly as different factions in upper management duke it out.
The bottom line is that IT needs to do what they do, but if they aren't addressing a legitimate business need and the users are going outside to get the legitimate business need met, well they need to step out of their box and act like a solutions provider and not like a bunch of rent-a-cop droids.
MacBook Pro. You can even run Windows on it. Doesn't come with Splinter Cell stickers or subwoofers. And they give you the option of glossy or matte.
I mean, if you're willing to shell out the dough for a T61, you might as well get a MacBook Pro and at least have the option to run MacOS X.
It depends all on angles and lighting. In a properly designed work environment, glare will never be a problem because there should never be any direct lighting that can't be repositioned by the end-user.
If this isn't the case for you, then your work environment is substandard and a threat to your health, especially your eyes. In which case, you should notify your employer, with all of the appropriate hints that if they don't fix it, you'll sue them.
So that explains the polka startup sounds....
Wikipedia is what it is. You can't fault Wikipedia for being what it is, you can only fault students who make the mistake of citing it as a primary source.
If you can't write a proper paper by the end of your first-year in college, you should just drop out because college is clearly not for you.
diggdot?
(note I have no affiliation with diggdot.us or doggdot.us)