you might admit to yourself somewhere around 70%-80% of the people who use MP3 probably engage in the defined act of piracy; Downloading media they don't own with no intention of paying for some, if not all of it.
Throwing around percentages is all very well but you can't boil down such a complex issue into a simple number imho. For instance say 70%-80% of people _are_ downloading copyrighted music... is that music they would have otherwise bought? I know that 90+% of the music I download is just to listen to what it's like, and it gets wiped to make space on my hard drive pretty quickly. I would never have bought it at any price, so it certainly doesn't count as a lost sale for a record company. All the decent stuff I listen to regularly I have the original on CD, despite having listened to it first on a burned CD (I tend to wait for a CD to come down to ~8ukp before buying it, which I consider the reasonable price I am prepared to pay).
It is very much like, as the parent poster said, a time-shifted radio for the consumer. Do you think the consumer ever thinks about the overheads of running a radio station? About the license fees a radio station pays? Nope, they just flick a button and it comes on. Much like Napster et al.
Yes, I honestly believe those percentages because I believe people are that weak, lazy and hypocritical (myself included).
What a sad take on life:-( I believe the percentage may be true as people have more freedom to explore new music they may not have otherwise heard, they are expanding themselves culturally, and are learning to define their own tastes through having real choice as opposed to being told by blanket marketing what they should and shouldn't listen to. Sure artists have to make a living, but listening to music is appreciating those good at their art. Listening to music is not a cold business transaction.
It's interesting that the article completely ignores Helios [nasa.gov], NASA's tested and proven high-altitude, entirely solar and battery-powered aircraft.
A fantastic feat of engineering it may be, but you missed out the rather crucial word "unmanned"...
Whenever I hear the name 'Ogg' I keep imagining the caveman from "Chuck Rock" (now that was a good game) bumbling along the screen, stopping in the middle, and going "OGG".
Can we keep the official name "Ogg Vorbis" (as the author won't change it no matter what we say) but change the extension to.mp5? Can you imagine Joe Public looking for MP3s but coming across.mp5 files ("it MUST be better...")
Well 160GB comes out as 250 CDs. Walmart is selling Memorex brand blank CDs $15 for 30, so that's $125 worth of CDs. Assuming your CD-burner takes 15mins to burn a full 640MB, it will only take you 62.5hrs, paying someone $5/hour will cost $312 bringing the total to more than the cost of the drive!
It would be cheaper buying a new drive after 364 days and creating a RAID-1 in case of failure...
If this lame name whinging is the best Ogg's detractors can do then it should go like gangbusters.
You misunderstand... it's the Ogg advocates that are frustrated when they think something so great is being held back by something so simple as an unattractive name (and unfortunately these things DO make a difference). MP3 is not a great name, but it rode on the back of the well known standard MPEG. Again, I would like to see "MP5" as an alias for Ogg:-)
The name whinging is really lame.
I disagree, I think you underestimate the effect something as simple as a name can have on Joe Public (ie non-techies)
[The disadvantage of the IETF is] it s..l...o...w.e..s. d...o...w...n . ..t..h..e d..e...v...e..l..o..p...m..e...n.....?
So does documenting your code... is that a bad thing too? Seriously though, IETF protocols once finalised tend to be very well thought out and have shown they can stand the test of time (look at SMTP, FTP, etc).
You can code as much as you like, the worst that can happen is that you will have to modify your code afterwards to fit in with the final standard (the library you use to talk the Jabber protocol will only make up a small percentage of your application code). My advice is code away, and once the final RFC is out it will give you a baseline of garaunteed interoperability with every other fellow client out there.
A little USB connection on the side would enable you to connect it to a computer. Select the equipment you have and it does a CDDB-like lookup (RCDB?) and configures your remote for you. If you have to program it by learning, ie zapping your current remote at it and telling your new remote what IR code that corresponds to, then you can upload that to RCDB for all to share. Being able to drag and drop buttons to design your own GUI would be a nice extra.
So many posters obviously haven't read the article. As the parent states, the government will use Open Source (be it BSD, GPL, etc license) but software developed by the government will be GPL (according to the article).
Use an ARM chip, I think the StrongARM 208MHz runs at something like 30mW, as opposed to the several W a lower power Intel runs at. Pick up an old RiscPC and install ARM Linux on it. Not only is it lighteningly quick but it runs cool so doesn't need a fan (saving even more electricity, and the no noise an extra bonus).
