If that percentage of scientists said there was a high probability (what, 70%? 80%?) that an asteroid would fall on your house tomorrow, killing you and your family, what would you do? Would you tell your spouse "Start Packing!", knowing you would lose your job and put your family in the poor house for a while, or would you tell the scientists to "Prove it!"?
If a large asteroid were on a collision course, should we let it happen as a natural thing? Or bankrupt the country to save the world? Actually, in that case we should probably threaten to do nothing until the rest of the world agrees to chip in...
Part of the point is the concern that *all* cars will come like this. Make the analogy slightly worse: say you can only have your tank filled by a "qualified technician". We shown that people can fill their own tanks for decades. Now we have to pay another high fee for something we used to be able to do before. If CorpX sees CorpY making a profit from this, CorpX'll jump right in line.
Also, there were rumors that if a motherboard manufacturer was thinking of making new AMD boards, Intel allegedly would hint that the manufacturer might face a shortage of Intel chipsets.
Yes, the insurance should cost more than the replacement. The key is, how much more? 10:1 for the TV isn't worth it. I don't have statistics for probability of loss of a house:)
A year ago I purchased a $1200 TV. The store offered a $300 extended warranty. This means they expect at most one in 4 of these TVs to fail in the 3 year period. A consumer review service indicated one in 30 of the TVs failed. At these failure rates, it's much cheaper for me to buy a new TV if one fails: $37,200 for 31 TVs (30 without extended warranty + 1 replacement), or $45,000 for 30 TVs with the extended warranty. (Obviously, I'm not buying 30 TVs. But 10 over the rest of my life would not be unreasonable, saving me over $2000.)
I recently replaced my file server for two reasons. 1) Age. 2) It was a different architecture (PowerPC) than my workstations, which means I needed two different update procedures. I switched to an Atom based system (MSI Wind Nettop). Now, if I update one workstation or the server, the updates get cached and used to update the remaining systems. Further, it's the same command to update any system: yum update. It's slightly out of the power and price envelopes, but it saves significant time on administration. Getting something low-power is nice, but make sure you aren't significantly increasing your admin time or bandwidth requirements.
Yes, to get low latency, your packets need to move at high speed. But, if your packets are tiny (100 bytes per packet, say) you get low bandwidth. Conversely, you can get high bandwidth with high latency. Think back to when they were filming Lord of the Rings: supposedly, they were loading helicopters with hard disks. Your packet size could be up to a petabyte, but it'll take 2+ hours, to load, fly, and unload... It still yields bandwidth at 10+GB/s.
for purposes of weight loss. I put it (and a tv) in front of a stationary bike. I'm 60% of the way towards my weight loss goal. I wouldn't be nearly this far without it. Playing Baldur's Gate or Fallout is *much* more fun than riding the bike alone. I actually have to force myself to get off the bike & stop playing.
Until we can get apples to apples comparisons, we don't know which is more cost effective. Yes, the Volt battery costs more now than it will in a few years. Look at hard drives: they used to be $100/MB. Now they're $0.1/GB.
As for gas, how much money will we have to pay in the future to clean up the environmental mess we've created? Climate change is happening now. That's not a question. The question is this: How bad will it get?
that is not a good reason to be annoyed at your ISP, in my opinion. Having monthly caps should improve things. If an ISP has N customers that all use only 1GB a month, that ISP has lower capital expenses than an ISP with N customers that all use 100GB a month. Having caps (and appropriate pricing!) makes sense. They shouldn't be offering unlimited service to begin with, at least not without charging you for it.
If your ISP starts mucking with your packets just because your using a third party VOIP app, the it's time to be upset.
Emperor Skull joked about Linux Starter, Linux Home Basic, etc above, but I think the concept of "Linux Starter" would be a good one.
If the community could settle on one or two distributions to recommend to new users, fewer new users would be confused/disheartened by the number of selections. Just make sure a search of "linux for new user" comes back with a page pointing to the two easiest distros to get up and running.
