91 is the country code for India and the area code for New Delhi starts with 1. My roommate was trying to make a phone call back home using an international calling card and didn't realize he needed to dial 011 first so he called 911 a few times before he figured it out.
Firefox completely ignores all system network and proxy settings. Instead, you have to go in and configure your own for Firefox. The most annoying part of this is that Firefox's settings do not have the option to ignore simple hostnames. This makes it virtually useless for browsing intranet sites since you have to manually add each intranet site you want to visit to the exceptions list.
I don't think it's new features as much as quality. Apple has been going months between Leopard seeds and the quality of the seeds has been dismal. Judging by the number of issues I saw in the last seed, I'm not at all surprised that they are slipping the release.
Here are some Hungarian variable names: cbStr - # of bytes in Str (cb = count of bytes) cMRU - # of items in the MRU (c = count) pFoo - pointer to Foo m_Foo - member variable Foo fEnabled - flag indicating whether something is enabled or not
In each of these cases, you could achieve the same effect by using words, e.g. strSize, MRUCount, FooPointer, FooMember, isEnabled, etc. but this gets unwieldy when the subject is itself a complex name. A consistently used adjective scheme like Hungarian notation can do wonders to the readability of your code (to someone who is not a complete newbie to the notation style).
The m_ notation indicates that a variable is a member of the class. Simonyi's version of the Hungarian notation is actually very useful. Indicating the type of a variable is mostly useless because that's something any competent IDE will give you for free. Simonyi's original concept of the Hungarian notation focused more on indicating the meaning of the variable in question, rather than its type.
You're correct. I estimated all the numbers involved and 10 is ridiculously high - not sure what I was thinking. However, it is still true that they need a very small convert rate to break even on the capital costs (not sure about the operational costs).
100,000 x 4500 = $450,000,000 (You had one too many zeros)
A simpler way to look at it, however: 6% interest on $100,000 is about $20 per day. If you depreciate the equipment over 5 years, that adds another $60 or so per day. If you figure that the average user will take about 2 flights in a day, you earn about $5 per user per flight. Your average airplane makes about 10 flights in a day giving you a potential customer base of 200 x 10 = 2000. You only need to sell to about 16 of those to pay for the capital costs. If you think you're going to get a higher attach rate than that (and I think you are), this is worth doing. Put in intangibles such as product differentiation and customer loyalty and you're far ahead of your costs.
Finiteness is only one of the qualities that a standard should have. Lots of things are finite. You also need intrinsic value. Gold's value is based on the same principles as a pyramid scheme or the 2000s.com stock boom. People value it, not because there's anything it provides, but because they believe other people will value it.
Gold was valued in ancient days because it had a lot of properties that were not available otherwise. With the advent of plastics and alloys, that is not true anymore.
Ballmer didn't "admit that previous sales forecasts were 'overly aggressive'".
The implication of that statement is: - Ballmer/Microsoft issued a sales forecast in the past - They were pressured on the accuracy of said forecast - They admitted that their forecasts were overly aggressive.
However, that's not what happened here. The sales forecasts in question were made by external analysts. In this case, it's Ballmer and Microsoft disagreeing with the forecasts. The word "admit" implies that you are conceding something that you tried to conceal before.
Why does Slashdot need to spin every story to try and make it sound even more negative than it is?
I'm not the original poster, but here are some of the things I don't like about XCode: - Search is broken. It's virtually impossible to find even all instances of a simple function being used in the open project. I use egrep on the command line instead of the useless XCode search. This extends to XCode being completely unable to find the definition of any function you are looking for. It's a huge productivity killer when more often than not when you ask it to find the definition of a symbol, it gives you the wrong one. Instead, I end up doing an egrep and hand-sifting through the list to find the definition v/s uses. - The debugger sucks. I can't tell you how many times I've run into the dreaded "gdb timed out while accessing variable value" in the middle of debugging something and had to restart the session because that's the only way out of it. The only workaround I know of is to turn off the Variable View, which makes for a pretty pathetic debugging experience. - Xcode is very unfriendly to automation. They've fixed this in more recent versions but not completely. It's a PITA to set it up so you can have a single configuration file shared between multiple projects. - This last one is a relatively minor gripe, but it's annoying that you can't choose the configuration you want to debug in the debugger window. Instead, you need to go to the Build Results window to do that.
This wasn't some case that Microsoft could decline to prosecute. In fact, Microsoft declined to assist with the prosecution in this case.
Given the extent of rampant copyright violation that goes unpunished in Russia, I'm more likely to believe this case was the result of someone trying to make a political point, either against copyrights or because of a personal grudge, rather than that of the police legitimately pursuing a copyright violator.
The article is vague on details but it sounds like they are alleging that Dell recorded the Intel money as part of their revenue instead of discounting it from the COGS as they are supposed to do. I still don't see how it could inflate their profits as the suit alleges.