I'm sorry, but tabs are a feature I always turn off. I mean, I'm not mad they're there, but I tried using them and didn't like them.
You tried one of the options, didn't like it, and so left it turned off. I really don't see the problem. Unlike browsers that don't have tabs hence don't give you the option.
The basic problem with tabs is that they force you to switch windows at two totally different places on your desktop.
You aren't forced to do anything. You can open a new tab _or_ a new window.
I imagine that I am fairly typical in that I have several browser pages up at any one time, and in addition to that, I have some other apps open (music player, IRC, news program, file manager, etc). The reason I have all that stuff open is because I switch between them, and I want to do this efficiently.
When you get used to tabbed browsing, you can have email, news, etc as well as a few browser windows open each containing a dozen grouped urls (eg a dozen programs you found on Freshmeat and want to flick back and forth comparing at leisure). Having 20-30 separate browser windows as well as trying to find you text editor window is a real pain.
A much more sensible approach is to open new browser windows rather than tabs, and then do all of your switching using the WM. One of the many advantages of this is that you can use keyboard shortcuts to cycle through all your windows, browser and the rest.
In your opinion, not in mine though for two reasons: first is that a lot of us click on the title bar of a window to bring it to the front hence the less title bars the better, and the second is that I don't want to have to go through every application I'm running to switch back and forth between two browser windows.
I suspect that tabs are a gimmick that will be requested only by a tiny but vocal minority.
That doesn't tally with a straw poll of the people I know.
It's my opinion that if you feel like you need tabs, there is something wrong with your window manager (or you don't know how to use it right).
First you complain you don't find tabbed browsing intuitive enough, then you accuse all of us using tabbed browsing that we are ignorant and should learn our window manager. Do you not find that contradictory?
If there is a bug in package A, the corp would have monetary incentive + engineers to fix it. (This is hypothetical, so spare me real world scenarios...) If there's a bug in package B, what exactly is the incentive to get it fixed in a timely manner?
Let's pick two productivity tools that are used in the office every day, say IE and Mozilla. Let's take a bug, for instance the SSL flaw. With Mozilla the bug was eliminated in days, M$ have still got to get around to fixing it. The incentive to fix it is because the users need it to be fixed, and being Open Source the programming community is fortunate enough to have plenty of gifted people able to do this quickly. You could look on it as a large collective self-interest.
Rick Berman is pulling a Lucas and not staying loyal to the fans
Hollywood producers aren't loyal to fans, they are loyal to the $. Business viewpoint: what's the point of making a great Star Trek movie and pleasing Star Trek fans, when you can repeat the mainstream dross which will pull in a chunk of the obedient masses AND will get the Star Trek fans in anyway just because it's "a Star Trek film"?
ObMeToo: chalk me up for another that found the WC character annoying but now rates Will as a top cool guy/celeb.
Recently, although I don't think it's always, they have had an article on how easy it is to convert your existing car to an electric one.
I've spoken to a few people that have done it, and are very happy with the result. They are faster than conventional cars, apparently because the electric motors give more torque. Here is one home conversion that does 100mph and cost £6,000 to convert. Running cost works out at £0.018 per mile.
I'm not likely to blow $20k on solar panels on my roof
Expect prices to drop. There are companies like BP pouring millions into research. Current solar technology is maxing out around 20% effecient, and uses rather nasty substances to make, so the hunt is on for alternative fabrication materials and methods (eg here).
I did, however, convert all my light bulbs to fluorescent
There are new energy efficient light bulbs that run on under 20 watts, are blindingly bright, but best of all now cost less than (afaicr) a couple of quid.
I'm even considering one of those insulating spreads that you wrap around the water heaters.
Essential. Also look out for micro-CHP coming soon (CHP = Combined Heat and Power). CHP is in wide use today in large buildings. Converting electricity to heat or vice versa is very inefficient, and you can get a max of 40% return. By producing both at the same time, you can get 90% return on the energy you put in.