Sorry for the rant, but I'm tired of people using today's electricity costs as if the cost covered *everything*.
Remember, today's electricity prices rarely cover the damage we're doing to the environment. Let's talk garbage collection for a moment. If you didn't pay someone to take your trash away, it would be cheaper to live. However, the trash would just pile up everywhere. At some point, all of that garbage would create physical risks and health hazards. Think how happy the rats and other vermin would be, eating the buffet in your backyard. Suddenly, maybe after a plague or two, we realize we need to clean up the garbage. That's going to come with a big price tag. (Remember to include the loss of health/life in addition to the monetary cost.)
Getting back to electricity, there seems to be pretty good evidence we're messing up the environment in a big way. We've been doing this for 50+ years. Humanity has such a "whatever" attitude about it that it will take something big for us to finally say, "Oh crap!" What will that be? The loss of a country due to rising ocean levels? How much more junk will we have put in the air/ground by the time that happens?
Considering how long it's going to take to realize we actually do need to fix it, how long is it going to take to clean up? What will the price tag be? Who's going to foot the bill?
I can answer the last one for you. Us. Not the CEOs who say global warming is a crock of crap and fight it tooth and nail because it's supposedly bad for business. They are who we'll be paying.
This may be a silly question, but I don't know the answer and it may be relevant. What about our thermal footprint? We've talked about reducing our carbon footprint. Assume the world becomes carbon neutral *tonight*. How much heat do we still generate each day? Burning coal, burning gasoline, sending electricity down wires...
Wind, tidal, or geothermal might take energy out of the atmosphere only to put it back in, so those might be "neutral". Creating solar arrays and putting them in the desert would mean capturing more light (heat) instead of reflecting some portion of the light back into space (not neutral).
Is this something to start thinking about? Is this thought just completely wrong?
They don't need to know when it will break. They need to know that it won't break under the most extreme flight conditions, plus some safety factor. As an example, say the wing experiences 50% more load than normal during the worst storm. If they make sure it doesn't break at 150% added load, it's fine with me. (Granted, I'd still want this to be a real test, not simulation.)
If one is required to purchase a new PC (the previous one dies, or a company hires new employees), one is required to buy PCs with a Microsoft OS (Macs aren't an option in many Microsoft-based infrastructures). While XP may have issues, it certainly seems Vista has many more. It also seems to have a higher hardware cost.
Changing your cookbook doesn't cause others to stop cooking. Cheating gets other customers frustrated, so they stop playing.
WoWGlider has been specifically developed by interpretting the data in WoW. Antivirus software looks for specific byte patterns, but does not try to interpret the various fields in WoW or any other file.
Warden (as far as I know) simply makes hashes of byte codes in the various running applications. The hashes get sent back to Blizzard. It doesn't search for the SSN field in your tax software files.
Use of software that changes your character or gives you privileged information is cheating in my opinion.
Use of a program that simply runs your character as if you were sitting at the keyboard? I'm not so sure of that. As long as you didn't run it 24x365.2425, I'm not sure Blizzard should complain. People don't want to waste their time doing everything over again, or just don't have the time to spend to get to level 70. That's why I quit. I'd probably still be a paying customer if I could use a "human simulator" program.
But, Blizzard has figured a monthly rate based on expected customer usage. They expect customers to be playing less than 24 hours a day. If everybody played 24 hours/day, Blizzard would have to raise the monthly fee.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but mental exercise (like coding) supposedly increases the brain's calorie consumption by 50%.
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=381608
If that percentage of scientists said there was a high probability (what, 70%? 80%?) that an asteroid would fall on your house tomorrow, killing you and your family, what would you do? Would you tell your spouse "Start Packing!", knowing you would lose your job and put your family in the poor house for a while, or would you tell the scientists to "Prove it!"?
If a large asteroid were on a collision course, should we let it happen as a natural thing? Or bankrupt the country to save the world? Actually, in that case we should probably threaten to do nothing until the rest of the world agrees to chip in...
