From the "apology-demanding" letter by "Alan Willaert, the Canadian representative of the American Federation of Musicians":
I am shocked that both Chow and Charlie Angus are allowed to openly depart from party policy and directive, obviously just to shamelessly buy votes among young people and academics.
So if you support a policy in line with a large segment of the people you represent, that's "shamelessly buy"ing votes?
Well, if so, than I wholeheartedly condemn the American Federation of Musician's shameless perversion of Democracy.
The way Maemo currently works on the Nokia Tablets is without signing. I would assume, though, that they get some control over what applications get according to the repository they're in. So far, getting into Maemo-extras (or whatever it is) hasn't appeared to be a hurdle for anyone with a legitimate product.
My biggest beef is that those OMWeather folks seem to update their build every week or so.
If it works in Diablo, and on N770s, n800s and n810s, the n900 has got you covered. The n900 may be a phone, but with its OMAP processor and MID heritage, the nerd angle is already covered.
Some of the techniques tested by Brennan and Greenstadt discard prepositions because they are deemed to have no information content, says Michael Oakes, a computational linguist at the University of Sunderland, UK. This filters out the words that could have helped most, he says.
"deemed to have no information content" is actually a positive feature for analysis. Vocabulary is one thing, but the little things, like prepositions, malapropisms, punctuation and favorite constructions are harder to fake. If someone consistently uses it's as a possessive and writes "for all intensive purposes", it'll be difficult for that person to suddenly start writing consistently.
The 737 entered service in 1967. The A320 entered service in 1988. To get meaningful numbers, you need to compare accident rates per total airframe cycles of aircraft manufactured after 1988. But, for an off-the-cuff response using the Aviation Safety Network, the 737-400 first saw service in 1986, so if you compare the hull-loss rate of all 737s, starting with the 737-400 to those of all A318, 319, 320 and 321s, you'd still need an order of magnitude difference to prove anything. For raw numbers, however, a total of 20 737-400, -500, -600, -700, -800 and -900 hulls have been lost to all causes. Similarly, 21 A318, A319, A320 and A321 hulls have been lost.
I don't know how many cycles they have between them, but the evident conclusions are: A. It's a lot safer to fly now than it was thirty years ago. B. There's no "ugly" difference between the A320 and the B737, either in favor or against FBW.
Yeah, but if you used CSS, and made a proportionally-correct window (Pixels are the worst solution), then you could just size the screen to the card, and the code would show.
The problem with the code is evident from the example on the screen: the card's marks in the first field can be combined against a field to produce a 0, 2, 6 or 8 flawlessly. It can also do (as one of the examples shows) a 7 with acceptable "noise". 1, 3, 4, 5 and 9 are impossible. So by a large enough data set of partial signs, you could figure out what was going on. The "added security features" like allowing automated shifting by half a row or inverting of the window actually diminish the security by giving additional data on what the card's markings are.
In the end though, it probably will be killed by browser tech. Enough casual users won't be familiar with things like manipulating browser window size, and, more importantly, those casual users will also constitute the largest pool of targets.
The Vinland map is a classic case of well-funded idiots who can't consider all the data.
Yes, the parchment is authentic. Yes, most of the map is authentic. No, there is no way in Hell the "Vinland" section is.
The rest of the map illustrates the travelogue (of journeys to the East) contained in the same codex. It's entirely consistent with the material in the book, with contemporary maps, and with what one would expect. It ain't a perfect representation, but more a spatial arrangement that coheres with the text. In other words, it's what you'd get if you took the book and sketched out a map from it.
The "Vinland" section is crammed into the left, and is laughably realistic: there's no medieval text from which you could construct a similar map. Hell, nobody circumnavigated Greenland until much later. Moreover, the saga of Erik the Red was not exactly a medieval best seller. It survived in a couple manuscripts, and Norse was not a language that the scribe of the map would have known. The codex, content and hand are all consistent with a scribe around Basel, if I recall correctly
So all this nonsense about carbon dating is beside the point. You can argue the ink composition all you want, but every single linguistic, codicological, paleographical and cultural historical indicator points to this being an obvious and bad fake.