And yet this is the same Nominet who is riding rough shod over user's objections [nominet-no.co.uk] to showing full addresses and phone numbers on whois on all of.uk (including.me.uk - supposed to be for individuals)
It was put to a vote, and the yes vote won. Those on the losing side will always feel 'ridden over' but that will happen in any democracy. I personally am all for the publication. People change email addresses like they change shoes, and I find the contact information useful for when I want to contact the owner of the domain (usually to see if they still want it, but I also feel more secure knowing it's there if I ever need to call and complain about any abuse).
the same nominet who has a shed load of money in the bank
If they can charge around $3/year for a domain and end up with a shed load of money in the bank, why am I going to complain? It means they have the funds to upgrade their infrastructure should they need to, and being a non-profit I know it's not going to end up in some directors pocket.
the same nominet who can take 4 months to respond to emails, and who, in my case took 2.5 years to transfer a domain I purchased into my name
I think you are probably an exception to the rule. I, and everyone else I know, have had excellent. I've no idea why you waited 2.5 years, after a couple of weeks I'd have been constantly badgering any company or organisation that had failed to do as promised, and after a month or two I'd have driven down there and made _sure_ it was done. It can't have been important if you never bothered chasing it up.
Nominet is not run for the common good, nor are they transparent
Acorn created a toaster expansion that would slot into your RiscPC. It was just an example of how powerful the 'slice' system was (impossible to run out of space in the machine), but it came with GUI to control it including a "browning control" widget. I can't find any pictures of it, though there is one of the RiscPC pizza oven and someone else uses it for his espresso machine.
The USENET newsgroup hierarchy seems to have worked quite well. The newsgroup names are very similar to domain names. Why not copy that model? For instance you get enough votes to create a 'developer.php', and then anyone can sell subdomains of that.
"Snakeoil" is the example name when setting up Apache after compiling in SSL. You are supposed to substitute in your own company name but obviously someone took the example a little too literally.
* There would be Linux-car drag races, where people could test their custom tuned kernels against each other
* Going over 6k rev/min would kill the sound server and the horn would stop working
* The cars would come in kit-car form, each driver able to slot in their own personalised dashboard
* You would be able to use any type of fuel, emulation will get some kind of perormance out of it
* It has a standard looking speedo, but the font for the numbers looks awful
* Forget child locks, you are able to individually set the priviledges of each component for each user (eg useful for stopping passengers from changing the radio station)
It is also claimed that this effect can cause behavioural changes, such as lack of concentration, difficulty with social association, and short temper.
Computer games are an exercise in stimulation, hence the lack of concentration when that stimulus is absent. This is very reminiscent of the "MTV generation" claims. I'll let the difficulty with social association when stuck in front of the computer for hours pass as self-evident. This leads to the short-temper. It can be caused by frustration in not getting your own way with immediate gratification (linked to first point). In real life, someone can't just type "stfu gayl0rd" to immediately close down a confrontation. They also can't evade or ignore confrontation in real life, which is easily done in a game. In fact it's not solely game related really. I've found I've become more short-tempered since I started working from home, as opposed to when I worked in an office. Mixing with other people is the only real cure. As for the non-reversible comment, I don't believe that. Anything you train yourself into you can retrain yourself out it.
This is clearly retarded. Why do computer dudes always throw down insane ultimatums? It gives us a bad name and it's the reason people in companies don't trust us.
How is that +5 interesting? It's not in the least bit retarded and where did gralem throw down an "insane ultimatum"? He has learned to trust Mandrake, for him it strikes the right balance between stability and ease of use, and so he uses it each time he does an install. Sounds fair enough to me and not in the least bit deserving abuse. You (Matt2000) may not be trusted, but don't inflict your paranoia on the rest of us.
Management: "Please install a Linux server that will handle all our email" Admin: "Ok, done" (notice lack of discussion about merits of various distros)
It's simple: in Japan, Europe, Australia, New Zealand etc... you only pay to call someone, not to receive a call.
That is true for 99% of people. The exception is when you start roaming around the world with your mobile. When abroad, the person calling pays their standard mobile rate and you have to pay the difference.
In the UK most operators now offer flat rate fees so you can stay on the mobile all day long and not pay an extra penny. On the plus side it cut my phone bill down by a factor of three! On the minus side you no longer have the excuse to get off the phone, "Got to go, this call is costing me a fortune".
3: Don't be afraid to give out your number to everyone. EVERYONE. Once you've done this you'll actually start receiving calls - it's only at this point you'll be seeing the benefit of having the phone.
Totally.With all the advance screening features on today's mobiles there aren't the same privacy problems as on the old fixed lines. I screen all my calls these days, and with the answerphone built into my Sony Z5 I can decide whether to pick up whilst the caller is leaving a message (or decide to call them back later).