I wouldn't want to be the guy feeding the 192 sharks. I'd want to be paid an arm and a leg in advance. Literally.
Part of the point is the concern that *all* cars will come like this. Make the analogy slightly worse: say you can only have your tank filled by a "qualified technician". We shown that people can fill their own tanks for decades. Now we have to pay another high fee for something we used to be able to do before. If CorpX sees CorpY making a profit from this, CorpX'll jump right in line.
Also, there were rumors that if a motherboard manufacturer was thinking of making new AMD boards, Intel allegedly would hint that the manufacturer might face a shortage of Intel chipsets.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/early-athlon-motherboard-review,123-2.html?xtmc=athlon_boards_chipset_shortage_taipei&xtcr=2
Yes, the insurance should cost more than the replacement. The key is, how much more? 10:1 for the TV isn't worth it. I don't have statistics for probability of loss of a house :)
A year ago I purchased a $1200 TV. The store offered a $300 extended warranty. This means they expect at most one in 4 of these TVs to fail in the 3 year period. A consumer review service indicated one in 30 of the TVs failed. At these failure rates, it's much cheaper for me to buy a new TV if one fails: $37,200 for 31 TVs (30 without extended warranty + 1 replacement), or $45,000 for 30 TVs with the extended warranty. (Obviously, I'm not buying 30 TVs. But 10 over the rest of my life would not be unreasonable, saving me over $2000.)
I recently replaced my file server for two reasons. 1) Age. 2) It was a different architecture (PowerPC) than my workstations, which means I needed two different update procedures. I switched to an Atom based system (MSI Wind Nettop). Now, if I update one workstation or the server, the updates get cached and used to update the remaining systems. Further, it's the same command to update any system: yum update. It's slightly out of the power and price envelopes, but it saves significant time on administration. Getting something low-power is nice, but make sure you aren't significantly increasing your admin time or bandwidth requirements.
Worker 1: Dude, I got this new phone, but the MP3 player doesn't work.
Worker 2: Stick it in your ear.
Worker 1: WTF? You stick it in your ear! Jerk.
Yes, to get low latency, your packets need to move at high speed. But, if your packets are tiny (100 bytes per packet, say) you get low bandwidth. Conversely, you can get high bandwidth with high latency. Think back to when they were filming Lord of the Rings: supposedly, they were loading helicopters with hard disks. Your packet size could be up to a petabyte, but it'll take 2+ hours, to load, fly, and unload... It still yields bandwidth at 10+GB/s.
Which would you rather add to your pack? A pound of flammable material, or a half-pound radio/battery with a half-pound hand-cranked generator?
for purposes of weight loss. I put it (and a tv) in front of a stationary bike. I'm 60% of the way towards my weight loss goal. I wouldn't be nearly this far without it. Playing Baldur's Gate or Fallout is *much* more fun than riding the bike alone. I actually have to force myself to get off the bike & stop playing.
Until we can get apples to apples comparisons, we don't know which is more cost effective. Yes, the Volt battery costs more now than it will in a few years. Look at hard drives: they used to be $100/MB. Now they're $0.1/GB.
As for gas, how much money will we have to pay in the future to clean up the environmental mess we've created? Climate change is happening now. That's not a question. The question is this: How bad will it get?
that is not a good reason to be annoyed at your ISP, in my opinion. Having monthly caps should improve things. If an ISP has N customers that all use only 1GB a month, that ISP has lower capital expenses than an ISP with N customers that all use 100GB a month. Having caps (and appropriate pricing!) makes sense. They shouldn't be offering unlimited service to begin with, at least not without charging you for it.
If your ISP starts mucking with your packets just because your using a third party VOIP app, the it's time to be upset.
Emperor Skull joked about Linux Starter, Linux Home Basic, etc above, but I think the concept of "Linux Starter" would be a good one.
