We have a code of ethics... the ACM writes them. I suppose it isn't really mandatory that we belong and therefor adhere to them, but I was taught to fall back on them for ethical issues.
The code is pretty much common sense. If you want a funny and kinda sad read, find the real estate code of ethics. They have to outline every evil, dirty little trick ever pulled and explicitly say not to do it.
That really threw me, but very few people seemed to care about that one (lots of people actually rejoiced over it). I personally like being able to jump into overtype mode. I know for sure that my formatting is going to be uniform that way when I re-use a document for its formatting. Now if MS put in a 'Reveal Codes' function like WordPerfect, then they can throw insert right out the window if they want (Reveal Formatting isn't anywhere near as nice in my opinion).
Anyway, I have a feeling that the elimination of Caps Lock would go over about the same. The vast majority wouldn't care, and the loudest voices on the subject will probably be applauding.
From the concept reading/videos that I have looked at, it seems that Google is looking to boot this thing straight from ROM. They state they are bypassing a lot of standard startup procedures and skipping any boot-loader; instead they are going to a kernel load and letting their OS do all that lifting (not because they can do it better than the hardware manufactures, but because, I would think, they don't actually want all that hardware there that you could do something with that isn't on the cloud). This means that you pretty much have to have a board with the ability to flash in Chrome OS, or be buying a machine that can do it. If you are getting a new netbook with Chrome OS on it, then yes, you are going to be getting back to bare bones. It sounds like, however, that is then all you are getting.
A comment from the engadget article made a really good point. To quote Dave95 about a cloud OS on a netbook:
That sounds an awful lot like what we do with our smart phones and iPads today. Sorry just don't see the need for such an OS on Netbooks. And with it being web based (web apps and services), you most likely will need a constant data connection anyway. So yet another device tied to carriers with contracts paying yet another data fee (my guess).
I think this is a very good point. If everything has to be done online, then don't you need constant, reliable connection to the internet?
Is a bare-bones, web only OS what people really want out of a netbook? I don't believe they do. I think people want an ultra-portable laptop that they can pull out and do a few things on at a moments notice. Yes, most (all with a few outliers) of those things are online. As Dave says though, how much of that can't be done on a smartphone or at least a tablet?
Google isn't exactly breaking into new territory here either. ASUS has played with this in the past, and Splashtop (http://www.splashtop.com/) is a popular product that ASUS and other board manufactures have bought into on some of their models. You have an instant on OS that gets you some internet goodies, and when you are ready you boot into a full-blown (arguable I suppose) OS if necessary.
Chrome OS, as I understand it, is not useful for netbooks in my mind. I don't even see netbooks being useful in the next few years. Small and ultra-portable... get a tablet. If you really need that keyboard, should be a nice market for a tablet with a kickstand and a pull out keyboard or detachable keyboard built into the back of the device (may already be one... haven't looked). I see Chrome OS being a much nicer fit for laptops and even desktops. I actually think that on a laptop or desktop, if Chrome OS had the ability to boot into Windows or Linux out of it, the platform would fair much better. Quick boot into your web-surfing -slash- half-production environment, and then when/if you need to, go to your full-production environment. Google, however, will probably not do this as they want all your internet needs through their services and their web-enable OS.
Therefor, I don't see Chrome OS going anywhere till we have cheap motherboards with that new BIOS-replacement flashable ROM running it (or BIOS that are extended to use *flashable* ROMs like Splashtop or Chrome OS) and with built in Type-1 hypervisors for local virtualization. That way you can choose to have one or both of your quick, web-only OS load and your full production environment OS load at the same time. You do your morning coffee ritual reading on Chrome OS (or whatever) and when it is time to do actual work for the day, you flash over to the production OS that is all loaded up and waiting (secure logins may need some work to get this running smoothly, but that is a minor glitch to work out). Then I can see Chrome OS really taking off, especially in the consumer market (big business, maybe not so much).
I suppose that one would have to look at hiring and retention rates out of your school to really get a good idea, but from the initial "knee-jerk" reaction to your post, I would think that UCF is not a good institution to get your education from, nor is it a good institution to hire from (I am a student myself, but putting myself in an employer's shoes I instantly put up a red flag). If this is the feeling of the majority of the student body, as you claim, then no defense or sweet talk of the university would convince me that their graduates are worth my time. Point is further proven by a 500+ person capstone course. I understand that the lecture itself is the 500+ part, and the class is split into labs for a percentage of their class time, but it still unfathomable to me that such a setup even exists. The level of personal attention from instructor to student must be terrible.