If adding layers to programs automatically makes them slower, and so slow that they are useless, we all would code in assembly.
Useless depends on the performance needed by the implementation. For example a sort routine in C may be fine for a database application, but in sorting visible polygons in an arcade game it may be too slow in which case there may be no choice except to implement that particular routine in assembly and interface it to the C program.
Java may use a VM and be slower than C but it has taken hold in server-side programming where the network connection is the bottleneck rather than the application. Even if the server becomes heavily loaded it's cheaper to throw more hardware at it than rewrite it in something faster.
It's all about how far you can get away with moving up the speed vs maintainability curve. It's for this reason we don't see any arcade games coming out written in Java, and why web designers will knock up a web site in PHP rather than write optimised C CGI/ISAPI/etc.
Although I don't want to be monitored, I'll gladly give up the right to complete privacy to stop the chance of a single future terrorist attack.
That's sad. You will be giving up your privacy in vain as you won't suppress random acts of violence with such a simple solution. The media are telling us that US intelligence had the information but failed to act on it due to rivalry between the FBI and the CIA, but is it really "sheer incompetence and gross neglect"? How many hundreds of equally likely sounding red herrings were they chasing up at the time? Instead of undermining confidence in the intelligence services, why not publicise the garauntee to privacy (as another poster in this thread did so eloquently) and foster an image of an agency that people would willingly co-operate with, which I'm sure the Agencies would find of far more value.
After all, if we have nothing to hide and are not stigmatized for what we say in private, what does it matter who's listening?
The civil liberty groups have already answered this pretty comprehensively, but I couldn't help thinking about Dutch society a century ago where (and please correct me if I've heard incorrectly) no-one dared put up curtains in their house to show the neighbours that nothing untowards was going on. That is a society I equally would not like to live in.
Slashdot Mirror
you might admit to yourself somewhere around 70%-80% of the people who use MP3 probably engage in the defined act of piracy; Downloading media they don't own with no intention of paying for some, if not all of it.
:-( I believe the percentage may be true as people have more freedom to explore new music they may not have otherwise heard, they are expanding themselves culturally, and are learning to define their own tastes through having real choice as opposed to being told by blanket marketing what they should and shouldn't listen to. Sure artists have to make a living, but listening to music is appreciating those good at their art. Listening to music is not a cold business transaction.
Throwing around percentages is all very well but you can't boil down such a complex issue into a simple number imho. For instance say 70%-80% of people _are_ downloading copyrighted music... is that music they would have otherwise bought? I know that 90+% of the music I download is just to listen to what it's like, and it gets wiped to make space on my hard drive pretty quickly. I would never have bought it at any price, so it certainly doesn't count as a lost sale for a record company. All the decent stuff I listen to regularly I have the original on CD, despite having listened to it first on a burned CD (I tend to wait for a CD to come down to ~8ukp before buying it, which I consider the reasonable price I am prepared to pay).
It is very much like, as the parent poster said, a time-shifted radio for the consumer. Do you think the consumer ever thinks about the overheads of running a radio station? About the license fees a radio station pays? Nope, they just flick a button and it comes on. Much like Napster et al.
Yes, I honestly believe those percentages because I believe people are that weak, lazy and hypocritical (myself included).
What a sad take on life
Phillip.
It's interesting that the article completely ignores Helios [nasa.gov], NASA's tested and proven high-altitude, entirely solar and battery-powered aircraft.
A fantastic feat of engineering it may be, but you missed out the rather crucial word "unmanned"...
Phillip.
Whenever I hear the name 'Ogg' I keep imagining the caveman from "Chuck Rock" (now that was a good game) bumbling along the screen, stopping in the middle, and going "OGG".
.mp5? Can you imagine Joe Public looking for MP3s but coming across .mp5 files ("it MUST be better...")
Can we keep the official name "Ogg Vorbis" (as the author won't change it no matter what we say) but change the extension to
Phillip.
Should I back it up first???
Well 160GB comes out as 250 CDs. Walmart is selling Memorex brand blank CDs $15 for 30, so that's $125 worth of CDs. Assuming your CD-burner takes 15mins to burn a full 640MB, it will only take you 62.5hrs, paying someone $5/hour will cost $312 bringing the total to more than the cost of the drive!