The Buffalo crash had little to do with ice. The pilots let the airspeed get too low on approach. The stick-shaker (literally, a device that shakes the controls and makes an unholy racket to wake the dead before they die again) activated to indicate that they were approaching the stall speed. The stick shaker did come on at a higher speed than normal because they had anti-ice on, and given the aircraft's actual condition (not much ice), they should have had even more of a buffer to set things right. Instead, for reasons unclear (possibly they were trained to avoid stalls induced by setting the thing out-of-trim), instead of applying power and putting the nose down, they pulled up. They then overrode the stick-pusher, which very simply is sheer stupidity.
The example, nor the Hudson, has nothing to do with the Boeing-vs-Airbus automation argument. Both Boeing and Airbus have stick shakers and stick pushers installed, and it's still possible for pilots to stall and crash perfectly good airplanes. And both Boeing and Airbus give the captain considerable control when things go bad.
For that matter, AF 447 probably had nothing to do with Boeing-vs.-Airbus automation philosophy. On both brands, when the pitot tubes fail, the glass cockpit goes dark. When that happens at night, it's been sufficient to cause a loss of all souls on board. The six previous times (as I understand it) in the past year that an Air France A330/A340 experienced a failure of all three pitot tubes due to icing, the tubes recovered in a matter of minutes. But if that failure occurred at night, over the mid-Atlantic, in a massive thunderstorm while operating near maximum altitude, no computer and very few pilots could have saved the aircraft.
In any case, all TFA is doing is quoting out-of-context from PPRuNe. For example:
On the other hand, some pilots feel that humans aren't well equipped to deal with flying huge aircraft blind, at night, in turbulence, without computers:
In an area of severe turbulence, hand flying at high altitude is not something I'd like to have to do, particularly with such a narrow speed band as the unfortunate Air France crew presented with.
The point isn't "without computers", but "without instruments". When 25 kts over your current speed will cause nasty mach effects on your subsonic aircraft, and 25 kts under your speed will cause you to spin out of the sky, and the turbulence is +/- 30 kts, you don't want to be there, and you really don't want to be there if you don't have an Airspeed gauge.
For that matter, the discussion there isn't between "Pilots and Engineers". More than 3/4 of the participants in that thread have no aviation qualification whatsoever. The mods just delete the worst dross, and as much Boeing vs. Airbus crap as they can.
And come on, Richard Quest was reading posts aloud from there on CNN last week.
Unless, of course, the publisher insists on camera-ready text, and make the editors of their books/journals responsible for typesetting/layout. In other words, it's already in the hands of the amateurs.
Standing in awe at the historical wonder that is the Amiga, OS and hardware, is a natural human reaction, and therefore not the sign of belonging to any cult.
The emotions that I've felt considering the Amiga are not unlike those I've experienced standing at the foot of the temple of Jupiter at Baalbek, or what I'd imagine would be the sensation of laying one's mortal eyes on the Temple of the Golden Pavilion. Actually, come to think of it, the Amiga was more Golden Pavilion than Baalbek: harmonious; perfect even in its flaws. So perfect, it should not exist on this flawed earth.
A crazed monk burned the Temple of the Golden Pavilion -- that's cultism. There are folks who believe the AmigaOS will rise again to rule us all -- that's cultism.
But admiring the sheer perfection of the Amiga as a computer system of its generation, and marveling at its unparalleled run as the most elegant and best-performing PC on the market? That's just appreciating historical reality.
A plagiarised paper just smells bad, and is characterized by shifts in voices and writing styles, sudden ignorance of the the critical points raised earlier. The same author who can't write a grammatically correct sentence one moment is throwing down complex constructions the next
The harder part is identifying the source of the plagiarism. For undergraduate papers, even the harder part is trivial. After all, the point of plagiarism is that the author is too lazy to write anything original.
