They both may have said it, but several variations on that quote were present in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (and possibly a few of the other books in that series.).
Speak for yourself. I'm pretty sure my great grandfather was an actual ape (or possibly a baboon). I don't know the details, but it seems likely that my grandmother got a little frisky at the zoo.
My system draws 350 watts with the monitors all turned off. With all 3 monitors turned on and only 3 hard disks plugged in it runs at roughly 550 watts. It used to be higher but I switched to LCDs for two of my monitors and that dropped power usage down by I think 100W or so (these monitors have probably already paid for themselves that way).
I actually have two power supplies in the system (each one rated for 650 watts). I originally had more hard disks plugged in for use as a media center, but I unplugged them when I realized they were wasting wattage considering how rarely they got used. So I just plug them in when I actually need them now.
I tried using the power saving mode, but the computer always froze up when it entered it, so I can't use it.
It's dual cpu and has I think 4 to 6 system fans running. I could disconnect some of them, but I'm a bit scared of risking damage to the system by trying that.
It has a high end dual video card (geforce 9500 I think. whichever version of the geforce it is that has two cards in it). However, I don't think this is relevant. My power usage didn't change when I upgraded the card except when I actually play games.
I live in California where power rates are very high. Even at my current lower rate of usage I pay 32 cents per KwH for all power over 300% baseline. (It's 22 cents at 200% baseline and 11 to 12 cents at 100% of baseline and below). Over the years those rates just keep going up. It was when my bill jumped from $200 to $250 in one month that I decided it was worth the effort to just shut it off every night.
Hibernation doesn't work on my system. I have 4GB of ram (only a subset of which is recognized by Windows) and WinXP chokes trying to hibernate.
I shut off my computer at night because it saves money. My electricity bill used to be about $250 a month. When I shut my computer down at night the bill dropped to $80 a month.
My computer also takes at least several minutes to boot up. It seems like it takes longer every time I upgrade my system. Every time a new version of Windows comes out it takes longer to boot up. I thought things would go at least a little faster when I upgraded to a dual CPU system but the bootup time stayed about the same (implying to me that it's disk speed that's the limiting factor).
I very much wish that bootup time could be reduced. As it is I use my laptop (where hibernation does work) when I need to jump online quickly.
I have a filter that puts all email with images in it directly into my junk folder unless the from address matches my whitelist. If you ban images then the spam will go back to text. It's a lot harder to figure out what text is spam and what is not.
I did this once my spam level reached irritating levels. Now it's back to being a trickle.
Someone please respond about this. The bone shape at the base of my skull is a bump that is unlike the shape of the skull of any of my immediate relatives. I've always wondered about it. I don't know why it would indicate being more intelligent, but in any case I'd like to know if it's actually indicative of something other than just a squashed head during birth.
I agree completely. I dearly wish that every election was a recall election. Look at how the California recall allowed numerous non-party people to run for office. The only change I'd make is to eliminate the need for the 50% vote to remove the incumbent from office. Let's just have the free for all election every time.
Many people may not like Arnold, but he's a hell of a lot more moderate than anyone is who was elected through the traditional pro-two-party process.
The key aspect of the recall is that anyone can get on the ballot with just a small number of signatures. I love that.
In fact, I think I'd prefer a requirement that if you're the incumbent, you need to get more than 50% in order to get reelected. If you get less then the next most popular person would get the job.
I for one am concerned of the possibility they might deem your exploits in-game to be taxable income, payable in US dollars, for instance, the moment your character enters the game, slays a boar, and gets 200 gold pieces off the corpse, that generates an earned income taxable event, and possible self-employment tax liabilities.
If it made any sense at all then wouldn't it make more sense to tax the gold pieces? If you make 200 gold pieces from killing a boar then the government gets x% of that. If the government wants to try to convert that into real cash then they can go ahead and do it.
Of course, that'll flood the market and thus reduce the cash value of the gold pieces. It would really be like taxing a barter transaction.
I'll take a look. I wasn't aware of any other implementation.
However, just to be clear, GWT is only limited to jdk 1.4 on the client side (the side that's compiled into javascript). The server side code can use jdk 1.5.
I just searched through these comments and didn't see any mention of GWT.
GWT is wonderful. I've programmed ajax stuff (check out my chess and checkers games. It's definitely brittle if you actually have to write the javascript and parse the xml and convert the xml to java objects manually.
But, using GWT has been a big eye opener for me. You write java code and it's compiled into javascript. It completely turns everything on its head. If you want to communicate some more information to the server from the client, all you need to do is add another method to the remote object (and its interfaces) and you suddenly have another statically type checked rpc call between client and server.
