The general problem is those who scoff at the Bible and Christianity are a posteriori; i.e. they require proof before believing in anything so mysterious & bizarre.
What Christianity is, however, is a priori - before there is proof - faith. If proof existed, there would be an obvious reason for everyone to believe.
And what's funniest of all is when they try to perform studies as to whether prayer can heal. We'll pray for subject A, and not for subject B, and see which one gets better, forgetting it may not be God's will for subject A to get better but for subject B to get better. So if subject A dies and subject B gets well, prayer kills?
The other issue which is really funny is to watch those who so devoted to a posteriori to the point everything has to be explainable by science - if not, it can't be true. We can't explain (using science) how Jesus could walk on water, how the Red Sea was parted, or how Joshua could bring down the walls of Jerico by marching around the city once a day for six days, around the city seven times on the seventh day, blowing the horns, and shouting loudly. Does this mean none of these events didn't happen? Let's pick the walls of Jerico. Could it be that because they followed God's instructs that God brought the walls down? Like a recipe or a combination lock - do all of these things as listed, showing your faith - and the end result will happen?
If you have to have proof for everything you believe, why are you doing so many things in your life which you are presuming work because someone else has made them work? You don't have proof for every activity in your life, but you rely upon every piece of equipment as though it has been demonstrated to you in advance to be flawless so it will behave as predicted.
Maybe:
The fat | out of shape, no personality, geeks who wear Star Trek uniforms to events as though they could be crew members but would have a better chance of being shot by a blind terrorist sniper at a distance of two miles after surviving a lightning strike on their way home from winning the lottery three weeks in a row than to make it into the Star Fleet Academy?
Seriously - I've always wondered about this but never found a good answer.
Blockbuster is going to have to do something to remain afloat. They still have brick&mortar stores to support and I don't think virtual rental is going to bail them out. The expenses affiliated with their hard stores cannot remain fixed and in order to offset them, those stores' revenues will have to increase just to break even.
An interesting question is whether Blockbuster will find a better business model than to mimic NetFlix. It was obviously an immediate counter-move to watch their market share disappear forever, but obviously not original. The result was merely price competition. That alone can't make or break a company because things such as customer service can easily outweigh it.
Blockbuster does have an advantage in the form of having local stores. This provides access to spontaneous rentals. Over time, some form of algebraic equation will have to be worked out to figure out the right mix of their online business model and the number of real-world stores. Too many or too few stores and the balance will be upset.
As far as Amazon's entry into the fray, waving a red flag in front of them won't guarantee they will move forward, but it certainly won't tell them to stay away, either.
There are going to be all sorts of strange statistics to make things interesting. Something which has held true (since forever) is 95% of the people who have access to cable have but a single provider [to choose from]. Otherwise, it's a dish. Pay-per-view is already available as a service but depending upon your provider (and location), the prices aren't always as gentle on your monthly bill as a visit down the street to Blockbuster. Fortunately, many systems permit 24-hour "rental" where you can play it at will, including rewind, fast forward, restart, etc.
As UWB (ultra-wideband) and other technologies (not cable modems) capable of either downloading or providing streaming movies could easily push Blockbuster's retail stores to the bring of survivability.
One of the bigger questions out of all of this - and it seems somewhat unrelated - is how all of this will affect the ability to put butts into the movie theatres. At least one recent survey shows a significant number of people prefer to watch movies at home. Admission price; food choice, quality, and price; and listening to babies cry, bored kids complain, and everyone else talk, surely cannot be factors in all of this, can they? Seriously, the quality and accessibility of home electronics has been cited as adding to the movie experience. (in addition to the other things I mentioned, IMO)
Linux is *far* behind Windows and OSX in terms of usability.
In what way? Two years since my move from windows confinement to linux and I am still discovering new stuff I cna do with an OOTB linux that I used to have to spend HOURS looking for documentation on from Microsoft - or even making my own tools or searching for tools already made by others.
Just out of curiosity - why did you only reference Windows in your response and not OSX? Windows' failings has nothing to do with OSX but
addressing using only Windows to prove your point is sophistry.