For academics (professors), the situation isn't all that different. Plagiarism is usually a mix of stupidity, laziness and pressure to get stuff done. It usually happens where big, popularizing authors try to rip off the obscure ones (go back twenty years a la Mr. Ambrose, or pick something in a different language, preferably Italian), or when someone needs a book in an obscure field, and tries to pirate something really obscure.
Even so, if a plagiarist has enemies who give a damn, they can find the source fairly fast. So why construct a test for the most obfuscated cases, when a plagiarist clever enough to obfuscate could simply write something original and sufficiently clever?
Marriage was a financial and political transaction only for those with financial and political power; most of the population didn't fit into that group. Also, there's a huge difference between Northwestern European marriage patterns and the Mediterranean model, going back at least to the twelfth century.
The "priest-approval" business didn't change much of that. What it did change was the canon-law recognition of marriages as being validly formed by: A. The couple announcing their marriage trough an exchange of present-tensed statements ("I take you to be my wife/I take you to be my husband") -or- B. The couple making future-tensed statements followed by a marital act.
No witnesses were required. So, in the eyes of the church, "Sure baby, I'll marry you next year" followed by a roll in the hay, was a valid marriage, and the Church Courts found themselves burdened with a bunch of these "he-said/she-said" lawsuits.
My point about fancy cars and small penises seems to have been misunderstood. Yes, wealth and the ability to provide security for a mate and offspring are the things that women have been hard-wired to look for, just as men look for someone perceived to be of good child-bearing stock. But a dude driving his bright red mid-life crisis sports car sends a different message than one driving a similarly priced, but more elegantly appointed luxo-car.
Years ago, I was waiting in the rain at the staff parking lot for the college newspapers to arrive so I could earn my work-study $4.25/hour delivering them around campus. The college president came out, made some snide remark about our dedication, then got in his red corvette. Our editor, a tall Texan woman, muttered "nice car", and as he drove off, yelled "Sorry about your penis!"
Shiny cars were last generation's penis-compensation trip. This generation, they're laptops. Let's face it: we carry them around with us everywhere, we always insist on using our own, we're proud of its power or versatility, and we carry it with us into the bathroom. It's a penis.
Most women with braincells are going to recognize that, and infer every other corollary. Guys with big laptops with more power than they ever use are likely compensating for something else. If a guy can come up with something "cute", maybe he knows he can deliver.
Of course, big, powerful and macho will impress the boys down at the server farm. Come to think of it, the big marketing whole right now is the lack of laptop commercials along the lines of pickup trucks: big burly men, toiling on the server farm. Country music blasts as foreman-looking nerd with glistening muscles and big hands drops a big-ass render project onto his Dell XPS, drops the sucks -- still running -- into his shoulder bag, and walks out the door into the sweet light of sunset.
You obviously didn't go through the indictment itself, where the party affiliations, when relevant is given. So the Democrat election commissioner is named in paragraph 4, and the Republican judge in paragraph 7.
The #1 unfounded assumption a person makes is that the world is the way s/he thinks it is.
In short, there's plenty of evidence that what you wrote is false. While the party affiliation of most people indicted is not mentioned (as it does not pertain to their job description), when mentioned, both parties come in.
I think it's obvious that your typology has very little meaning.
Yes, you can divide them that way, but it won't explain anything. The fact the very first sale was likely a pirate sale (I say likely, because an enterprising pirate would find someone on the inside to jack that file straight off the server) doesn't have anything to do with being able to afford it, but rather that _being the first to supply a pirate copy_ has value.
You can divide the group into purchased and "woulda-coulda", but the value of a pirated copy is different from that of a legitimate one. Unless the legitimate copy is intentionally crippled, it's worth more than a pirate copy. And cost isn't just a function of monetary price; it involves all the trouble needed to go through to get a copy.
In short: there are A. People for whom pirated copies are inherently better for whatever social value they bring (the pirate scenesters). B. People for whom pirated copies are so repugnant, they'll never consider it. C. People who are ambiguous about it, and will behave according to cost.