For the textbooks, you may be correct. From what I understand from speaking with my own professors though, each professor chooses their own books and makes their own deals. If it is really too overwhelming to make up your own tests (which if the team of professors here can put a new one together in short order like this, I think they could put one together at a less insane pace over 2 or 3 months before midterm/final), then the prof should tell the publisher that he is happy to do exclusive business with them, but on a larger timetable. Skip a version once in a while. At a high level like this course, should they really be using books with versions anyway? Isn't a theory based oneshot book for the times more appropriate? I fully admit I am not educated in this area, and there are most likely factors I am not even thinking of that make this decision impossible for faculty, but these are my initial thoughts.
Overall, I am leaning towards a lot of the other posters in my opinion on this professor. He is using a lazier method of teaching. If he is like you have heard, and is one of the professors with a real passion for what he is teaching, then I applaud him. On the other hand, I think he should leave the university for one with a much more personalized education system where he can really interact with every one of his students. Teaching at a university that treats their students as a number doesn't sound like a philosophy that is in keeping with his principals. He may want to evaluate if those tens of thousands of students lives he touched are better than the fewer number of students he could have really impacted at a different university.
500+ capstone... I'm still having trouble with that.
I doubt you'll actually get many complaints for lack of advertising, especially considering that isn't really your "content." I've never heard of an ADA case where a blind person complained that they couldn't read a posted advertising flyer on a bulletin board in a store. If it does mean that the horrible chain of dozens of domains and layers of Javascript for ads has to go away so you just serve your ads yourself, meh. I'm still having trouble finding a lot of problems with this.
The girlfriend is classified as learning disabled (despite being a semester off of a bachelors degree now) and has a hard time reading. She uses a screen reading program that I know has internet reading capabilities, but I never checked it out for myself. I was a bit surprised by this topic (from what I remember of working with Dreamweaver a few years back, you could set it up to yell at you if you weren't complying with some accessibility standards) so I asked her how her experience goes in using it on the internet. She told me that sometimes she gets all of the website, sometimes all she gets is the title, and other times somewhere in between. When she asked me why I wanted to know, I briefly described what I was reading here.
First thing she responds with is "Oh please no." Somewhat long rant made short, her prediction is that if they put these stronger regulations and compliance dates into play, those ads will be read, and she will end up having to hear them in the middle of the stuff she wants to actually hear. The example she gave me was of a website she was looking at with a advertisement in the content of the page: "...out door recreation tummy tuck" would be produced from her headphones.
So I'm thinking that things could be made better, or so much worse depending on the website designer with this regulation in play... and occasionally entertaining.
I don't think someone has ever heard the term "Slippery Slope" before.
In any case, discussion is one of the things you are kinda required to have in a democracy. You're argument is silly and is bordering on having an almost dictatorship-like approach. Just because you are nice about shutting someone down (which cutting a news agency out of the biggest political coverage around is crippling them in a pretty big way) doesn't mean you are not, in fact, shutting someone down. So previous poster's comments were right on. Sorry.
Nonsense. Utter nonsense. The President's job is to accomplish his agenda that he was elected to accomplish. To do that he needs to explain his program and counter the objections of his opponents.
Umm... it would seem to me that all it would take to counter the objections of his opponents is a COUNTER ARGUMENT! A fact, a scenario depicting the failings of the opposition argument, or even a damn 'think of the children' speech is better than just saying "No, I don't want to hear it, lalalalalalal!" Really?! You're serious about this?! News Flash: (hehehehe pun) If a President can't counter an opposing argument with facts of his own, either he/she isn't worth a damn, the idea isn't worth a damn, or both. This had better be a troll, or I am just going to succeed from humanity.
Lastly, as far as I know, right of association protects people from the government, not the other way around. I can't really comment further than that.
Then you still need to say on your website, "Note that you must have Python installed to obtain this software."
Even after reading the author's defense, it still sounds like this is useful for providing support in niche application situations (one webserver for many client types, or amazing boot disks and installers), or to prevent DUMMY_MODE-ON from the less tech savvy users (then there are other reasons given, but they don't sound too impressive to me). In the latter case, you still have these users seeing the website and getting wide-eyed at the idea of having to find some mysterious language library. For that senario, I think the fatELF binary would be a decent idea.
It would seem to me this would save some decent bandwidth cost on large programs. The author says it would save on disk space for developers, but I kinda wonder if it would be negated by the bandwidth increase.
Hey, that's one of my favorite pass times. There isn't many things I enjoy more in the mall than walking into RadioShack, being approached by an employee offering to help me find something, and telling him exactly what it is that I want. The look of confusion, horror, and dulling of the eyes as DUMMY MODE moves to the ON position makes me smile on the inside.
You say most of the time, the publicist wants exclusive control of the image. Isn't that to say that you sign over the copyright to them as well, for all intents and purposes? I understand why the photographer can't do anything with the photos, but what's wrong with the publicist now?