I'll probably still do simple form apps in struts, but I don't intend to ever write another line of javascript that's of any significant complexity. It's no longer necessary. No longer do I need to figure out incompatibilities between browsers. GWT just figures it out.
All these years people have been trying to make a good java webapp framework and GWT comes along and does things in a way that just turns everything on its head. Struts and Tapestry and JSF are all solving the wrong problems. They all try to make it easy to take html forms and retrieve and validate that information.
GWT turns it around and just lets you communicate java objects. I used to be unhappy that I needed to settle for choosing which framework was the least bad. Now I just say to hell with the lot of them except in situations where javascript isn't allowed.
I didn't know you had to supply a CV to post on Slashdot
Well no, you don't need to explain your expertise just to post. But, when you say "It doesn't look too obvious to me." with regard to a patent, I think it's only reasonable to expect you to include your level of expertise in the post. When people don't, I just assume they're not experts.
That said, if you are a mathematician then you get the last word. Apparently it really wasn't obvious to other people in the field.
Of course, that doesn't change the fact that it's an algorithm and it shouldn't be possible to patent an algorithm. But, that's another discussion.
Are you a cryptographer or a mathematician? Patents don't need to be obvious to everyone for them to be obvious. They only need to be obvious to an expert in that field.
If 1000 different electrical engineers come up with idea X at the same time, that idea shouldn't be patentable even if the idea is utterly non-obvious to non-engineers.
I never saw the movie, but why couldn't you pop popcorn with a laser? You can pop popcorn over a fire or in a microwave, so apparently all that's required is heat. If a laser heats up a kernel then it'll pop won't it?
Ahnold's first move was to encumber the state by a couple billion zorkmids by repealing an emergency bugetary measure which increased a vehicle registration fee.
The act had been in place, should the state fall into a deficit situation and, riding a populist wave of revolt against it, he yanked the revenue generator.
Your phrasing is very nice. I like how you called it a "revenue generator".
Personally, I'd have phrased it like this:
"Arnold's first move was to fulfil a campaign pledge and repeal an unpopular tax increase that the legislature put in place to help cover up its irresponsible runaway spending habits."
"Separately, the California legislature once again passed a budget that failed to even attempt to cut spending in order to bring the budget deficit under control. At the same time voters continue their support of these habits by passing referendums that spend money like a drunk teen with his father's credit card."
"In a fit of total irresponsibility, voters also turned down a referendum that would have required their government to operate within a balanced budget."
"Just for fun, voters voted against an anti-gerrymandering law because they like things just the way they are."
I wish more actors would get into politics. Only the worst sort of person devotes their life to being a politician. Actors are able to glide into office on the basis of their popularity. In the past I'd have been annoyed by that, but I now realize that voters rarely vote people into office for good reasons. Paul Graham wrote an essay on how the most attractive candidates usually win. Therefore, it's better to get a wide selection of random people in office than it is to have a consistently bad selection of incumbents who have spent their lives as parasites on society.
Nice. So you define libertarianism as absolutely extreme, thus leaving no place for those of use who want less government but do not want more social laws (Republicans) and do not want more fiscal laws (Democrats).
It's easy to define viewpoints you disagree with to just be extreme. Some of my friends are Democrats who say that sort of thing about Republicans without realizing that they are pretty extreme themselves. The same goes for a few Republicans I know.
Now that I think about it, I realize that you're just a troll. I apologize to the slashdot community for feeding you.
Why does libertarianism have to be extreme while republicans and democrats get to straddle a wide range? Extreme libertarians are anarchists just like extreme republicans are neo-conservatives and extreme democrats are socialists.
Of course things break down in the extreme. All economic, social and political theories break down at the extreme.
It's just a different middle ground. If libertarians ever came to power, they might try to be extreme for a bit, but they'd end up complying with the realities of the world just like every other political party has done. They'd just end up at a different middle ground than those with republican or democratic sensibilities.
There are a lot of professors that record their lectures and make them freely available to help their students, this guy just seems to be trying to make a quick buck.
The beautiful thing about capitalism is that one person can benefit from the self interested greed of another. That's why it works so well.
If he is only interested in making a quick buck then preventing him from charging will just mean that he won't do it at all.
The only reasonable alternative is to have the university pay him the $2.50 per lecture. The only downside there is price control. He'd only have one buyer (the university) so it'd be difficult to adjust the price to find out how much the lectures are really worth to students.