There's not much you can do about A. For B and C, however, the trick is to make as much value as affordable as possible while keeping revenue up.
The problem is that companies seem to think the trick is to sell as little value at the most competitive price. Cheapening the value of the (legitimate) purchase lowers the barrier to (illegitimate) distribution.
None of this helps the poor guy trying to sell his iPhone app.; I'm just saying that the dynamics aren't all unit price and piracy.
I do a lot of work in libraries, and the n800/n810 wins here.
Say what you will about Apple's nice toys, the n800/n810's 800x480 screen is key for library catalogs (I use a n800, but I gather the n810 is what you can get these days). If you've been to many libraries, you know that catalogs tend to display a lot of information that is handy to have on the screen at the same time (such as title, call number, status), and they don't usually format it for a mobile browser.
I'm sure the iPod Touch has a prettier browsing experience, but for running this sort of work, the n810 wins.
Some library sites do run flash, by the way. And I can understand why Apple wouldn't implement Flash: that crap can chunder a slower device into tiny pieces. Apple's aiming for a consistent user experience; Nokia's letting their users take the device to the limit and beyond.
Classic Hollywood cartoons were synched precisely to the animation, and Carl Stalling (famous for doing the orchestration during the Golden Age of Looney Tunes/Merry Melodies), had a giant clicker for the sessions. So what do the charts look like on one of his pieces?
Yeah, but however transitory it is, it's far better suited to us than anything space has to offer. Seriously, any "changes over geological time" that occur are small change compared to the cost of terraforming. Or, put another way, it will take far less energy, logistics and ingenuity to maintain a human-habitable planet than to evolve one. Likewise, it will take far less genetic monkeying to keep our species compatible with this planet's environment than to adapt to that of another planet.
So, fine, seek to colonize other worlds, if that's what your religion says. But recognize that if we can't sustain our existence over Earthbound environmental changes, there's no way we can do it on another planet.
Or you could have a display turn itself off when not in use, but still have the processor (slowly) ticking along.
I'm serious. The portability of a computer really helps for (A) sitations where you don't have the infrastructure to support a computer, (B) places where you don't have a computer permanently, (C) tasks that occur intermittently or concurrent with non-computer tasks.
In all three cases, lower power and greater autonomy are what you want. But (C) is where the ARM CPU really shines, and yeah, it shines with a screen too.
Slashdot Mirror
So if you support a policy in line with a large segment of the people you represent, that's "shamelessly buy"ing votes?
Well, if so, than I wholeheartedly condemn the American Federation of Musician's shameless perversion of Democracy.
The way Maemo currently works on the Nokia Tablets is without signing. I would assume, though, that they get some control over what applications get according to the repository they're in. So far, getting into Maemo-extras (or whatever it is) hasn't appeared to be a hurdle for anyone with a legitimate product.
My biggest beef is that those OMWeather folks seem to update their build every week or so.
It's in the garage.
If it works in Diablo, and on N770s, n800s and n810s, the n900 has got you covered. The n900 may be a phone, but with its OMAP processor and MID heritage, the nerd angle is already covered.
"deemed to have no information content" is actually a positive feature for analysis. Vocabulary is one thing, but the little things, like prepositions, malapropisms, punctuation and favorite constructions are harder to fake. If someone consistently uses it's as a possessive and writes "for all intensive purposes", it'll be difficult for that person to suddenly start writing consistently.
cut-and-paste is always an option.
The 737 entered service in 1967. The A320 entered service in 1988. To get meaningful numbers, you need to compare accident rates per total airframe cycles of aircraft manufactured after 1988. But, for an off-the-cuff response using the Aviation Safety Network, the 737-400 first saw service in 1986, so if you compare the hull-loss rate of all 737s, starting with the 737-400 to those of all A318, 319, 320 and 321s, you'd still need an order of magnitude difference to prove anything. For raw numbers, however, a total of 20 737-400, -500, -600, -700, -800 and -900 hulls have been lost to all causes. Similarly, 21 A318, A319, A320 and A321 hulls have been lost.