I'm assuming that you don't ever get paid for that photo session again. You don't get a cut of what the publicist does with it, as you have them pay for everything up front, from what I understand of your post. Despite that, you say "If the publicist wants the picture under the CC, I am going to charge more for it." To me, that says your contract with the publicist would state "While I sign over all rights to this image to you, I forbid you from putting the image into the CC, public domain, etc."
If this is correct, I don't understand why you, or any photographer, would care especially what the publicist does with the photographs past their intended purpose? Publicist sells photos to magazine for untold thousands or millions of dollars, obviously the photographer needs to be compensated accordingly. But one of the unused photos or a photo that has already served it's indented purpose is put into the CC or public domain, why is additional compensation and restriction needed for what equates out to a donation in the photographer (as a bonus) and publisher's names?
In other words, once it's the publicist's problem, is it really, and shouldn't it be, all the publicist's problem? Clarification please?:)
*I admit to full ignorance in photography contracts and business practices.
That would be nice, but I doubt it will much happen. Your talking about a device that plays standard DS games and is marketed as the next unit in the DS line... more of a model number increase with a few gadgets than a new system.
As such, I highly doubt developers will decrease their available market and make 'Only for the DSi' games. If you mean improving games that ran like crap from before, or downloadable games from this new store, then maybe. The possibility would also exist to maybe download a HQ-texture patch or something from the store for a cartridge, but I still highly doubt very many games and game makers, if any, would subscribe to such a trend.
But... but... there are step-by-step instructions right from google itself. They even have pretty pictures!
You are also given the choice of 7 different clients, and 7 mobile phone instructions. Maybe it's not completely all inclusive, but why would your average n00b be using something else?
Also, this is quite honestly lazy ass teaching. Reusing 100% of the material year after year...? Hell no. Theories change, textbooks update, and teaching methods improve. Beyond that, as pointed out before, the notes are for your future reference, not just for reference of the class. If you were to write all your notes into the margins of your textbook, would they tell you that you have to burn the book?
Bring this to the Dean first. If nothing else, just to get his/her reaction. If the Dean thinks this is no big deal and acceptable behavior, get the hell out of there. That place is taking your money and giving you a substandard education as far as I'm concerned.
That's been pretty much my experience. It makes perfect sense what the GP said... use it for a general understanding and then get more specifics off it's references and further searching along those veins.
That's never the reason given when a prof/teacher says "Don't use wikipedia" though. It's always "anybody can make a change and when I looked up [X topic in my field that I have researched] I found all kinds of bad information." And of course whenever I interject in there rant and ask why they didn't fix it if they know with such certainty that the articles they read were wrong, they usually blow me off or say the system isn't worth their time.
-pessimistic-rant- Personally, I think they just don't want anything to do with a system that might potentially inhibit the sales of their 200-page-for-$120 text books. -/pessimistic-rant-
The only reason I have to rip a DVD is the terrible quality of a cheap DVD drive. It does not slow down while playing a DVD movie like more expensive DVD drives do. I have two options: crack the DVD protection and rip it, or write a limited rights executable (or a service) C program for windows to slow down the drive temporarily. Guess which option most people select.
Or you can spend $25 and buy a drive that doesn't suck. I'm guessing most people choose that.
Or walk away from playing the dvd on the computer all together after seeing the $45 price tag for NerdX (take your pick) Computer Service to install it on top of the $25.
That situation kinda depends on your definition of *most people*. I would say most people don't know that it's possible to rip a DVD... or what rip means, for that matter.
I'm sorry, I still don't get it. The hard copy has existed for years, so what's wrong with getting a dozen dot-matrix printers (ok, probably need something faster/better, but first thing that came to my mind), a ton of paper, and auto printing each and every network packet from the heads to the local server, machine diagnostic, routine execution, etc (whatever it takes really). There's your paper trail. Scale as appropriate from there.
I understand that in electronic systems, any part can be tampered with, but surely you can make that damn hard. Put some cameras in the booths watching the sensitive parts of the machines (not the screen/buttons obviously). Get a few nerds with opposite party associations to watch all the in depth stuff coming over the screens and out of the printers.
In addition, we already have people that are watching the regular votes, so why not keep their jobs. Teach them to monitor basic things... make sure everything's in correct placement, check for shenanigans, etc. From what I've gathered, we aren't talking about people booting IE up, logging into usvote.gov and entering their SSN here. It's a relatively closed system during the process.
Maybe after all that, the cost wouldn't be worth it? Maybe it'll take some much more robust and generally more badass software than what they're using now? Maybe the hardware isn't there at cost? I don't know... but I certainly don't see why the idea should be written off and not actively developed. I just don't get it.
FFX almost perfected the active-time battle system in my opinion.