If the community could settle on one or two distributions to recommend to new users, fewer new users would be confused/disheartened by the number of selections. Just make sure a search of "linux for new user" comes back with a page pointing to the two easiest distros to get up and running.
Would that be hard?
Sorry for the rant, but I'm tired of people using today's electricity costs as if the cost covered *everything*.
Remember, today's electricity prices rarely cover the damage we're doing to the environment. Let's talk garbage collection for a moment. If you didn't pay someone to take your trash away, it would be cheaper to live. However, the trash would just pile up everywhere. At some point, all of that garbage would create physical risks and health hazards. Think how happy the rats and other vermin would be, eating the buffet in your backyard. Suddenly, maybe after a plague or two, we realize we need to clean up the garbage. That's going to come with a big price tag. (Remember to include the loss of health/life in addition to the monetary cost.)
Getting back to electricity, there seems to be pretty good evidence we're messing up the environment in a big way. We've been doing this for 50+ years. Humanity has such a "whatever" attitude about it that it will take something big for us to finally say, "Oh crap!" What will that be? The loss of a country due to rising ocean levels? How much more junk will we have put in the air/ground by the time that happens?
Considering how long it's going to take to realize we actually do need to fix it, how long is it going to take to clean up? What will the price tag be? Who's going to foot the bill?
I can answer the last one for you. Us. Not the CEOs who say global warming is a crock of crap and fight it tooth and nail because it's supposedly bad for business. They are who we'll be paying.
This may be a silly question, but I don't know the answer and it may be relevant. What about our thermal footprint? We've talked about reducing our carbon footprint. Assume the world becomes carbon neutral *tonight*. How much heat do we still generate each day? Burning coal, burning gasoline, sending electricity down wires...
Wind, tidal, or geothermal might take energy out of the atmosphere only to put it back in, so those might be "neutral". Creating solar arrays and putting them in the desert would mean capturing more light (heat) instead of reflecting some portion of the light back into space (not neutral).
Is this something to start thinking about? Is this thought just completely wrong?
(For those who didn't want to click, that's the Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol. HTCPCP was "introduced" April 1, 1998.)
Here it is.
They don't need to know when it will break. They need to know that it won't break under the most extreme flight conditions, plus some safety factor. As an example, say the wing experiences 50% more load than normal during the worst storm. If they make sure it doesn't break at 150% added load, it's fine with me. (Granted, I'd still want this to be a real test, not simulation.)
No news at 11.
Two reasons not to use SCO stock for TP:
1. Paper cuts.
2. Already full of "stuff".
If one is required to purchase a new PC (the previous one dies, or a company hires new employees), one is required to buy PCs with a Microsoft OS (Macs aren't an option in many Microsoft-based infrastructures). While XP may have issues, it certainly seems Vista has many more. It also seems to have a higher hardware cost.
Do you think someone could start some sort of anti-trust suit on this? They are forcing customers to buy what seems to be a defective product.
Changing your cookbook doesn't cause others to stop cooking. Cheating gets other customers frustrated, so they stop playing.
WoWGlider has been specifically developed by interpretting the data in WoW. Antivirus software looks for specific byte patterns, but does not try to interpret the various fields in WoW or any other file.
Warden (as far as I know) simply makes hashes of byte codes in the various running applications. The hashes get sent back to Blizzard. It doesn't search for the SSN field in your tax software files.
Use of software that changes your character or gives you privileged information is cheating in my opinion.
Use of a program that simply runs your character as if you were sitting at the keyboard? I'm not so sure of that. As long as you didn't run it 24x365.2425, I'm not sure Blizzard should complain. People don't want to waste their time doing everything over again, or just don't have the time to spend to get to level 70. That's why I quit. I'd probably still be a paying customer if I could use a "human simulator" program.
But, Blizzard has figured a monthly rate based on expected customer usage. They expect customers to be playing less than 24 hours a day. If everybody played 24 hours/day, Blizzard would have to raise the monthly fee.