It would be cheaper buying a new drive after 364 days and creating a RAID-1 in case of failure...
Phillip.
If this lame name whinging is the best Ogg's detractors can do then it should go like gangbusters.
:-)
You misunderstand... it's the Ogg advocates that are frustrated when they think something so great is being held back by something so simple as an unattractive name (and unfortunately these things DO make a difference). MP3 is not a great name, but it rode on the back of the well known standard MPEG. Again, I would like to see "MP5" as an alias for Ogg
The name whinging is really lame.
I disagree, I think you underestimate the effect something as simple as a name can have on Joe Public (ie non-techies)
Phillip.
[The disadvantage of the IETF is] it s ..l ...o ...w .e..s. d...o...w...n . . .t..h..e d..e...v...e..l..o..p...m..e...n.....?
So does documenting your code... is that a bad thing too? Seriously though, IETF protocols once finalised tend to be very well thought out and have shown they can stand the test of time (look at SMTP, FTP, etc).
You can code as much as you like, the worst that can happen is that you will have to modify your code afterwards to fit in with the final standard (the library you use to talk the Jabber protocol will only make up a small percentage of your application code). My advice is code away, and once the final RFC is out it will give you a baseline of garaunteed interoperability with every other fellow client out there.
Phillip.
A little USB connection on the side would enable you to connect it to a computer. Select the equipment you have and it does a CDDB-like lookup (RCDB?) and configures your remote for you. If you have to program it by learning, ie zapping your current remote at it and telling your new remote what IR code that corresponds to, then you can upload that to RCDB for all to share. Being able to drag and drop buttons to design your own GUI would be a nice extra.
Phillip.
So many posters obviously haven't read the article. As the parent states, the government will use Open Source (be it BSD, GPL, etc license) but software developed by the government will be GPL (according to the article).
Phillip.
Use an ARM chip, I think the StrongARM 208MHz runs at something like 30mW, as opposed to the several W a lower power Intel runs at. Pick up an old RiscPC and install ARM Linux on it. Not only is it lighteningly quick but it runs cool so doesn't need a fan (saving even more electricity, and the no noise an extra bonus).
Phillip.
I'm sorry, but tabs are a feature I always turn off. I mean, I'm not mad they're there, but I tried using them and didn't like them.
You tried one of the options, didn't like it, and so left it turned off. I really don't see the problem. Unlike browsers that don't have tabs hence don't give you the option.
The basic problem with tabs is that they force you to switch windows at two totally different places on your desktop.
You aren't forced to do anything. You can open a new tab _or_ a new window.
I imagine that I am fairly typical in that I have several browser pages up at any one time, and in addition to that, I have some other apps open (music player, IRC, news program, file manager, etc). The reason I have all that stuff open is because I switch between them, and I want to do this efficiently.
When you get used to tabbed browsing, you can have email, news, etc as well as a few browser windows open each containing a dozen grouped urls (eg a dozen programs you found on Freshmeat and want to flick back and forth comparing at leisure). Having 20-30 separate browser windows as well as trying to find you text editor window is a real pain.
A much more sensible approach is to open new browser windows rather than tabs, and then do all of your switching using the WM. One of the many advantages of this is that you can use keyboard shortcuts to cycle through all your windows, browser and the rest.
In your opinion, not in mine though for two reasons: first is that a lot of us click on the title bar of a window to bring it to the front hence the less title bars the better, and the second is that I don't want to have to go through every application I'm running to switch back and forth between two browser windows.
I suspect that tabs are a gimmick that will be requested only by a tiny but vocal minority.
That doesn't tally with a straw poll of the people I know.
It's my opinion that if you feel like you need tabs, there is something wrong with your window manager (or you don't know how to use it right).
First you complain you don't find tabbed browsing intuitive enough, then you accuse all of us using tabbed browsing that we are ignorant and should learn our window manager. Do you not find that contradictory?
Phillip.
If there is a bug in package A, the corp would have monetary incentive + engineers to fix it. (This is hypothetical, so spare me real world scenarios...) If there's a bug in package B, what exactly is the incentive to get it fixed in a timely manner?
Let's pick two productivity tools that are used in the office every day, say IE and Mozilla. Let's take a bug, for instance the SSL flaw. With Mozilla the bug was eliminated in days, M$ have still got to get around to fixing it. The incentive to fix it is because the users need it to be fixed, and being Open Source the programming community is fortunate enough to have plenty of gifted people able to do this quickly. You could look on it as a large collective self-interest.