Financial statements are public and they never include per-unit prices for raw materials and parts. They include a lump sum "Cost of Goods Sold" which includes the total price for all raw materials and parts consumed per business (if it's broken down that way). If Dell is worried that other companies can read their financial records they have more serious problems to worry about.
It is entirely possible (although uncommon) for a person to donate millions and have the end result be the same amount of wealth as if they did not donate millions, but instead paid more taxes. It just means the money goes to the charity instead of the government.
No. That is not possible. It is possible for someone with millions to hedge their money into tax shelters that lets them end up with more wealth than if they hadn't but that's orthogonal to charitable donations. Charitable donations will never let you end up with more or even as much wealth as you would have had without the donations.
Tax rates are marginal so dropping from a 40% to a 30% bracket does not mean you save 10% of your entire income on taxes.
I strongly recommend learning elementary math and the basics of the tax code before spouting off on stuff that you don't know anything about.
Jerry: So were going to make the Post Office pay for my new stereo? Kramer: It's a write off for them. Jerry: How is it a write off? Kramer: They just write it off. Jerry: Write it off what? Kramer: Jerry, all these big companies they write off everything! Jerry: You don't even know what a write off is. Kramer: Do you? Jerry: No. I don't. Kramer: But they do, and they're the ones writing it off. Jerry: I wish I had the last twenty seconds of my life back.
You don't pay taxes on the money you give away because you are giving it away. That is the only "tax advantage" that charity gives you. And trust me, the taxes you're saving will always be less than the money you're giving away.
$100,000 borrowed on a 25-year loan at 6% is about $7800/year. You should also apply a 2-4% inflation rate to that cost, which actually reduces the value of the money you will pay as time progresses so that your payment in the 25th year will be about $3000 in todays dollars. Not caring to do the math, I'd put the cost at about $6800/year.
This has nothing to do with NVidia drivers. My guess is you just have some bad RAM.
I use a Mac Pro with 3GB of RAM every day. When I first got it, it would kernel panic when I went past the 2GB mark too. However, swapping out the RAM with some known-good RAM fixed that.
You're confusing investment with charity. The Gates foundation invests its money to get a return. It then uses those returns to perform charity. When(if) they invest in GE, it's not as an act of charity towards GE but because they believe that investment will return them more money that they can use to perform charity.
Slashdot Mirror
91 is the country code for India and the area code for New Delhi starts with 1. My roommate was trying to make a phone call back home using an international calling card and didn't realize he needed to dial 011 first so he called 911 a few times before he figured it out.
Firefox completely ignores all system network and proxy settings. Instead, you have to go in and configure your own for Firefox. The most annoying part of this is that Firefox's settings do not have the option to ignore simple hostnames. This makes it virtually useless for browsing intranet sites since you have to manually add each intranet site you want to visit to the exceptions list.
Vista's DRM doesn't prevent you from doing anything that you could have done on XP.
What utter FUD! How does Vista make it harder to do that?
I don't think it's new features as much as quality. Apple has been going months between Leopard seeds and the quality of the seeds has been dismal. Judging by the number of issues I saw in the last seed, I'm not at all surprised that they are slipping the release.
Here are some Hungarian variable names:
cbStr - # of bytes in Str (cb = count of bytes)
cMRU - # of items in the MRU (c = count)
pFoo - pointer to Foo
m_Foo - member variable Foo
fEnabled - flag indicating whether something is enabled or not
In each of these cases, you could achieve the same effect by using words, e.g. strSize, MRUCount, FooPointer, FooMember, isEnabled, etc. but this gets unwieldy when the subject is itself a complex name. A consistently used adjective scheme like Hungarian notation can do wonders to the readability of your code (to someone who is not a complete newbie to the notation style).
The m_ notation indicates that a variable is a member of the class. Simonyi's version of the Hungarian notation is actually very useful. Indicating the type of a variable is mostly useless because that's something any competent IDE will give you for free. Simonyi's original concept of the Hungarian notation focused more on indicating the meaning of the variable in question, rather than its type.
That's Hungarian for First Post.
You're correct. I estimated all the numbers involved and 10 is ridiculously high - not sure what I was thinking. However, it is still true that they need a very small convert rate to break even on the capital costs (not sure about the operational costs).
100,000 x 4500 = $450,000,000 (You had one too many zeros)
A simpler way to look at it, however: 6% interest on $100,000 is about $20 per day. If you depreciate the equipment over 5 years, that adds another $60 or so per day. If you figure that the average user will take about 2 flights in a day, you earn about $5 per user per flight. Your average airplane makes about 10 flights in a day giving you a potential customer base of 200 x 10 = 2000. You only need to sell to about 16 of those to pay for the capital costs. If you think you're going to get a higher attach rate than that (and I think you are), this is worth doing. Put in intangibles such as product differentiation and customer loyalty and you're far ahead of your costs.