Well, I know it's been said already, but I figure I'll add my 2 cents in. I really, really disliked FFX's battle system. I can't argue with much of what you said. It was well written for what it was, and it did seem to run pretty smooth, but I don't think it's like the ATB at all. At least not if you play a Final Fantasy game with ATB set to... was it called active? Well, the setting that isn't 'Wait'.
I liked having to input my commands quickly, and if I was indicisive, I paid for it with the monster getting an extra hit or two in. I never knew when he was going to strike, and what magnitude that the attack would be. I may run the battle all the way through, or halfway through it I may need to rappidly find a new strategy. My infromation was kind of limited... I liked that.
I thought that FFX kind of killed that for me. I knew exactly how things would effect the enimey, and I could sit there and test out different attacks and see what they would do without actually doing them. Then you got the fact that you can sub characters, and that made it all the less chalenging. I could put in a bunch of heavy hitters, then when a big attack hit, throw in the healers, heal, take them back out and put the damage masters back in. At least that's how it played to me. I thought it was too easy, to sum it up. Didn't challenge me enough.
At the same time, I could take the Grandia series's battle system for an example. That one shows the action times of the enimies and the characters action times like FFX does, and you cause serious time effects to your enimies with certian types of attacks. However, you had to be pretty good at figguring out the timings it took to do such things. Also, it was kind of a sacrifice to perform time and status attacks damage wise, more so than FFX anyway.
So while FFX-2 may not have been as clever a game as FFX in so many ways, I still had more fun with it gamplay wise than FFX. Put some of the challenge back.
If this team that is working on FFXIII want to try to give me a system that will challenge my reflexes as much as my stratigic abilities, I'm all for letting them try. It will certianly be interesting... whether it is gold or pure crap.
Maybe you can improve on the idea though. Just don't do too good of a job, or else someone may start limiting the frequencies of light we are allowed to see.
Microsoft could choose not to implement this, thus allowing HD to be viewed on Legacy monitors.
So that means that means that today's so called 'Legacy' monitors are still right up there with the newest of the HDTVs (as I was always led to believe), right? And if thats true, does that also mean that we, as consumers, are going to be asked (maybe 'asked' isn't the right word) to buy a brand new monitor just for the inclusion of some new copy-protection microchip, with no performance upgrade? The hardware companies and politicians are making this way too confusing.
Also (assuming the answers to the above questions are yes), why can't an adapter that houses their precious DHCP componets be made to be placed on the video cable, just like a DVI to VGA converter?
I wonder how much longer your relatives will be happy though. I, myself, have only had a home internet connection for a little more than a year now (and yes, it is on a 56k), but I have been noticing a gradual shift in the internet. Web pages everywhere seem to be getting to be more expectent of broadband. Even a friend of mine (who initially brought this observation to conversations that we had during physics class) who runs a cable modem has noticed the added bulk of web pages.
I often find myself waiting more and more for web pages to load now due to increased adds, picture intesive web page interfaces, and flash (I see flash a LOT more often now). Whats worse it that adds are starting to be in flash and moving gif formats more often as well now. Some of them moving gifs take anywhere from 1.5 to 3 minutes to load all the way.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not sobbing into my keyboard or anything. The loading time is still far from unacceptabel. I just wonder how much longer it will be until it is.
Are you saying that any government (or one person for that matter) with the resources can copy the DNS server as it stands now without having to get any permission from the US Government or without having to be on a special terminal? It can really just be downloaded (I realize that I'm probably simplifying things, but still...)?
If that is true, wouldn't that also mean that the governments and people who were (and probably still are) calling for the server to be transfered to the UN (which I, personally, would not care to see happen at this point in time, and probably not in the foreseeable future) mearly wanted it transfered on someone else's dollar (euro, yin, assload of pasos, etc.)?
Just asking, as it sounds like something that most governments (if not all) would do.
I did RTFA, but I didn't feel like searching through a PDF for the answer to my question. How do they plan on identifying someone's location in one of these 911 incidents that they are so sure will happen?
To triangulate a broadcast location, don't you need at least 3 reciever stations in the immediate area?
If so, wouldn't that mean that you would already be in a decently populated area (we are taling about calling 911 in public, right?) where someone nearby should be able to find a land line while you are bleeding in the street?
Sounds like maybe 911 shouldn't be available with these phones, or that it should be a known risk in buying one that it may contribute to your death when operators have no idea where you are.
Slashdot Mirror
We have a code of ethics... the ACM writes them. I suppose it isn't really mandatory that we belong and therefor adhere to them, but I was taught to fall back on them for ethical issues.
http://www.acm.org/about/code-of-ethics
The code is pretty much common sense. If you want a funny and kinda sad read, find the real estate code of ethics. They have to outline every evil, dirty little trick ever pulled and explicitly say not to do it.
