You'll have better luck trotting that one out to someone who hasn't gone on record as saying OSX sucks.
It was just a jab pointed at defensive bigmouths.
Anyway, if you're printing when it isn't absolutely necessary you're doing it wrong.
And if buying a device which doesn't support printing will help you reduce paperwork you're doing it very very wrong. Not that the iPad is something that's fit for the office anyway.
Megapixels are meaningless. It still has a crappy fixed plastic lens with no focusing ability. In fact, considering that high resolution sensors perform worse in low-light conditions it will only make the small size more problematic.
I could list a hundred good uses, but how about you just shut up questioning how other people use their machines and stop trying to tell people what's good for them?
Writing evolves over generations. What it looks like depends on the tools used and the motivations of the writer. Some of it looks beautiful, much of it doesn't.
Most of history however didn't use what we currently call "cursive", but simply an alphabet with strokes that were adapted to writing with a quill.
But the cursive scripts we teach 8 year olds today can't be written with a quill. And written with a fine-tipped pen they look really ugly too.
Don't get me wrong, there's a place for cursive scripts. It just isn't the classroom. It's not worth putting the simplified writing systems that were conceived by elementary school teachers some time in the last century on a pedestal.
Obviously it would be best if everyone put some thought into their own writing style, but most just unquestioningly continue to use the system that was indoctrinated to them since they were 6.
Have you ever tried otherwise? After I changed to writing block letters I was able to write at least almost as fast and the characters were always legible. With cursive my hand would hurt faster, I would actively have to avoid ambiguities (even going as far as crossing out words multiple times till I was completely happy) and it looks butt-ugly if I try to write with any speed. And this is coming from someone who learned cursive script at six years old, used it all through school and the better part of his life since.
With typefaces it's all about character recognition, an in a larger extent word recognition. That's why monospaced fonts are more difficult to read, and all caps requires more concentration. So while Fraktur is indeed more complicated the truth is that if you spent some time reading the texts you would quickly get used to it. Back when it was common, people did in fact find it more difficult reading latin letters.
The three months is a conservative guess. And you're over-simplifying the issue. You can certainly learn the characters in a day or two, but the difficulty is in understanding how the language is encoded to script. When characters are grouped they are pronounced completely differently than on their own.
Nobody ever had any illusions about signatures being secure or that it proves identity. It's merely a form of documentation or record keeping to prevent common errors. You still rely on face-to-face or other documents for identification. I've never heard of anybody being denied payment or service because they can't reproduce a signature alone.
I don't think arguing endlessly over common usage is really helpful. I've never seen a definition that you couldn't punch holes through. People get the biggest impression from images. That's why when they see robots and planets on the cover they think "Sci-Fi shit" and when they see dungeons and dragons it's "fantasy shit". Maybe we should all embrace this simple usage and use more descriptive terms when we want to be more specific. Your defintion certainly excludes the majority of works traditionally considered Sci-Fi, but if you define "Hard SF" as a sub-category of science fiction you can distinguish it from thematically similar works.
Virtually all fantasy fiction works that way, and it's one of the things that distinguishes it from traditional legends and fairy-tales. Many of them love to draw on alchemy for inspiration, some of it every bit as detailed and thorough as most science fiction.
To be fair that can be thought with Java and on modern machines. You can do enough resource wasting with BASIC interpreter too. And in all honesty, how relevant is it to be copying Assembler routines on architectures that haven't even heard of floating point numbers? If you want to learn obscure architectures there are plenty of emulators which will do the job.
With Ink however you will generally get much less use than what you calculate because apart from office-environments most people will go many weeks without running out, which means that some of the ink will dry up. Some people will only print a handfull of pages before they find out their ink is ruined. Unused toner will keep for many months or years and are much more reliable.
For Bulk printing I would guess that a nice continuous ink system would be most effective, but then again inkjet printer wear out much quicker.
They're not. And they don't even need to be in light of how effective advertising can be. Or would you like to point to a verdict that found otherwise?
What they can do is protect a trademark, which can also apply in varying degrees to the shape and design of the product if it is particularly unique.
He's correct. They aren't. Any food engineer could look at a product and it's packaging and tell you how it's done. Even calling it reverse-engineering is a bit of a push.
It's all about the brand for packaged food companies. That's why there are so many commercials for breakfast cereals and candy to convince people that only real Coco-Pops taste like Coco-Pops.
There have been many psychological studies to show just how stupid and gullible people are in this regard.
It's sensitive to protocol (e.g. gaming vs. HTTP/HTTPS/etc), not to the identity of the party on the other end (e.g. MSNBC vs. Fox News or YouTube vs. Dailymotion).
Have you got a source for that? They don't seem to want to explain what the premium is exactly for on their site.
Untrue. Networks can be expanded long before proper uses emerge. Having a 2Mbps connection back in the 90's and early 2000s, you didn't know what to do with all the bandwidth. The best Idea people had was file sharing, but there was still absolutely no way you were going to max out your connection. These networks had been designed to offer these next-generation video and audio service, but no-one seemed interested.
Actually this is exactly the kind of abuse that Net Neutrality laws are trying to tackle. The ISP will try and come up with excuses to make it sound reasonable ("Yeah, our VOIP service is like totally separate from our Internet service." or "It would be super hard for us to do this for competitors), but at the end day your ISP is using the open (and considerably cheaper) infrastructure of the Internet to offer a phone service (which they make a killing on by the way) with a high reliability, yet they deny the same kind of reliability to their unbundled competitors. This isn't like the plain old telephone service, where voiceband signals are processed by separate infrastructure, this is like having one traffic lane and asking everyone else to pull over as soon as the highway operators taxi service comes down the road at top speed.