Phillip.
Rick Berman is pulling a Lucas and not staying loyal to the fans
Hollywood producers aren't loyal to fans, they are loyal to the $. Business viewpoint: what's the point of making a great Star Trek movie and pleasing Star Trek fans, when you can repeat the mainstream dross which will pull in a chunk of the obedient masses AND will get the Star Trek fans in anyway just because it's "a Star Trek film"?
ObMeToo: chalk me up for another that found the WC character annoying but now rates Will as a top cool guy/celeb.
Phillip.
Recently, although I don't think it's always, they have had an article on how easy it is to convert your existing car to an electric one.
I've spoken to a few people that have done it, and are very happy with the result. They are faster than conventional cars, apparently because the electric motors give more torque. Here is one home conversion that does 100mph and cost £6,000 to convert. Running cost works out at £0.018 per mile.
I'm not likely to blow $20k on solar panels on my roof
Expect prices to drop. There are companies like BP pouring millions into research. Current solar technology is maxing out around 20% effecient, and uses rather nasty substances to make, so the hunt is on for alternative fabrication materials and methods (eg here).
I did, however, convert all my light bulbs to fluorescent
There are new energy efficient light bulbs that run on under 20 watts, are blindingly bright, but best of all now cost less than (afaicr) a couple of quid.
I'm even considering one of those insulating spreads that you wrap around the water heaters.
Essential. Also look out for micro-CHP coming soon (CHP = Combined Heat and Power). CHP is in wide use today in large buildings. Converting electricity to heat or vice versa is very inefficient, and you can get a max of 40% return. By producing both at the same time, you can get 90% return on the energy you put in.
Phillip.
And yet this is the same Nominet who is riding rough shod over user's objections [nominet-no.co.uk] to showing full addresses and phone numbers on whois on all of .uk (including .me.uk - supposed to be for individuals)
It was put to a vote, and the yes vote won. Those on the losing side will always feel 'ridden over' but that will happen in any democracy. I personally am all for the publication. People change email addresses like they change shoes, and I find the contact information useful for when I want to contact the owner of the domain (usually to see if they still want it, but I also feel more secure knowing it's there if I ever need to call and complain about any abuse).
the same nominet who has a shed load of money in the bank
If they can charge around $3/year for a domain and end up with a shed load of money in the bank, why am I going to complain? It means they have the funds to upgrade their infrastructure should they need to, and being a non-profit I know it's not going to end up in some directors pocket.
who don't publish accounts
What, you mean these accounts?
the same nominet who can take 4 months to respond to emails, and who, in my case took 2.5 years to transfer a domain I purchased into my name
I think you are probably an exception to the rule. I, and everyone else I know, have had excellent. I've no idea why you waited 2.5 years, after a couple of weeks I'd have been constantly badgering any company or organisation that had failed to do as promised, and after a month or two I'd have driven down there and made _sure_ it was done. It can't have been important if you never bothered chasing it up.
Nominet is not run for the common good, nor are they transparent
I respectfully disagree.
Phillip.
Acorn created a toaster expansion that would slot into your RiscPC. It was just an example of how powerful the 'slice' system was (impossible to run out of space in the machine), but it came with GUI to control it including a "browning control" widget. I can't find any pictures of it, though there is one of the RiscPC pizza oven and someone else uses it for his espresso machine.
Phillip.
The USENET newsgroup hierarchy seems to have worked quite well. The newsgroup names are very similar to domain names. Why not copy that model? For instance you get enough votes to create a 'developer.php', and then anyone can sell subdomains of that.
Phillip.
"Snakeoil" is the example name when setting up Apache after compiling in SSL. You are supposed to substitute in your own company name but obviously someone took the example a little too literally.
Phillip.
* There would be Linux-car drag races, where people could test their custom tuned kernels against each other
:-)
* Going over 6k rev/min would kill the sound server and the horn would stop working
* The cars would come in kit-car form, each driver able to slot in their own personalised dashboard
* You would be able to use any type of fuel, emulation will get some kind of perormance out of it
* It has a standard looking speedo, but the font for the numbers looks awful
* Forget child locks, you are able to individually set the priviledges of each component for each user (eg useful for stopping passengers from changing the radio station)
Next?
Phillip.