All cities like that are self selected. If the place is slightly dangerous then a certain subset of the people get out before it gets too bad. That makes it worse because the percentage of people who are dangerous has just gone up as a percentage of the whole.
The cycle repeats until it reaches the point where the only people left are the ones who either like living in that sort of area or people who feel they have no choice but to stay or people who are simply too afraid of change to try to move.
Simply saying that people should move out doesn't address the fact that some people will stay and the place will remain and just get worse.
The only way to make someplace like that better is to do something that attracts normal people back to the area while at the same time boosting the police presence so that these new people feel safe and thus don't leave.
You can see more on screen at high def. If women don't look good at higher resolutions then just don't zoom in as far. Which looks better?
1. video of one woman at low resolution.
2. video of three women zoomed out but with same amount of visual data per woman as #1.
Try taking any video and then zoom out. The picture looks a lot better but you can't see as much. Some old movies (I'm talking non-porn now) just don't have good visual quality. They can be more enjoyable if you just zoom out.
All video looks terrible if you put it on a sufficiently large screen.
I took the time to actually put the data that you linked to into a spreadsheet and then calculated the correlation coefficient. It turned out to be -0.01.
Assuming those data sets actually coincide time-wise, that appears to mean that there's no simple link between those two values. I wouldn't necessarily expect a direct causal link given the many variables involved in unemployment, but I'm surprised that there's no correlation at all.
I'd be interested in looking at that correlation over time. For instance, if we run these numbers every year for the last hundred years, is there ever a correlation? Perhaps the correlation is low during certain periods of time (perhaps when the economy is good) while it is much higher in others (perhaps when the economy is bad).
If anyone else wants to run the numbers, you can view them at:
UnemploymentMinWage
I tried pasting them into this message, but the spam filter wouldn't let it through.
So now I know it's legal for me to crack the program to make it work without a dongle. Now I just need to figure out how to get someone reputable to crack it for me.
It's the program I need, not the files. The program will open up gif or jpg or png files and then convert them into a file format for my programmable embroidery machine. It's not a simple thing to do. It has to create a path for the thread to go which makes the resulting design look good when it's sewn out.
The file format it converts into is readable by other programs as well as my machine, so there's no problem there.
Are you saying that it's actually legal for me to buy a cracked version of the software because I already own a legal but non-working version of it?
The people doing the selling aren't selling converters. They're actually selling cracked versions of the program. The program requires a dongle to run. I have the dongle, but it stopped working when the company went under. I'm pretty sure that even if it's legal for me to buy the cracked version, it probably isn't legal for them to sell it (despite the fact that the company went under and the product isn't being sold at all anymore). But, I guess that's not my problem.
Slashdot Mirror
They both may have said it, but several variations on that quote were present in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (and possibly a few of the other books in that series.).
See: http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/27540.html
Speak for yourself. I'm pretty sure my great grandfather was an actual ape (or possibly a baboon). I don't know the details, but it seems likely that my grandmother got a little frisky at the zoo.
My system draws 350 watts with the monitors all turned off. With all 3 monitors turned on and only 3 hard disks plugged in it runs at roughly 550 watts. It used to be higher but I switched to LCDs for two of my monitors and that dropped power usage down by I think 100W or so (these monitors have probably already paid for themselves that way).
I actually have two power supplies in the system (each one rated for 650 watts). I originally had more hard disks plugged in for use as a media center, but I unplugged them when I realized they were wasting wattage considering how rarely they got used. So I just plug them in when I actually need them now.
I tried using the power saving mode, but the computer always froze up when it entered it, so I can't use it.
It's dual cpu and has I think 4 to 6 system fans running. I could disconnect some of them, but I'm a bit scared of risking damage to the system by trying that.
It has a high end dual video card (geforce 9500 I think. whichever version of the geforce it is that has two cards in it). However, I don't think this is relevant. My power usage didn't change when I upgraded the card except when I actually play games.
I live in California where power rates are very high. Even at my current lower rate of usage I pay 32 cents per KwH for all power over 300% baseline. (It's 22 cents at 200% baseline and 11 to 12 cents at 100% of baseline and below). Over the years those rates just keep going up. It was when my bill jumped from $200 to $250 in one month that I decided it was worth the effort to just shut it off every night.
Hibernation doesn't work on my system. I have 4GB of ram (only a subset of which is recognized by Windows) and WinXP chokes trying to hibernate.
I shut off my computer at night because it saves money. My electricity bill used to be about $250 a month. When I shut my computer down at night the bill dropped to $80 a month.