I don't know how many cycles they have between them, but the evident conclusions are:
A. It's a lot safer to fly now than it was thirty years ago.
B. There's no "ugly" difference between the A320 and the B737, either in favor or against FBW.
Yeah, but if you used CSS, and made a proportionally-correct window (Pixels are the worst solution), then you could just size the screen to the card, and the code would show.
The problem with the code is evident from the example on the screen: the card's marks in the first field can be combined against a field to produce a 0, 2, 6 or 8 flawlessly. It can also do (as one of the examples shows) a 7 with acceptable "noise". 1, 3, 4, 5 and 9 are impossible. So by a large enough data set of partial signs, you could figure out what was going on. The "added security features" like allowing automated shifting by half a row or inverting of the window actually diminish the security by giving additional data on what the card's markings are.
In the end though, it probably will be killed by browser tech. Enough casual users won't be familiar with things like manipulating browser window size, and, more importantly, those casual users will also constitute the largest pool of targets.
The Vinland map is a classic case of well-funded idiots who can't consider all the data.
Yes, the parchment is authentic. Yes, most of the map is authentic. No, there is no way in Hell the "Vinland" section is.
The rest of the map illustrates the travelogue (of journeys to the East) contained in the same codex. It's entirely consistent with the material in the book, with contemporary maps, and with what one would expect. It ain't a perfect representation, but more a spatial arrangement that coheres with the text. In other words, it's what you'd get if you took the book and sketched out a map from it.
The "Vinland" section is crammed into the left, and is laughably realistic: there's no medieval text from which you could construct a similar map. Hell, nobody circumnavigated Greenland until much later. Moreover, the saga of Erik the Red was not exactly a medieval best seller. It survived in a couple manuscripts, and Norse was not a language that the scribe of the map would have known. The codex, content and hand are all consistent with a scribe around Basel, if I recall correctly
So all this nonsense about carbon dating is beside the point. You can argue the ink composition all you want, but every single linguistic, codicological, paleographical and cultural historical indicator points to this being an obvious and bad fake.
And get off my lawn.
The example, nor the Hudson, has nothing to do with the Boeing-vs-Airbus automation argument. Both Boeing and Airbus have stick shakers and stick pushers installed, and it's still possible for pilots to stall and crash perfectly good airplanes. And both Boeing and Airbus give the captain considerable control when things go bad.
For that matter, AF 447 probably had nothing to do with Boeing-vs.-Airbus automation philosophy. On both brands, when the pitot tubes fail, the glass cockpit goes dark. When that happens at night, it's been sufficient to cause a loss of all souls on board. The six previous times (as I understand it) in the past year that an Air France A330/A340 experienced a failure of all three pitot tubes due to icing, the tubes recovered in a matter of minutes. But if that failure occurred at night, over the mid-Atlantic, in a massive thunderstorm while operating near maximum altitude, no computer and very few pilots could have saved the aircraft.
In any case, all TFA is doing is quoting out-of-context from PPRuNe. For example:
The point isn't "without computers", but "without instruments". When 25 kts over your current speed will cause nasty mach effects on your subsonic aircraft, and 25 kts under your speed will cause you to spin out of the sky, and the turbulence is +/- 30 kts, you don't want to be there, and you really don't want to be there if you don't have an Airspeed gauge.
For that matter, the discussion there isn't between "Pilots and Engineers". More than 3/4 of the participants in that thread have no aviation qualification whatsoever. The mods just delete the worst dross, and as much Boeing vs. Airbus crap as they can.
And come on, Richard Quest was reading posts aloud from there on CNN last week.
Unless, of course, the publisher insists on camera-ready text, and make the editors of their books/journals responsible for typesetting/layout. In other words, it's already in the hands of the amateurs.