That really threw me, but very few people seemed to care about that one (lots of people actually rejoiced over it). I personally like being able to jump into overtype mode. I know for sure that my formatting is going to be uniform that way when I re-use a document for its formatting. Now if MS put in a 'Reveal Codes' function like WordPerfect, then they can throw insert right out the window if they want (Reveal Formatting isn't anywhere near as nice in my opinion).
Anyway, I have a feeling that the elimination of Caps Lock would go over about the same. The vast majority wouldn't care, and the loudest voices on the subject will probably be applauding.
From the concept reading/videos that I have looked at, it seems that Google is looking to boot this thing straight from ROM. They state they are bypassing a lot of standard startup procedures and skipping any boot-loader; instead they are going to a kernel load and letting their OS do all that lifting (not because they can do it better than the hardware manufactures, but because, I would think, they don't actually want all that hardware there that you could do something with that isn't on the cloud). This means that you pretty much have to have a board with the ability to flash in Chrome OS, or be buying a machine that can do it. If you are getting a new netbook with Chrome OS on it, then yes, you are going to be getting back to bare bones. It sounds like, however, that is then all you are getting.
A comment from the engadget article made a really good point. To quote Dave95 about a cloud OS on a netbook:
That sounds an awful lot like what we do with our smart phones and iPads today. Sorry just don't see the need for such an OS on Netbooks. And with it being web based (web apps and services), you most likely will need a constant data connection anyway. So yet another device tied to carriers with contracts paying yet another data fee (my guess).
I think this is a very good point. If everything has to be done online, then don't you need constant, reliable connection to the internet?
Is a bare-bones, web only OS what people really want out of a netbook? I don't believe they do. I think people want an ultra-portable laptop that they can pull out and do a few things on at a moments notice. Yes, most (all with a few outliers) of those things are online. As Dave says though, how much of that can't be done on a smartphone or at least a tablet?
Google isn't exactly breaking into new territory here either. ASUS has played with this in the past, and Splashtop (http://www.splashtop.com/) is a popular product that ASUS and other board manufactures have bought into on some of their models. You have an instant on OS that gets you some internet goodies, and when you are ready you boot into a full-blown (arguable I suppose) OS if necessary.
Chrome OS, as I understand it, is not useful for netbooks in my mind. I don't even see netbooks being useful in the next few years. Small and ultra-portable... get a tablet. If you really need that keyboard, should be a nice market for a tablet with a kickstand and a pull out keyboard or detachable keyboard built into the back of the device (may already be one... haven't looked). I see Chrome OS being a much nicer fit for laptops and even desktops. I actually think that on a laptop or desktop, if Chrome OS had the ability to boot into Windows or Linux out of it, the platform would fair much better. Quick boot into your web-surfing -slash- half-production environment, and then when/if you need to, go to your full-production environment. Google, however, will probably not do this as they want all your internet needs through their services and their web-enable OS.
Therefor, I don't see Chrome OS going anywhere till we have cheap motherboards with that new BIOS-replacement flashable ROM running it (or BIOS that are extended to use *flashable* ROMs like Splashtop or Chrome OS) and with built in Type-1 hypervisors for local virtualization. That way you can choose to have one or both of your quick, web-only OS load and your full production environment OS load at the same time. You do your morning coffee ritual reading on Chrome OS (or whatever) and when it is time to do actual work for the day, you flash over to the production OS that is all loaded up and waiting (secure logins may need some work to get this running smoothly, but that is a minor glitch to work out). Then I can see Chrome OS really taking off, especially in the consumer market (big business, maybe not so much).
That's my 2 for you.
I suppose that one would have to look at hiring and retention rates out of your school to really get a good idea, but from the initial "knee-jerk" reaction to your post, I would think that UCF is not a good institution to get your education from, nor is it a good institution to hire from (I am a student myself, but putting myself in an employer's shoes I instantly put up a red flag). If this is the feeling of the majority of the student body, as you claim, then no defense or sweet talk of the university would convince me that their graduates are worth my time. Point is further proven by a 500+ person capstone course. I understand that the lecture itself is the 500+ part, and the class is split into labs for a percentage of their class time, but it still unfathomable to me that such a setup even exists. The level of personal attention from instructor to student must be terrible.
For the textbooks, you may be correct. From what I understand from speaking with my own professors though, each professor chooses their own books and makes their own deals. If it is really too overwhelming to make up your own tests (which if the team of professors here can put a new one together in short order like this, I think they could put one together at a less insane pace over 2 or 3 months before midterm/final), then the prof should tell the publisher that he is happy to do exclusive business with them, but on a larger timetable. Skip a version once in a while. At a high level like this course, should they really be using books with versions anyway? Isn't a theory based oneshot book for the times more appropriate? I fully admit I am not educated in this area, and there are most likely factors I am not even thinking of that make this decision impossible for faculty, but these are my initial thoughts.