I don't think survival of the fittest is ever the right phrase[1]. I propose survival of the most adaptable. You can be the fittest in one environment or set of circumstances but when the situation changes; e.g. Apple moving to x86, what defines the fittest changes. The ability to adapt to whatever is going on and where it's taking place is what counts.
The GUI is an understatement. The strategy of Windows-like but not Windows will not win in the long run. It's not an improvement. Mac is the right interface...so far; time has borne this out. The lack of software (including games) has been the Mac downfall. Perhaps time will produce a better UI - beyond voice alone. What happens when, (in reverse order of time):
-o- it reads your mental requests[2] (ultimate)
-o- sees where your eyes are on the screen and reacts to your voice in the context of that location
-o- reacts to your voice
-o- keyboard.
Special mention needs to be made - obviously - for those who are [currently] paralyzed and using an eye interface - it doesn't fit anywhere on the time line per se - but the technology can be borrowed (obviously - above). Something similar will likely be said for a mental interface. It'll either be implemented for those who can communicate no other way and broadened to everyone else, or it'll be developed for the human brain, once. aside from minor changes for those who have some form of small needs.
In the meantime, the question will be: copy Apple or make it Apple-like; enough to avoid listening to landsharks ring your doorbell vs retaining the status quo and watching all but the diehards jump ship. You are not going to convince Mac users to switch to Linux with a Windows' GUI (not "belonging to Windows": Windows prime for the math people, think Windows-- for the programmers) interface.
There is a ready-made GUI ready for Linux to use and I predict it will emerge with an attempt to preserve Linux as a long-term desktop alternative against Windows as the lion's share of the market vs. Mac as the users' choice of UI. What is it? (no fair peeking below) Clues: (a) It predates Windows. (b) It is currently [still] on the market. (c) Its owner has been around for a long, long time. (d) It has become a big supporter of Linux and OS in general and will only do more in the future. Can you guess what it is?[3]
Otherwise, Linux as-is will try to wedge itself between Windows and Mac. Doing so will inflict a lot of pressure. Not good pressure; i.e. not in the sense of creating a diamond. Corporations must have a reason to go to Linux beyond better scalability over Windows' servers and a cheaper, and anti-Microsoft desktop. It will retain the former (servers) and Mac will absorb the desktop, both for the purposes of usability and the anti-Microsoft sentiment. The money won't be an issue because they're already paying it to Microsoft. The Microsoft->Mac migration is nearly a flat transaction (or zero-sum game, if you prefer) when evaluating the UI and finances. Linux will have to find a way to intervene in order to survive. That's as simple[4] as it gets. Granted, it's making serious inroads when it comes to applications - but applications alone will not increase marketshare in the long term.
Next question: When will it be time for Linux to stop being one size fits all? At some point, Linux will have to fork to server and client in order to survive with all of the other occupants riding in the x86 boat. No matter how much people want to defend Linux and see it as invincible, its unity will become its downfall.
____________________ [1] and the intrepretation of Darwin needs to change as well. Otherwise, survival of the fittest is going to be confined to short bursts of time. [2] a small BIAC in
The hospital where my wife works (where we met; one of the largest in the city) resurrected the vacuum tube system which had been abandoned a long time ago, primarily for special needs in the pharmacy - she works in the administrative pharmacy. I don't think they're going to experiment with roborts anytime soon. They'd see them as a security risk.
There are things which can't be transported - usually things such as blood samples - which have problems with the sudden acceleration and deceleration in a high-pressure environment.
They still use people to perform the med transport for restocking. But they also won't pay for extra software to ensure a complete two-way connection between two computer systems. Things which don't make a complete connection drop off to an exception report. They have people who have to look up additional information to determine what the problem is|was, and what information needs to be used to key it into the other system which bounced it. This stuff has to be done in a timely manner as once a patient has checked out, the list of charges is frozen. How can they be charged after they've left?
This means people have to go in on 3-day weekends, etc. to rekey that data. They're finally realizing it's an investment for the software, not an expense.