My computer also takes at least several minutes to boot up. It seems like it takes longer every time I upgrade my system. Every time a new version of Windows comes out it takes longer to boot up. I thought things would go at least a little faster when I upgraded to a dual CPU system but the bootup time stayed about the same (implying to me that it's disk speed that's the limiting factor).
I very much wish that bootup time could be reduced. As it is I use my laptop (where hibernation does work) when I need to jump online quickly.
I have a filter that puts all email with images in it directly into my junk folder unless the from address matches my whitelist. If you ban images then the spam will go back to text. It's a lot harder to figure out what text is spam and what is not.
I did this once my spam level reached irritating levels. Now it's back to being a trickle.
Someone please respond about this. The bone shape at the base of my skull is a bump that is unlike the shape of the skull of any of my immediate relatives. I've always wondered about it. I don't know why it would indicate being more intelligent, but in any case I'd like to know if it's actually indicative of something other than just a squashed head during birth.
I agree completely. I dearly wish that every election was a recall election. Look at how the California recall allowed numerous non-party people to run for office. The only change I'd make is to eliminate the need for the 50% vote to remove the incumbent from office. Let's just have the free for all election every time.
Many people may not like Arnold, but he's a hell of a lot more moderate than anyone is who was elected through the traditional pro-two-party process.
The key aspect of the recall is that anyone can get on the ballot with just a small number of signatures. I love that.
In fact, I think I'd prefer a requirement that if you're the incumbent, you need to get more than 50% in order to get reelected. If you get less then the next most popular person would get the job.
Of course, that'll flood the market and thus reduce the cash value of the gold pieces. It would really be like taxing a barter transaction.
I'll take a look. I wasn't aware of any other implementation.
However, just to be clear, GWT is only limited to jdk 1.4 on the client side (the side that's compiled into javascript). The server side code can use jdk 1.5.
I just searched through these comments and didn't see any mention of GWT.
GWT is wonderful. I've programmed ajax stuff (check out my chess and checkers games. It's definitely brittle if you actually have to write the javascript and parse the xml and convert the xml to java objects manually.
But, using GWT has been a big eye opener for me. You write java code and it's compiled into javascript. It completely turns everything on its head. If you want to communicate some more information to the server from the client, all you need to do is add another method to the remote object (and its interfaces) and you suddenly have another statically type checked rpc call between client and server.
I'll probably still do simple form apps in struts, but I don't intend to ever write another line of javascript that's of any significant complexity. It's no longer necessary. No longer do I need to figure out incompatibilities between browsers. GWT just figures it out.
All these years people have been trying to make a good java webapp framework and GWT comes along and does things in a way that just turns everything on its head. Struts and Tapestry and JSF are all solving the wrong problems. They all try to make it easy to take html forms and retrieve and validate that information.
GWT turns it around and just lets you communicate java objects. I used to be unhappy that I needed to settle for choosing which framework was the least bad. Now I just say to hell with the lot of them except in situations where javascript isn't allowed.
Well no, you don't need to explain your expertise just to post. But, when you say "It doesn't look too obvious to me." with regard to a patent, I think it's only reasonable to expect you to include your level of expertise in the post. When people don't, I just assume they're not experts.
That said, if you are a mathematician then you get the last word. Apparently it really wasn't obvious to other people in the field.
Of course, that doesn't change the fact that it's an algorithm and it shouldn't be possible to patent an algorithm. But, that's another discussion.
Are you a cryptographer or a mathematician? Patents don't need to be obvious to everyone for them to be obvious. They only need to be obvious to an expert in that field.
If 1000 different electrical engineers come up with idea X at the same time, that idea shouldn't be patentable even if the idea is utterly non-obvious to non-engineers.
I never saw the movie, but why couldn't you pop popcorn with a laser? You can pop popcorn over a fire or in a microwave, so apparently all that's required is heat. If a laser heats up a kernel then it'll pop won't it?
Which company is this about?
Personally, I'd have phrased it like this:
"Arnold's first move was to fulfil a campaign pledge and repeal an unpopular tax increase that the legislature put in place to help cover up its irresponsible runaway spending habits."
"Separately, the California legislature once again passed a budget that failed to even attempt to cut spending in order to bring the budget deficit under control. At the same time voters continue their support of these habits by passing referendums that spend money like a drunk teen with his father's credit card."
"In a fit of total irresponsibility, voters also turned down a referendum that would have required their government to operate within a balanced budget."
"Just for fun, voters voted against an anti-gerrymandering law because they like things just the way they are."