...you obviously haven't read the Graffiti at Pompeii
Standing in awe at the historical wonder that is the Amiga, OS and hardware, is a natural human reaction, and therefore not the sign of belonging to any cult. The emotions that I've felt considering the Amiga are not unlike those I've experienced standing at the foot of the temple of Jupiter at Baalbek, or what I'd imagine would be the sensation of laying one's mortal eyes on the Temple of the Golden Pavilion. Actually, come to think of it, the Amiga was more Golden Pavilion than Baalbek: harmonious; perfect even in its flaws. So perfect, it should not exist on this flawed earth. A crazed monk burned the Temple of the Golden Pavilion -- that's cultism. There are folks who believe the AmigaOS will rise again to rule us all -- that's cultism. But admiring the sheer perfection of the Amiga as a computer system of its generation, and marveling at its unparalleled run as the most elegant and best-performing PC on the market? That's just appreciating historical reality.
A plagiarised paper just smells bad, and is characterized by shifts in voices and writing styles, sudden ignorance of the the critical points raised earlier. The same author who can't write a grammatically correct sentence one moment is throwing down complex constructions the next The harder part is identifying the source of the plagiarism. For undergraduate papers, even the harder part is trivial. After all, the point of plagiarism is that the author is too lazy to write anything original.
For academics (professors), the situation isn't all that different. Plagiarism is usually a mix of stupidity, laziness and pressure to get stuff done. It usually happens where big, popularizing authors try to rip off the obscure ones (go back twenty years a la Mr. Ambrose, or pick something in a different language, preferably Italian), or when someone needs a book in an obscure field, and tries to pirate something really obscure.
Even so, if a plagiarist has enemies who give a damn, they can find the source fairly fast. So why construct a test for the most obfuscated cases, when a plagiarist clever enough to obfuscate could simply write something original and sufficiently clever?
Marriage was a financial and political transaction only for those with financial and political power; most of the population didn't fit into that group. Also, there's a huge difference between Northwestern European marriage patterns and the Mediterranean model, going back at least to the twelfth century.
The "priest-approval" business didn't change much of that. What it did change was the canon-law recognition of marriages as being validly formed by:
A. The couple announcing their marriage trough an exchange of present-tensed statements ("I take you to be my wife/I take you to be my husband")
-or-
B. The couple making future-tensed statements followed by a marital act.
No witnesses were required. So, in the eyes of the church, "Sure baby, I'll marry you next year" followed by a roll in the hay, was a valid marriage, and the Church Courts found themselves burdened with a bunch of these "he-said/she-said" lawsuits.
My point about fancy cars and small penises seems to have been misunderstood. Yes, wealth and the ability to provide security for a mate and offspring are the things that women have been hard-wired to look for, just as men look for someone perceived to be of good child-bearing stock. But a dude driving his bright red mid-life crisis sports car sends a different message than one driving a similarly priced, but more elegantly appointed luxo-car.
Years ago, I was waiting in the rain at the staff parking lot for the college newspapers to arrive so I could earn my work-study $4.25/hour delivering them around campus. The college president came out, made some snide remark about our dedication, then got in his red corvette. Our editor, a tall Texan woman, muttered "nice car", and as he drove off, yelled "Sorry about your penis!"
Shiny cars were last generation's penis-compensation trip. This generation, they're laptops. Let's face it: we carry them around with us everywhere, we always insist on using our own, we're proud of its power or versatility, and we carry it with us into the bathroom. It's a penis.
Most women with braincells are going to recognize that, and infer every other corollary. Guys with big laptops with more power than they ever use are likely compensating for something else. If a guy can come up with something "cute", maybe he knows he can deliver.
Of course, big, powerful and macho will impress the boys down at the server farm. Come to think of it, the big marketing whole right now is the lack of laptop commercials along the lines of pickup trucks: big burly men, toiling on the server farm. Country music blasts as foreman-looking nerd with glistening muscles and big hands drops a big-ass render project onto his Dell XPS, drops the sucks -- still running -- into his shoulder bag, and walks out the door into the sweet light of sunset.