After several of us left fifteen years ago, things went downhill and have never recovered. IS now determines what people are permitted to purchase based upon their desire to support it. Ask for a CD burner. Sorry, we don't think you need one. This is even if it comes out of your budget. Last year, they determined too many laptops were in use and required all departments to write justifications for the laptops they had, knowing 10% of them would have to be turned in. If they couldn't support all of them, the least they could have done is to tell them they were on their own or would have to seek alternative support. A high-quality printer for prototypes of future medical forms to be used by doctors? Sorry, we don't want you to have one. (and that's nearly the language they use).
I installed a burner on my wife's PC before they went around and locked everyone's machines down. When they permitted her to upgrade because of hard disk and CPU needs (after an unbelievable list of requisitions to fill out), they didn't know any better than to transfer it to her new machine.
I'm wondering what would have happened if it had barged into a room where a colonoscopy or prostate exam was in progress. If it was off-course, there's no telling what it might do in either of those situations.
I tote Instant HTML around with me when I need a reference. There may be better books, but it's got what I need. It's for 4.0 and while there are changes I don't have with me, it gets me by when I need it. And while it doesn't list Opera or Firefox, it's got charts for the various tags, showing which ones are supported in IE and NN - and in which versions. Again, it's not perfect, but if I see something across the board for IE, I figure it must be IE-only and I know to avoid it. Besides, I'm willing to wager the HTML in use is restricted to a pretty significant set of tags - not much esoterica.
I buy my own books. Then they are mine to do with what I please and go with me as I move along. So I choose to buy what I like.
I got it five years ago (original print date 1997, reprint 2000) so I've gotten my money's worth. As far as killing trees, I figure this is part of a tree I saved from one of the annual forest fires in the Sierras.
I figure most of the publishers trying to come out with new flavors of HTML books are doing so for a lack of imagination & creativity for other books which should be published. There are tons of those. The problem is that most of of the people who work on publishing staffs would not be customers of their own products if they didn't work there. And that's why so many topics are overlooked or misunderstood.
If you put a plastic gallon jug full of water in the freezer, it'll grow out of the container considerably, cracking and destroying it. Your jugs will be one and done. When I was still playing soccer for a club (pre-ACL days of my youth), several guys would put a partial jug in the freezer and the next day, it would melt througout the game and water would be available to drink at 45:00 and 90:00. The water obviously tasted pretty nasty, but it was cold.
(That was one group. I couldn't handle the water for more than two games and had to switch to my favorite: iced tea. The two dental students preferred beer. They also wore mouth guards. Paranoid? And the other four or five stayed with Gatorade.)
________________________________
Anyone in here nicknamed Nutmeg?
;)
Fully loaded means you have a CPU, Celeron or otherwise. For less than that you can have a computer but it doesn't have a CPU.
It's sort of like the write-only hard drives we designed in college while sitting over cocktails (we attended a dry religious university) at a casino in Atlantic City (after ACM National Finals in Philadelphia + job fair) - and I know everyone else has created their own version as well. Support: "You say there's smoke coming out of your hard drive? What were you doing right before that? You were copying files from it? I'm sorry, sir, but that's not a supported feature. This is write-only hard drive. Infinite capacity. The only way we can make that feature possible is to prevent reading from the device."
As it's not spelled very often, but instead used vocally, flack is supposed to be flak.
By the same token, someone will pique your curiousity, not peak it.
_____________________________
(A public service in the interest of keeping IT people looking better when they aren't with other IT people. "I'm a geek so it doesn't matter" isn't an excuse)
It's inevitably the company who comes out smelling like a rose, but it's never stated up-front.
disclaimer:
I'm not a member of the anything-but-Microsoft crowd. Microsoft products supply my income and have done so since I left the mainframe market fifteen years ago.
I will say I take no pleasure in seeing research results showing a Windows-based product to be exponentially superior to another product (e.g. Linux) without a statement as to what caused the study to be made: who commissioned it? Later, we find out after the headlines read "Study Says Windows Beats the Crap Out of Linux" the project was funded by Microsoft.
In the interest of fairness and honesty, would Microsoft permitted that study to see the light of day if it didn't go in their favor? Look at the vendors, especially hardware, who perform tweaking to achieve special ratings during benchmarks.
I look at these situations as a problem-solver, not a statistician in the sense of a statistician making a hypothesis then determining if it's true or false. A problem-solver, however, in analyzing the data and letting the chips fall where they may - objectively - regardless of any other influence.