I wish more actors would get into politics. Only the worst sort of person devotes their life to being a politician. Actors are able to glide into office on the basis of their popularity. In the past I'd have been annoyed by that, but I now realize that voters rarely vote people into office for good reasons. Paul Graham wrote an essay on how the most attractive candidates usually win. Therefore, it's better to get a wide selection of random people in office than it is to have a consistently bad selection of incumbents who have spent their lives as parasites on society.
Nice. So you define libertarianism as absolutely extreme, thus leaving no place for those of use who want less government but do not want more social laws (Republicans) and do not want more fiscal laws (Democrats).
It's easy to define viewpoints you disagree with to just be extreme. Some of my friends are Democrats who say that sort of thing about Republicans without realizing that they are pretty extreme themselves. The same goes for a few Republicans I know.
Now that I think about it, I realize that you're just a troll. I apologize to the slashdot community for feeding you.
Why does libertarianism have to be extreme while republicans and democrats get to straddle a wide range? Extreme libertarians are anarchists just like extreme republicans are neo-conservatives and extreme democrats are socialists.
Of course things break down in the extreme. All economic, social and political theories break down at the extreme.
It's just a different middle ground. If libertarians ever came to power, they might try to be extreme for a bit, but they'd end up complying with the realities of the world just like every other political party has done. They'd just end up at a different middle ground than those with republican or democratic sensibilities.
If he is only interested in making a quick buck then preventing him from charging will just mean that he won't do it at all.
The only reasonable alternative is to have the university pay him the $2.50 per lecture. The only downside there is price control. He'd only have one buyer (the university) so it'd be difficult to adjust the price to find out how much the lectures are really worth to students.
All cities like that are self selected. If the place is slightly dangerous then a certain subset of the people get out before it gets too bad. That makes it worse because the percentage of people who are dangerous has just gone up as a percentage of the whole.
The cycle repeats until it reaches the point where the only people left are the ones who either like living in that sort of area or people who feel they have no choice but to stay or people who are simply too afraid of change to try to move.
Simply saying that people should move out doesn't address the fact that some people will stay and the place will remain and just get worse.
The only way to make someplace like that better is to do something that attracts normal people back to the area while at the same time boosting the police presence so that these new people feel safe and thus don't leave.
You can see more on screen at high def. If women don't look good at higher resolutions then just don't zoom in as far. Which looks better?
1. video of one woman at low resolution.
2. video of three women zoomed out but with same amount of visual data per woman as #1.
Try taking any video and then zoom out. The picture looks a lot better but you can't see as much. Some old movies (I'm talking non-porn now) just don't have good visual quality. They can be more enjoyable if you just zoom out.
All video looks terrible if you put it on a sufficiently large screen.
A few quick searches turned up this from the UK and this which covers a variety of cases.
I took the time to actually put the data that you linked to into a spreadsheet and then calculated the correlation coefficient. It turned out to be -0.01.
Assuming those data sets actually coincide time-wise, that appears to mean that there's no simple link between those two values. I wouldn't necessarily expect a direct causal link given the many variables involved in unemployment, but I'm surprised that there's no correlation at all.
I'd be interested in looking at that correlation over time. For instance, if we run these numbers every year for the last hundred years, is there ever a correlation? Perhaps the correlation is low during certain periods of time (perhaps when the economy is good) while it is much higher in others (perhaps when the economy is bad).
If anyone else wants to run the numbers, you can view them at: UnemploymentMinWage
I tried pasting them into this message, but the spam filter wouldn't let it through.
*smile* If it helps, I have embroidery files for space invaders and pacman designs that I made.
Here you can get my designs for Berzerk, Centipede, and Pong.
Thanks! That's what I needed to know.
So now I know it's legal for me to crack the program to make it work without a dongle. Now I just need to figure out how to get someone reputable to crack it for me.
It's the program I need, not the files. The program will open up gif or jpg or png files and then convert them into a file format for my programmable embroidery machine. It's not a simple thing to do. It has to create a path for the thread to go which makes the resulting design look good when it's sewn out.
The file format it converts into is readable by other programs as well as my machine, so there's no problem there.
Are you saying that it's actually legal for me to buy a cracked version of the software because I already own a legal but non-working version of it?
The people doing the selling aren't selling converters. They're actually selling cracked versions of the program. The program requires a dongle to run. I have the dongle, but it stopped working when the company went under. I'm pretty sure that even if it's legal for me to buy the cracked version, it probably isn't legal for them to sell it (despite the fact that the company went under and the product isn't being sold at all anymore). But, I guess that's not my problem.