You obviously didn't go through the indictment itself, where the party affiliations, when relevant is given. So the Democrat election commissioner is named in paragraph 4, and the Republican judge in paragraph 7. The #1 unfounded assumption a person makes is that the world is the way s/he thinks it is. In short, there's plenty of evidence that what you wrote is false. While the party affiliation of most people indicted is not mentioned (as it does not pertain to their job description), when mentioned, both parties come in.
Chance of aircraft being distributed randomly in the air: zero.
I think it's obvious that your typology has very little meaning.
Yes, you can divide them that way, but it won't explain anything. The fact the very first sale was likely a pirate sale (I say likely, because an enterprising pirate would find someone on the inside to jack that file straight off the server) doesn't have anything to do with being able to afford it, but rather that _being the first to supply a pirate copy_ has value.
You can divide the group into purchased and "woulda-coulda", but the value of a pirated copy is different from that of a legitimate one. Unless the legitimate copy is intentionally crippled, it's worth more than a pirate copy. And cost isn't just a function of monetary price; it involves all the trouble needed to go through to get a copy.
In short: there are A. People for whom pirated copies are inherently better for whatever social value they bring (the pirate scenesters). B. People for whom pirated copies are so repugnant, they'll never consider it. C. People who are ambiguous about it, and will behave according to cost.
There's not much you can do about A. For B and C, however, the trick is to make as much value as affordable as possible while keeping revenue up.
The problem is that companies seem to think the trick is to sell as little value at the most competitive price. Cheapening the value of the (legitimate) purchase lowers the barrier to (illegitimate) distribution.
None of this helps the poor guy trying to sell his iPhone app.; I'm just saying that the dynamics aren't all unit price and piracy.
I do a lot of work in libraries, and the n800/n810 wins here.
Say what you will about Apple's nice toys, the n800/n810's 800x480 screen is key for library catalogs (I use a n800, but I gather the n810 is what you can get these days). If you've been to many libraries, you know that catalogs tend to display a lot of information that is handy to have on the screen at the same time (such as title, call number, status), and they don't usually format it for a mobile browser.
I'm sure the iPod Touch has a prettier browsing experience, but for running this sort of work, the n810 wins.
Some library sites do run flash, by the way. And I can understand why Apple wouldn't implement Flash: that crap can chunder a slower device into tiny pieces. Apple's aiming for a consistent user experience; Nokia's letting their users take the device to the limit and beyond.
Classic Hollywood cartoons were synched precisely to the animation, and Carl Stalling (famous for doing the orchestration during the Golden Age of Looney Tunes/Merry Melodies), had a giant clicker for the sessions. So what do the charts look like on one of his pieces?
Yeah, but however transitory it is, it's far better suited to us than anything space has to offer. Seriously, any "changes over geological time" that occur are small change compared to the cost of terraforming. Or, put another way, it will take far less energy, logistics and ingenuity to maintain a human-habitable planet than to evolve one. Likewise, it will take far less genetic monkeying to keep our species compatible with this planet's environment than to adapt to that of another planet.
So, fine, seek to colonize other worlds, if that's what your religion says. But recognize that if we can't sustain our existence over Earthbound environmental changes, there's no way we can do it on another planet.
Yeah. I keep my transceiver in my coat. But that's not "the GPS" of the N800, but "a GPS".
And sure, the high-resolution screen, full loadout of maps and portability have save me many times.
Plus benchmarking these things running Windows Vista? Are you nuts? I mean, XP is bad enough.
The N810 has GPS, but the N800 doesn't.
Or you could have a display turn itself off when not in use, but still have the processor (slowly) ticking along.
I'm serious. The portability of a computer really helps for (A) sitations where you don't have the infrastructure to support a computer, (B) places where you don't have a computer permanently, (C) tasks that occur intermittently or concurrent with non-computer tasks.
In all three cases, lower power and greater autonomy are what you want. But (C) is where the ARM CPU really shines, and yeah, it shines with a screen too.
(N800 mafia speaking)
Okay, so that hole in the bottom-left was "band of brothers", huh?