A better way to explain this is an example: the various groups responsible for placing traffic signals & controlling traffic flow put down the hose meters where they think the data should be collected in order to justify where they want the signals to be put. My question to those people, and the people on the city council, or any boards is this: Suppose we collected incredible volumes of data. Subsequent analysis would show the correct place to put a traffic signal is an intersection 2 miles outside of the city limits - almost in the countryside. Doing so would eliminate bumper-to-bumper traffic during the rush hour.
Would you do it?
You already know what their answer would be. They don't want to follow the data. They want to bend the data. ("We think this is a likely place for the light. Let's check the traffic flow to validate it.")
On the news: "so-and-so's stock doubled today." So it went from 6 to 12. Although they'd likely use "rose by 2" when it went from 98 to 100.
What happens when it goes from 2 to 4? (Doubled or Grew by 100%)? Grew by 2? Grew exponentially?
And this is the local news, cranking out words without realizing what they are saying.
(although if you were to make a transcript of what they say and read it, it makes no sense whatsoever)
It looks like someone who isn't very much in tune with what's been going on online. They pop in, make some observations about things which have been in progress for some time or have been recommended by others, and they are modded 5-insightful?
Now I know who has been dipping into my private meth stock I cooked (with kool-aid and flea spray added).
Re:Dumbest thing I've read all week...
on
The Evil in E-Mail
·
· Score: 1
Not SPAM, spam. (Be careful of the ownership issues.)
Personally, I think a better technique would be to:
-- route a copy of every piece of email to a single, highly scaled server.
-- use the markup tags <ESP> and </ESP> (prepend and append) to make the email accessible via the sixth sense.
-- hire the Psychic Friends Network to sit around and let contents of the ESP-text seep into their brains. They won't be slowed down by reading them or using a keyboard.
-- they'll easily sort out the innocent messages from the criminal ones.
It certainly isn't any less accurate or efficient than what he's proposing.
"referrer" isn't a reliable piece of data. Most experienced web developers know this and most inexperienced web developers start posting questions after hours of frustration because they can't make use of it in their web services or they can't log the data as part of the project specs.
I have an old vacuum tube radio. It hasn't been plugged in since forever.
My MIL was going to throw it out when we were cleaning out her mother's house. Everything is intact, and it's sitting here in the living room, fitting in with the rest of the furniture.
I've just never come up with the stones to pull the tubes, map their location, dust everything, etc. Everything which needs to be done before I'm willing to plug it in. On top of that, electricity is one of my three phobias. If I ground myself with a bracelet on each wrist, I've been able to zap a board in my Pc. Not consistently, but it happens. I've had friends who know a lot more than I do verify I'm grounded. That means needing help whenever hardware changes have to be made.
Of course he does. Just as people can't resist touching things when the waitstaff tell them something is hot when they put it on the table, God knows people can't resist taking a whiff of things which stink horribly. Think of it as a "brown smell". (see: brown note) The temptation is just too strong.
There was a guy in college who would hold off pinching a loaf for two or three days, then set his alarm to be earlier than most people would get up. Inevitably, there would be a sign on the bathroom door: Record Turd ~~ Stall #3. And as nasty as some of the prudes thought of the practice, they couldn't resist nudging the door open to check it out.
The bottom line? People simply cannot resist weird sh%t.
Actually, there are those of us who don't mind the scent of n-butyl mercaptan[1]. Not a full blast in the face, but once it's had a chance to waft throughout the night air.
The Chicago Tribune had a story about this many years ago. I was glad to see it and know I wasn't the only one. Growing up in the country, I was familiar with a lot of wildlife, particularly nocturnal which I'd see as I was running during the cooler hours.
Slashdot Mirror
The general problem is those who scoff at the Bible and Christianity are a posteriori; i.e. they require proof before believing in anything so mysterious & bizarre.
What Christianity is, however, is a priori - before there is proof - faith. If proof existed, there would be an obvious reason for everyone to believe.
And what's funniest of all is when they try to perform studies as to whether prayer can heal. We'll pray for subject A, and not for subject B, and see which one gets better, forgetting it may not be God's will for subject A to get better but for subject B to get better. So if subject A dies and subject B gets well, prayer kills?