It is also claimed that this effect can cause behavioural changes, such as lack of concentration, difficulty with social association, and short temper.
Computer games are an exercise in stimulation, hence the lack of concentration when that stimulus is absent. This is very reminiscent of the "MTV generation" claims. I'll let the difficulty with social association when stuck in front of the computer for hours pass as self-evident. This leads to the short-temper. It can be caused by frustration in not getting your own way with immediate gratification (linked to first point). In real life, someone can't just type "stfu gayl0rd" to immediately close down a confrontation. They also can't evade or ignore confrontation in real life, which is easily done in a game. In fact it's not solely game related really. I've found I've become more short-tempered since I started working from home, as opposed to when I worked in an office. Mixing with other people is the only real cure. As for the non-reversible comment, I don't believe that. Anything you train yourself into you can retrain yourself out it.
Phillip.
If you want to use XML in PHP, then you may want to look here.
Phillip.
"I will always only install Mandrake."
This is clearly retarded. Why do computer dudes always throw down insane ultimatums? It gives us a bad name and it's the reason people in companies don't trust us.
How is that +5 interesting? It's not in the least bit retarded and where did gralem throw down an "insane ultimatum"? He has learned to trust Mandrake, for him it strikes the right balance between stability and ease of use, and so he uses it each time he does an install. Sounds fair enough to me and not in the least bit deserving abuse. You (Matt2000) may not be trusted, but don't inflict your paranoia on the rest of us.
Management: "Please install a Linux server that will handle all our email"
Admin: "Ok, done"
(notice lack of discussion about merits of various distros)
Phillip.
It's simple: in Japan, Europe, Australia, New Zealand etc... you only pay to call someone, not to receive a call.
That is true for 99% of people. The exception is when you start roaming around the world with your mobile. When abroad, the person calling pays their standard mobile rate and you have to pay the difference.
In the UK most operators now offer flat rate fees so you can stay on the mobile all day long and not pay an extra penny. On the plus side it cut my phone bill down by a factor of three! On the minus side you no longer have the excuse to get off the phone, "Got to go, this call is costing me a fortune".
3: Don't be afraid to give out your number to everyone. EVERYONE. Once you've done this you'll actually start receiving calls - it's only at this point you'll be seeing the benefit of having the phone.
Totally.With all the advance screening features on today's mobiles there aren't the same privacy problems as on the old fixed lines. I screen all my calls these days, and with the answerphone built into my Sony Z5 I can decide whether to pick up whilst the caller is leaving a message (or decide to call them back later).
Phillip.
Counter-strike.
Phillip.
If adding layers to programs automatically makes them slower, and so slow that they are useless, we all would code in assembly.
Useless depends on the performance needed by the implementation. For example a sort routine in C may be fine for a database application, but in sorting visible polygons in an arcade game it may be too slow in which case there may be no choice except to implement that particular routine in assembly and interface it to the C program.
Java may use a VM and be slower than C but it has taken hold in server-side programming where the network connection is the bottleneck rather than the application. Even if the server becomes heavily loaded it's cheaper to throw more hardware at it than rewrite it in something faster.
It's all about how far you can get away with moving up the speed vs maintainability curve. It's for this reason we don't see any arcade games coming out written in Java, and why web designers will knock up a web site in PHP rather than write optimised C CGI/ISAPI/etc.
Phillip.
Although I don't want to be monitored, I'll gladly give up the right to complete privacy to stop the chance of a single future terrorist attack.
That's sad. You will be giving up your privacy in vain as you won't suppress random acts of violence with such a simple solution. The media are telling us that US intelligence had the information but failed to act on it due to rivalry between the FBI and the CIA, but is it really "sheer incompetence and gross neglect"? How many hundreds of equally likely sounding red herrings were they chasing up at the time? Instead of undermining confidence in the intelligence services, why not publicise the garauntee to privacy (as another poster in this thread did so eloquently) and foster an image of an agency that people would willingly co-operate with, which I'm sure the Agencies would find of far more value.
After all, if we have nothing to hide and are not stigmatized for what we say in private, what does it matter who's listening?
The civil liberty groups have already answered this pretty comprehensively, but I couldn't help thinking about Dutch society a century ago where (and please correct me if I've heard incorrectly) no-one dared put up curtains in their house to show the neighbours that nothing untowards was going on. That is a society I equally would not like to live in.
Phillip.