Finiteness is only one of the qualities that a standard should have. Lots of things are finite. You also need intrinsic value. Gold's value is based on the same principles as a pyramid scheme or the 2000s .com stock boom. People value it, not because there's anything it provides, but because they believe other people will value it.
Gold was valued in ancient days because it had a lot of properties that were not available otherwise. With the advent of plastics and alloys, that is not true anymore.
AIIIIIIIIIIIIIEE!! Too many I's!!!
Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
Ballmer didn't "admit that previous sales forecasts were 'overly aggressive'".
The implication of that statement is:
- Ballmer/Microsoft issued a sales forecast in the past
- They were pressured on the accuracy of said forecast
- They admitted that their forecasts were overly aggressive.
However, that's not what happened here. The sales forecasts in question were made by external analysts. In this case, it's Ballmer and Microsoft disagreeing with the forecasts. The word "admit" implies that you are conceding something that you tried to conceal before.
Why does Slashdot need to spin every story to try and make it sound even more negative than it is?
I'm not the original poster, but here are some of the things I don't like about XCode:
- Search is broken. It's virtually impossible to find even all instances of a simple function being used in the open project. I use egrep on the command line instead of the useless XCode search. This extends to XCode being completely unable to find the definition of any function you are looking for. It's a huge productivity killer when more often than not when you ask it to find the definition of a symbol, it gives you the wrong one. Instead, I end up doing an egrep and hand-sifting through the list to find the definition v/s uses.
- The debugger sucks. I can't tell you how many times I've run into the dreaded "gdb timed out while accessing variable value" in the middle of debugging something and had to restart the session because that's the only way out of it. The only workaround I know of is to turn off the Variable View, which makes for a pretty pathetic debugging experience.
- Xcode is very unfriendly to automation. They've fixed this in more recent versions but not completely. It's a PITA to set it up so you can have a single configuration file shared between multiple projects.
- This last one is a relatively minor gripe, but it's annoying that you can't choose the configuration you want to debug in the debugger window. Instead, you need to go to the Build Results window to do that.
This wasn't some case that Microsoft could decline to prosecute. In fact, Microsoft declined to assist with the prosecution in this case.
Given the extent of rampant copyright violation that goes unpunished in Russia, I'm more likely to believe this case was the result of someone trying to make a political point, either against copyrights or because of a personal grudge, rather than that of the police legitimately pursuing a copyright violator.
The article is vague on details but it sounds like they are alleging that Dell recorded the Intel money as part of their revenue instead of discounting it from the COGS as they are supposed to do. I still don't see how it could inflate their profits as the suit alleges.
Financial statements are public and they never include per-unit prices for raw materials and parts. They include a lump sum "Cost of Goods Sold" which includes the total price for all raw materials and parts consumed per business (if it's broken down that way). If Dell is worried that other companies can read their financial records they have more serious problems to worry about.
start.com has been doing it for more than a year now.
They're staring because most of them have never seen a virgin before.
It is entirely possible (although uncommon) for a person to donate millions and have the end result be the same amount of wealth as if they did not donate millions, but instead paid more taxes. It just means the money goes to the charity instead of the government.
No. That is not possible. It is possible for someone with millions to hedge their money into tax shelters that lets them end up with more wealth than if they hadn't but that's orthogonal to charitable donations. Charitable donations will never let you end up with more or even as much wealth as you would have had without the donations.
Tax rates are marginal so dropping from a 40% to a 30% bracket does not mean you save 10% of your entire income on taxes.
I strongly recommend learning elementary math and the basics of the tax code before spouting off on stuff that you don't know anything about.
Jerry: So were going to make the Post Office pay for my new stereo?
Kramer: It's a write off for them.
Jerry: How is it a write off?
Kramer: They just write it off.
Jerry: Write it off what?
Kramer: Jerry, all these big companies they write off everything!
Jerry: You don't even know what a write off is.
Kramer: Do you?
Jerry: No. I don't.
Kramer: But they do, and they're the ones writing it off.
Jerry: I wish I had the last twenty seconds of my life back.
You don't pay taxes on the money you give away because you are giving it away. That is the only "tax advantage" that charity gives you. And trust me, the taxes you're saving will always be less than the money you're giving away.
$100,000 borrowed on a 25-year loan at 6% is about $7800/year. You should also apply a 2-4% inflation rate to that cost, which actually reduces the value of the money you will pay as time progresses so that your payment in the 25th year will be about $3000 in todays dollars. Not caring to do the math, I'd put the cost at about $6800/year.
Does California have a third senator besides Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer?
This has nothing to do with NVidia drivers. My guess is you just have some bad RAM.
I use a Mac Pro with 3GB of RAM every day. When I first got it, it would kernel panic when I went past the 2GB mark too. However, swapping out the RAM with some known-good RAM fixed that.
You're confusing investment with charity. The Gates foundation invests its money to get a return. It then uses those returns to perform charity. When(if) they invest in GE, it's not as an act of charity towards GE but because they believe that investment will return them more money that they can use to perform charity.