The other issue which is really funny is to watch those who so devoted to a posteriori to the point everything has to be explainable by science - if not, it can't be true. We can't explain (using science) how Jesus could walk on water, how the Red Sea was parted, or how Joshua could bring down the walls of Jerico by marching around the city once a day for six days, around the city seven times on the seventh day, blowing the horns, and shouting loudly. Does this mean none of these events didn't happen? Let's pick the walls of Jerico. Could it be that because they followed God's instructs that God brought the walls down? Like a recipe or a combination lock - do all of these things as listed, showing your faith - and the end result will happen?
If you have to have proof for everything you believe, why are you doing so many things in your life which you are presuming work because someone else has made them work? You don't have proof for every activity in your life, but you rely upon every piece of equipment as though it has been demonstrated to you in advance to be flawless so it will behave as predicted.
Which geeks?
Maybe:
The fat | out of shape, no personality, geeks who wear Star Trek uniforms to events as though they could be crew members but would have a better chance of being shot by a blind terrorist sniper at a distance of two miles after surviving a lightning strike on their way home from winning the lottery three weeks in a row than to make it into the Star Fleet Academy?
Seriously - I've always wondered about this but never found a good answer.
Blockbuster is going to have to do something to remain afloat. They still have brick&mortar stores to support and I don't think virtual rental is going to bail them out. The expenses affiliated with their hard stores cannot remain fixed and in order to offset them, those stores' revenues will have to increase just to break even.
An interesting question is whether Blockbuster will find a better business model than to mimic NetFlix. It was obviously an immediate counter-move to watch their market share disappear forever, but obviously not original. The result was merely price competition. That alone can't make or break a company because things such as customer service can easily outweigh it.
Blockbuster does have an advantage in the form of having local stores. This provides access to spontaneous rentals. Over time, some form of algebraic equation will have to be worked out to figure out the right mix of their online business model and the number of real-world stores. Too many or too few stores and the balance will be upset.
As far as Amazon's entry into the fray, waving a red flag in front of them won't guarantee they will move forward, but it certainly won't tell them to stay away, either.
There are going to be all sorts of strange statistics to make things interesting. Something which has held true (since forever) is 95% of the people who have access to cable have but a single provider [to choose from]. Otherwise, it's a dish. Pay-per-view is already available as a service but depending upon your provider (and location), the prices aren't always as gentle on your monthly bill as a visit down the street to Blockbuster. Fortunately, many systems permit 24-hour "rental" where you can play it at will, including rewind, fast forward, restart, etc.
As UWB (ultra-wideband) and other technologies (not cable modems) capable of either downloading or providing streaming movies could easily push Blockbuster's retail stores to the bring of survivability.
One of the bigger questions out of all of this - and it seems somewhat unrelated - is how all of this will affect the ability to put butts into the movie theatres. At least one recent survey shows a significant number of people prefer to watch movies at home. Admission price; food choice, quality, and price; and listening to babies cry, bored kids complain, and everyone else talk, surely cannot be factors in all of this, can they? Seriously, the quality and accessibility of home electronics has been cited as adding to the movie experience. (in addition to the other things I mentioned, IMO)
Linux is *far* behind Windows and OSX in terms of usability.
In what way? Two years since my move from windows confinement to linux and I am still discovering new stuff I cna do with an OOTB linux that I used to have to spend HOURS looking for documentation on from Microsoft - or even making my own tools or searching for tools already made by others.
Just out of curiosity - why did you only reference Windows in your response and not OSX? Windows' failings has nothing to do with OSX but addressing using only Windows to prove your point is sophistry.
I don't think survival of the fittest is ever the right phrase[1]. I propose survival of the most adaptable. You can be the fittest in one environment or set of circumstances but when the situation changes; e.g. Apple moving to x86, what defines the fittest changes. The ability to adapt to whatever is going on and where it's taking place is what counts.