Overall, I am leaning towards a lot of the other posters in my opinion on this professor. He is using a lazier method of teaching. If he is like you have heard, and is one of the professors with a real passion for what he is teaching, then I applaud him. On the other hand, I think he should leave the university for one with a much more personalized education system where he can really interact with every one of his students. Teaching at a university that treats their students as a number doesn't sound like a philosophy that is in keeping with his principals. He may want to evaluate if those tens of thousands of students lives he touched are better than the fewer number of students he could have really impacted at a different university.
500+ capstone... I'm still having trouble with that.
I doubt you'll actually get many complaints for lack of advertising, especially considering that isn't really your "content." I've never heard of an ADA case where a blind person complained that they couldn't read a posted advertising flyer on a bulletin board in a store. If it does mean that the horrible chain of dozens of domains and layers of Javascript for ads has to go away so you just serve your ads yourself, meh. I'm still having trouble finding a lot of problems with this.
The girlfriend is classified as learning disabled (despite being a semester off of a bachelors degree now) and has a hard time reading. She uses a screen reading program that I know has internet reading capabilities, but I never checked it out for myself. I was a bit surprised by this topic (from what I remember of working with Dreamweaver a few years back, you could set it up to yell at you if you weren't complying with some accessibility standards) so I asked her how her experience goes in using it on the internet. She told me that sometimes she gets all of the website, sometimes all she gets is the title, and other times somewhere in between. When she asked me why I wanted to know, I briefly described what I was reading here.
First thing she responds with is "Oh please no." Somewhat long rant made short, her prediction is that if they put these stronger regulations and compliance dates into play, those ads will be read, and she will end up having to hear them in the middle of the stuff she wants to actually hear. The example she gave me was of a website she was looking at with a advertisement in the content of the page: "...out door recreation tummy tuck" would be produced from her headphones.
So I'm thinking that things could be made better, or so much worse depending on the website designer with this regulation in play... and occasionally entertaining.
I don't think someone has ever heard the term "Slippery Slope" before.
In any case, discussion is one of the things you are kinda required to have in a democracy. You're argument is silly and is bordering on having an almost dictatorship-like approach. Just because you are nice about shutting someone down (which cutting a news agency out of the biggest political coverage around is crippling them in a pretty big way) doesn't mean you are not, in fact, shutting someone down. So previous poster's comments were right on. Sorry.
Nonsense. Utter nonsense. The President's job is to accomplish his agenda that he was elected to accomplish. To do that he needs to explain his program and counter the objections of his opponents.
Umm... it would seem to me that all it would take to counter the objections of his opponents is a COUNTER ARGUMENT! A fact, a scenario depicting the failings of the opposition argument, or even a damn 'think of the children' speech is better than just saying "No, I don't want to hear it, lalalalalalal!" Really?! You're serious about this?! News Flash: (hehehehe pun) If a President can't counter an opposing argument with facts of his own, either he/she isn't worth a damn, the idea isn't worth a damn, or both. This had better be a troll, or I am just going to succeed from humanity.
Lastly, as far as I know, right of association protects people from the government, not the other way around. I can't really comment further than that.
Then you still need to say on your website, "Note that you must have Python installed to obtain this software."
Even after reading the author's defense, it still sounds like this is useful for providing support in niche application situations (one webserver for many client types, or amazing boot disks and installers), or to prevent DUMMY_MODE-ON from the less tech savvy users (then there are other reasons given, but they don't sound too impressive to me). In the latter case, you still have these users seeing the website and getting wide-eyed at the idea of having to find some mysterious language library. For that senario, I think the fatELF binary would be a decent idea.
Click, run, detect arch, download proper binaries/source, install.
It would seem to me this would save some decent bandwidth cost on large programs. The author says it would save on disk space for developers, but I kinda wonder if it would be negated by the bandwidth increase.
Hey, that's one of my favorite pass times. There isn't many things I enjoy more in the mall than walking into RadioShack, being approached by an employee offering to help me find something, and telling him exactly what it is that I want. The look of confusion, horror, and dulling of the eyes as DUMMY MODE moves to the ON position makes me smile on the inside.
You lost me.*
:)
You say most of the time, the publicist wants exclusive control of the image. Isn't that to say that you sign over the copyright to them as well, for all intents and purposes? I understand why the photographer can't do anything with the photos, but what's wrong with the publicist now?
I'm assuming that you don't ever get paid for that photo session again. You don't get a cut of what the publicist does with it, as you have them pay for everything up front, from what I understand of your post. Despite that, you say "If the publicist wants the picture under the CC, I am going to charge more for it." To me, that says your contract with the publicist would state "While I sign over all rights to this image to you, I forbid you from putting the image into the CC, public domain, etc."