The GUI is an understatement. The strategy of Windows-like but not Windows will not win in the long run. It's not an improvement. Mac is the right interface...so far; time has borne this out. The lack of software (including games) has been the Mac downfall. Perhaps time will produce a better UI - beyond voice alone. What happens when, (in reverse order of time):
-o- it reads your mental requests[2] (ultimate)
-o- sees where your eyes are on the screen and reacts to your voice in the context of that location
-o- reacts to your voice
-o- keyboard.
Special mention needs to be made - obviously - for those who are [currently] paralyzed and using an eye interface - it doesn't fit anywhere on the time line per se - but the technology can be borrowed (obviously - above). Something similar will likely be said for a mental interface. It'll either be implemented for those who can communicate no other way and broadened to everyone else, or it'll be developed for the human brain, once. aside from minor changes for those who have some form of small needs.
In the meantime, the question will be: copy Apple or make it Apple-like; enough to avoid listening to landsharks ring your doorbell vs retaining the status quo and watching all but the diehards jump ship. You are not going to convince Mac users to switch to Linux with a Windows' GUI (not "belonging to Windows": Windows prime for the math people, think Windows-- for the programmers) interface.
There is a ready-made GUI ready for Linux to use and I predict it will emerge with an attempt to preserve Linux as a long-term desktop alternative against Windows as the lion's share of the market vs. Mac as the users' choice of UI. What is it? (no fair peeking below) Clues: (a) It predates Windows. (b) It is currently [still] on the market. (c) Its owner has been around for a long, long time. (d) It has become a big supporter of Linux and OS in general and will only do more in the future. Can you guess what it is?[3]
Otherwise, Linux as-is will try to wedge itself between Windows and Mac. Doing so will inflict a lot of pressure. Not good pressure; i.e. not in the sense of creating a diamond. Corporations must have a reason to go to Linux beyond better scalability over Windows' servers and a cheaper, and anti-Microsoft desktop. It will retain the former (servers) and Mac will absorb the desktop, both for the purposes of usability and the anti-Microsoft sentiment. The money won't be an issue because they're already paying it to Microsoft. The Microsoft->Mac migration is nearly a flat transaction (or zero-sum game, if you prefer) when evaluating the UI and finances. Linux will have to find a way to intervene in order to survive. That's as simple[4] as it gets. Granted, it's making serious inroads when it comes to applications - but applications alone will not increase marketshare in the long term
Next question: When will it be time for Linux to stop being one size fits all? At some point, Linux will have to fork to server and client in order to survive with all of the other occupants riding in the x86 boat. No matter how much people want to defend Linux and see it as invincible, its unity will become its downfall.
____________________
[1] and the intrepretation of Darwin needs to change as well. Otherwise, survival of the fittest is going to be confined to short bursts of time.
[2] a small BIAC in
The hospital where my wife works (where we met; one of the largest in the city) resurrected the vacuum tube system which had been abandoned a long time ago, primarily for special needs in the pharmacy - she works in the administrative pharmacy. I don't think they're going to experiment with roborts anytime soon. They'd see them as a security risk.
There are things which can't be transported - usually things such as blood samples - which have problems with the sudden acceleration and deceleration in a high-pressure environment.
They still use people to perform the med transport for restocking. But they also won't pay for extra software to ensure a complete two-way connection between two computer systems. Things which don't make a complete connection drop off to an exception report. They have people who have to look up additional information to determine what the problem is|was, and what information needs to be used to key it into the other system which bounced it. This stuff has to be done in a timely manner as once a patient has checked out, the list of charges is frozen. How can they be charged after they've left? This means people have to go in on 3-day weekends, etc. to rekey that data. They're finally realizing it's an investment for the software, not an expense.
After several of us left fifteen years ago, things went downhill and have never recovered. IS now determines what people are permitted to purchase based upon their desire to support it. Ask for a CD burner. Sorry, we don't think you need one. This is even if it comes out of your budget. Last year, they determined too many laptops were in use and required all departments to write justifications for the laptops they had, knowing 10% of them would have to be turned in. If they couldn't support all of them, the least they could have done is to tell them they were on their own or would have to seek alternative support. A high-quality printer for prototypes of future medical forms to be used by doctors? Sorry, we don't want you to have one. (and that's nearly the language they use).
I installed a burner on my wife's PC before they went around and locked everyone's machines down. When they permitted her to upgrade because of hard disk and CPU needs (after an unbelievable list of requisitions to fill out), they didn't know any better than to transfer it to her new machine.
I would agree about rampage.
I'm wondering what would have happened if it had barged into a room where a colonoscopy or prostate exam was in progress. If it was off-course, there's no telling what it might do in either of those situations.
It would have been funnier if you'd said Sarah Connor. (and you might have received more points) ;)
I tote Instant HTML around with me when I need a reference. There may be better books, but it's got what I need. It's for 4.0 and while there are changes I don't have with me, it gets me by when I need it. And while it doesn't list Opera or Firefox, it's got charts for the various tags, showing which ones are supported in IE and NN - and in which versions. Again, it's not perfect, but if I see something across the board for IE, I figure it must be IE-only and I know to avoid it. Besides, I'm willing to wager the HTML in use is restricted to a pretty significant set of tags - not much esoterica.
I buy my own books. Then they are mine to do with what I please and go with me as I move along. So I choose to buy what I like.
I got it five years ago (original print date 1997, reprint 2000) so I've gotten my money's worth. As far as killing trees, I figure this is part of a tree I saved from one of the annual forest fires in the Sierras.
I figure most of the publishers trying to come out with new flavors of HTML books are doing so for a lack of imagination & creativity for other books which should be published. There are tons of those. The problem is that most of of the people who work on publishing staffs would not be customers of their own products if they didn't work there. And that's why so many topics are overlooked or misunderstood.
If you put a plastic gallon jug full of water in the freezer, it'll grow out of the container considerably, cracking and destroying it. Your jugs will be one and done. When I was still playing soccer for a club (pre-ACL days of my youth), several guys would put a partial jug in the freezer and the next day, it would melt througout the game and water would be available to drink at 45:00 and 90:00. The water obviously tasted pretty nasty, but it was cold.
(That was one group. I couldn't handle the water for more than two games and had to switch to my favorite: iced tea. The two dental students preferred beer. They also wore mouth guards. Paranoid? And the other four or five stayed with Gatorade.)
________________________________
Anyone in here nicknamed Nutmeg?
Fully loaded means you have a CPU, Celeron or otherwise.
For less than that you can have a computer but it doesn't have a CPU.
It's sort of like the write-only hard drives we designed in college while sitting over cocktails (we attended a dry religious university) at a casino in Atlantic City (after ACM National Finals in Philadelphia + job fair) - and I know everyone else has created their own version as well.
Support: "You say there's smoke coming out of your hard drive? What were you doing right before that? You were copying files from it? I'm sorry, sir, but that's not a supported feature. This is write-only hard drive. Infinite capacity. The only way we can make that feature possible is to prevent reading from the device."
As it's not spelled very often, but instead used vocally, flack is supposed to be flak .
By the same token, someone will pique your curiousity, not peak it.
_____________________________
(A public service in the interest of keeping IT people looking better when they aren't with other IT people. "I'm a geek so it doesn't matter" isn't an excuse)
Who commissioned the study.
It's inevitably the company who comes out smelling like a rose, but it's never stated up-front.
disclaimer:
I'm not a member of the anything-but-Microsoft crowd. Microsoft products supply my income and have done so since I left the mainframe market fifteen years ago.
I will say I take no pleasure in seeing research results showing a Windows-based product to be exponentially superior to another product (e.g. Linux) without a statement as to what caused the study to be made: who commissioned it? Later, we find out after the headlines read "Study Says Windows Beats the Crap Out of Linux" the project was funded by Microsoft.
In the interest of fairness and honesty, would Microsoft permitted that study to see the light of day if it didn't go in their favor? Look at the vendors, especially hardware, who perform tweaking to achieve special ratings during benchmarks.
I look at these situations as a problem-solver, not a statistician in the sense of a statistician making a hypothesis then determining if it's true or false. A problem-solver, however, in analyzing the data and letting the chips fall where they may - objectively - regardless of any other influence.