If this is correct, I don't understand why you, or any photographer, would care especially what the publicist does with the photographs past their intended purpose? Publicist sells photos to magazine for untold thousands or millions of dollars, obviously the photographer needs to be compensated accordingly. But one of the unused photos or a photo that has already served it's indented purpose is put into the CC or public domain, why is additional compensation and restriction needed for what equates out to a donation in the photographer (as a bonus) and publisher's names?
In other words, once it's the publicist's problem, is it really, and shouldn't it be, all the publicist's problem? Clarification please?
*I admit to full ignorance in photography contracts and business practices.
That would be nice, but I doubt it will much happen. Your talking about a device that plays standard DS games and is marketed as the next unit in the DS line... more of a model number increase with a few gadgets than a new system.
As such, I highly doubt developers will decrease their available market and make 'Only for the DSi' games. If you mean improving games that ran like crap from before, or downloadable games from this new store, then maybe. The possibility would also exist to maybe download a HQ-texture patch or something from the store for a cartridge, but I still highly doubt very many games and game makers, if any, would subscribe to such a trend.
But... but... there are step-by-step instructions right from google itself. They even have pretty pictures!
You are also given the choice of 7 different clients, and 7 mobile phone instructions. Maybe it's not completely all inclusive, but why would your average n00b be using something else?
http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=75726
._.
"A problem has been detected and your bowels have shut down to prevent further damage to your body."
Yeeaaaaah, I can live with out that as well.
Also, this is quite honestly lazy ass teaching. Reusing 100% of the material year after year...? Hell no. Theories change, textbooks update, and teaching methods improve. Beyond that, as pointed out before, the notes are for your future reference, not just for reference of the class. If you were to write all your notes into the margins of your textbook, would they tell you that you have to burn the book?
Bring this to the Dean first. If nothing else, just to get his/her reaction. If the Dean thinks this is no big deal and acceptable behavior, get the hell out of there. That place is taking your money and giving you a substandard education as far as I'm concerned.
That's been pretty much my experience. It makes perfect sense what the GP said... use it for a general understanding and then get more specifics off it's references and further searching along those veins.
That's never the reason given when a prof/teacher says "Don't use wikipedia" though. It's always "anybody can make a change and when I looked up [X topic in my field that I have researched] I found all kinds of bad information." And of course whenever I interject in there rant and ask why they didn't fix it if they know with such certainty that the articles they read were wrong, they usually blow me off or say the system isn't worth their time.
-pessimistic-rant- Personally, I think they just don't want anything to do with a system that might potentially inhibit the sales of their 200-page-for-$120 text books. -/pessimistic-rant-
Or you can spend $25 and buy a drive that doesn't suck. I'm guessing most people choose that.
Or walk away from playing the dvd on the computer all together after seeing the $45 price tag for NerdX (take your pick) Computer Service to install it on top of the $25.
That situation kinda depends on your definition of *most people*. I would say most people don't know that it's possible to rip a DVD... or what rip means, for that matter.
*shrugs*
Not quite from what I understand. In order to stuff anything into an AVI is quite a pain and requires you to be a bit hacky.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_container_formats
I believe that shows the baseline differences.
I'm sorry, I still don't get it. The hard copy has existed for years, so what's wrong with getting a dozen dot-matrix printers (ok, probably need something faster/better, but first thing that came to my mind), a ton of paper, and auto printing each and every network packet from the heads to the local server, machine diagnostic, routine execution, etc (whatever it takes really). There's your paper trail. Scale as appropriate from there.
I understand that in electronic systems, any part can be tampered with, but surely you can make that damn hard. Put some cameras in the booths watching the sensitive parts of the machines (not the screen/buttons obviously). Get a few nerds with opposite party associations to watch all the in depth stuff coming over the screens and out of the printers.
In addition, we already have people that are watching the regular votes, so why not keep their jobs. Teach them to monitor basic things... make sure everything's in correct placement, check for shenanigans, etc. From what I've gathered, we aren't talking about people booting IE up, logging into usvote.gov and entering their SSN here. It's a relatively closed system during the process.
Maybe after all that, the cost wouldn't be worth it? Maybe it'll take some much more robust and generally more badass software than what they're using now? Maybe the hardware isn't there at cost? I don't know... but I certainly don't see why the idea should be written off and not actively developed. I just don't get it.
I think 'Free Night and Weekends' just took new meaning.
FFX almost perfected the active-time battle system in my opinion.