A better way to explain this is an example: the various groups responsible for placing traffic signals & controlling traffic flow put down the hose meters where they think the data should be collected in order to justify where they want the signals to be put. My question to those people, and the people on the city council, or any boards is this:
Suppose we collected incredible volumes of data. Subsequent analysis would show the correct place to put a traffic signal is an intersection 2 miles outside of the city limits - almost in the countryside. Doing so would eliminate bumper-to-bumper traffic during the rush hour.
Would you do it?
You already know what their answer would be. They don't want to follow the data. They want to bend the data. ("We think this is a likely place for the light. Let's check the traffic flow to validate it.")
On the news: "so-and-so's stock doubled today." So it went from 6 to 12. Although they'd likely use "rose by 2" when it went from 98 to 100.
What happens when it goes from 2 to 4? (Doubled or Grew by 100%)? Grew by 2? Grew exponentially? And this is the local news, cranking out words without realizing what they are saying.
(although if you were to make a transcript of what they say and read it, it makes no sense whatsoever)
What insights are shown here?
It looks like someone who isn't very much in tune with what's been going on online. They pop in, make some observations about things which have been in progress for some time or have been recommended by others, and they are modded 5-insightful?
Now I know who has been dipping into my private meth stock I cooked (with kool-aid and flea spray added).
Not SPAM , spam . (Be careful of the ownership issues.)
Personally, I think a better technique would be to:
-- route a copy of every piece of email to a single, highly scaled server.
-- use the markup tags <ESP> and </ESP> (prepend and append) to make the email accessible via the sixth sense.
-- hire the Psychic Friends Network to sit around and let contents of the ESP-text seep into their brains. They won't be slowed down by reading them or using a keyboard.
-- they'll easily sort out the innocent messages from the criminal ones.
It certainly isn't any less accurate or efficient than what he's proposing.
I have a better question. note:
complete legacy collection of tangible U.S. Government publications
When will they digitize the intangible publications?
Not to mention a decent level of understanding of logic
I wrongly assumed that since I paid for it, it must be better,
"My uncle gave me a Ferrari but I bought a VW bug. Because I paid for it, I presumed it was better than the Ferrari."
I think it's time for him to stop by eBay and buy a clue.
"referrer" isn't a reliable piece of data. Most experienced web developers know this and most inexperienced web developers start posting questions after hours of frustration because they can't make use of it in their web services or they can't log the data as part of the project specs.
Besides, it's not that tough to spoof.
I have an old vacuum tube radio. It hasn't been plugged in since forever.
My MIL was going to throw it out when we were cleaning out her mother's house. Everything is intact, and it's sitting here in the living room, fitting in with the rest of the furniture.
I've just never come up with the stones to pull the tubes, map their location, dust everything, etc. Everything which needs to be done before I'm willing to plug it in. On top of that, electricity is one of my three phobias. If I ground myself with a bracelet on each wrist, I've been able to zap a board in my Pc. Not consistently, but it happens. I've had friends who know a lot more than I do verify I'm grounded. That means needing help whenever hardware changes have to be made.
Of course he does. Just as people can't resist touching things when the waitstaff tell them something is hot when they put it on the table, God knows people can't resist taking a whiff of things which stink horribly. Think of it as a "brown smell". (see: brown note) The temptation is just too strong.
There was a guy in college who would hold off pinching a loaf for two or three days, then set his alarm to be earlier than most people would get up. Inevitably, there would be a sign on the bathroom door: Record Turd ~~ Stall #3 . And as nasty as some of the prudes thought of the practice, they couldn't resist nudging the door open to check it out.
The bottom line? People simply cannot resist weird sh%t.
The Bodeans did the Friends theme?
That shows how little I know. I always thought the Rembrandts did it.
Here's a toast to Knife Lake Dorothy!
(She was the nicest lady!)
But it doesn't have people who use "it's" instead of "its"!
Actually, there are those of us who don't mind the scent of n-butyl mercaptan[1]. Not a full blast in the face, but once it's had a chance to waft throughout the night air.
The Chicago Tribune had a story about this many years ago. I was glad to see it and know I wasn't the only one. Growing up in the country, I was familiar with a lot of wildlife, particularly nocturnal which I'd see as I was running during the cooler hours.
...why does everyone flaunt Marconi when Tesla had voice transmission long before Marconi's public demonstrations were nothing more than Morse?