Well, I know it's been said already, but I figure I'll add my 2 cents in. I really, really disliked FFX's battle system. I can't argue with much of what you said. It was well written for what it was, and it did seem to run pretty smooth, but I don't think it's like the ATB at all. At least not if you play a Final Fantasy game with ATB set to... was it called active? Well, the setting that isn't 'Wait'.
I liked having to input my commands quickly, and if I was indicisive, I paid for it with the monster getting an extra hit or two in. I never knew when he was going to strike, and what magnitude that the attack would be. I may run the battle all the way through, or halfway through it I may need to rappidly find a new strategy. My infromation was kind of limited... I liked that.
I thought that FFX kind of killed that for me. I knew exactly how things would effect the enimey, and I could sit there and test out different attacks and see what they would do without actually doing them. Then you got the fact that you can sub characters, and that made it all the less chalenging. I could put in a bunch of heavy hitters, then when a big attack hit, throw in the healers, heal, take them back out and put the damage masters back in. At least that's how it played to me. I thought it was too easy, to sum it up. Didn't challenge me enough.
At the same time, I could take the Grandia series's battle system for an example. That one shows the action times of the enimies and the characters action times like FFX does, and you cause serious time effects to your enimies with certian types of attacks. However, you had to be pretty good at figguring out the timings it took to do such things. Also, it was kind of a sacrifice to perform time and status attacks damage wise, more so than FFX anyway.
So while FFX-2 may not have been as clever a game as FFX in so many ways, I still had more fun with it gamplay wise than FFX. Put some of the challenge back.
If this team that is working on FFXIII want to try to give me a system that will challenge my reflexes as much as my stratigic abilities, I'm all for letting them try. It will certianly be interesting... whether it is gold or pure crap.
Timex had a product for you at one time. The Data Link Watch ( http://www.212.net/computershop/prod96/timex_pr.ht m ). Only problem is that it was in PCWorld's list of Dis-honorable mentions on their 25 Worst Tech Products Of All Time ( http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,12577 2,pg,7,00.asp ), so it may not be the best choice.
Maybe you can improve on the idea though. Just don't do too good of a job, or else someone may start limiting the frequencies of light we are allowed to see.
Can you imagine them working together?
Finally, after several years, the two reconcile..... only to find that one uses vi, and the other emacs.
Its a vicious cycle.
Microsoft could choose not to implement this, thus allowing HD to be viewed on Legacy monitors.
So that means that means that today's so called 'Legacy' monitors are still right up there with the newest of the HDTVs (as I was always led to believe), right? And if thats true, does that also mean that we, as consumers, are going to be asked (maybe 'asked' isn't the right word) to buy a brand new monitor just for the inclusion of some new copy-protection microchip, with no performance upgrade? The hardware companies and politicians are making this way too confusing.
Also (assuming the answers to the above questions are yes), why can't an adapter that houses their precious DHCP componets be made to be placed on the video cable, just like a DVI to VGA converter?
Questions, questions...
I wonder how much longer your relatives will be happy though. I, myself, have only had a home internet connection for a little more than a year now (and yes, it is on a 56k), but I have been noticing a gradual shift in the internet. Web pages everywhere seem to be getting to be more expectent of broadband. Even a friend of mine (who initially brought this observation to conversations that we had during physics class) who runs a cable modem has noticed the added bulk of web pages.
I often find myself waiting more and more for web pages to load now due to increased adds, picture intesive web page interfaces, and flash (I see flash a LOT more often now). Whats worse it that adds are starting to be in flash and moving gif formats more often as well now. Some of them moving gifs take anywhere from 1.5 to 3 minutes to load all the way.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not sobbing into my keyboard or anything. The loading time is still far from unacceptabel. I just wonder how much longer it will be until it is.
Wait....?
Are you saying that any government (or one person for that matter) with the resources can copy the DNS server as it stands now without having to get any permission from the US Government or without having to be on a special terminal? It can really just be downloaded (I realize that I'm probably simplifying things, but still...)?
If that is true, wouldn't that also mean that the governments and people who were (and probably still are) calling for the server to be transfered to the UN (which I, personally, would not care to see happen at this point in time, and probably not in the foreseeable future) mearly wanted it transfered on someone else's dollar (euro, yin, assload of pasos, etc.)?
Just asking, as it sounds like something that most governments (if not all) would do.
I did RTFA, but I didn't feel like searching through a PDF for the answer to my question. How do they plan on identifying someone's location in one of these 911 incidents that they are so sure will happen?
To triangulate a broadcast location, don't you need at least 3 reciever stations in the immediate area?
If so, wouldn't that mean that you would already be in a decently populated area (we are taling about calling 911 in public, right?) where someone nearby should be able to find a land line while you are bleeding in the street?
Sounds like maybe 911 shouldn't be available with these phones, or that it should be a known risk in buying one that it may contribute to your death when operators have no idea where you are.