The VOIP services of ISP also always happen to be priced totally inappropriately for a VOIP service. They follow the price models of POTS services and even fucking prevent you from connecting to other networks. No sane person or business would ever choose them, only the suckers who don't know any better when they order their internet connection. So we have: Bundling Price Gouging directly harming competition It's one of the most extreme examples of anti-competitive behavior we've ever seen.
You're ignoring the condition. Net neutrality means that you don't discriminate between identical services. Prioritizing either gaming or VOIP traffic over video certainly wouldn't be giving anyone an advantage. Only prioritizing certain "business partners" games however would. The amount of traffic caused by games and VOIP is minimal compared to that of Video.
It depends on what you consider impossible to mean. Atomic scale electronic devices are certainly feasible, but it certainly won't be the kind of electronics or processes that Moore would have been thinking of. Atomic distances are around 0.1 nanometers, so a 22nm cell is about 200 atoms wide. And a cell contains multiple components, so the actual elementary components are even smaller. Matter doesn't behave deterministically on these scales. But boolean logic requires it. There are theoretical ways to work around this, but it would certainly be a radically different way of designing electronics. In other words it won't be a classical transistor.
Computers will continue to get better and faster, but Moore's original law about transistor density won't be able to stand for very long any more.
Thing is Windows Commander is obviously referring to the Microsoft product, wheras as the word "Window" is a common word in computing for a certain GUI element. If someone were to sell satellite receivers as "Sky Butler" they would have a similar point.
Website changes it's URI and you can't find out what it was? You're screwed? Someone knows you use the tool? You're screwed (At least as much as you would be without it). And you'll probably lose them all at once by havin a Master Password.
Password Managers are the only sane way of creating and keeping track of secure passwords. They're not bulletproof but a hell of a lot better than some of the weird-ass "tips" people give you and other obscurities.
Maybe you just put too much faith in government regulation. This probably won't surprise you now, but the government is not liable for people who harm themselves. The main person responsible for your safety is yourself. Don't assume that just because something can be sold means that it's safe and harmless in every way.
Look.. I grew up with the knowledge that the FDA, or the government, made sure that food was healthy and could not be sold otherwise.
Problem being that there is no black and white line between "healthy" and "unhealthy" like lifestyle mags sometimes make out. The fact that alcohol in unhealthy doesn't make the government stop people from buying it if they want to.
Research beyond the can? Just what kind of research could you have done before the Internet? Called the manufacturer? Sure to be an unbiased source. Pay for a doctor's visit (some people don't have health insurance you know... in fact millions of Americans) to discuss all of your grocery purchase decisions?
How about the common-sense advice of "don't make extrem dietary choices", and if you still do, don't complain if it fucks you up.
What part of I don't have health insurance do you not understand?
And that prevents you from asking a doctor how? As I said, you're responsible for your own safety. So stop coming up with excuses.
After it was clear to me that mercury had always been present in the fish and that the FDA allowed it to continue, along with what I had heard about water quality in general (MTBE), I felt that instead of trusting the tap water and bottled water companies my safest bet was to research water purification techniques and hardware and purify my own water.
You can get a detailed analysis from every water board or supplier which will tell you mineral contents and germ counts. They are tested regularly and rigerously. You can then decide for yourself whether you want to drink it or not. I would trust that more than my own knowledge and ressources to purify water. What if you get some nasty disease from contaimnation in your equipment? What if it's some elementary error in operating such equipment? Are you going to blame the FDA and the manufacturer for allowing you to purchase something and not making it idiot-proof? Will you point out that while it's common knowledge that drinking water requires regular and expensive testing for contamination, there are a lot of poeple who don't know that?
P.S - I think it is fair to characterize your opinion of my ignorance as an opinion of nutrition labels in general. So is everybody who relies on this information also gobsmackingly foolhardy ignorant?
It's more of an opinion on people who try the latest fad diets like "I'll live off nothing but canned Tuna to lose weight" and expect someone from the government to swipe the can out of their hand.
Slashdot Mirror
You'll have better luck trotting that one out to someone who hasn't gone on record as saying OSX sucks.
It was just a jab pointed at defensive bigmouths.
Anyway, if you're printing when it isn't absolutely necessary you're doing it wrong.
And if buying a device which doesn't support printing will help you reduce paperwork you're doing it very very wrong.
Not that the iPad is something that's fit for the office anyway.
Megapixels are meaningless. It still has a crappy fixed plastic lens with no focusing ability. In fact, considering that high resolution sensors perform worse in low-light conditions it will only make the small size more problematic.
I could list a hundred good uses, but how about you just shut up questioning how other people use their machines and stop trying to tell people what's good for them?
Trust an Apple fanboy to question printing....
Writing evolves over generations. What it looks like depends on the tools used and the motivations of the writer. Some of it looks beautiful, much of it doesn't.
Most of history however didn't use what we currently call "cursive", but simply an alphabet with strokes that were adapted to writing with a quill.
But the cursive scripts we teach 8 year olds today can't be written with a quill. And written with a fine-tipped pen they look really ugly too.
Don't get me wrong, there's a place for cursive scripts. It just isn't the classroom. It's not worth putting the simplified writing systems that were conceived by elementary school teachers some time in the last century on a pedestal.
Obviously it would be best if everyone put some thought into their own writing style, but most just unquestioningly continue to use the system that was indoctrinated to them since they were 6.
Have you ever tried otherwise? After I changed to writing block letters I was able to write at least almost as fast and the characters were always legible. With cursive my hand would hurt faster, I would actively have to avoid ambiguities (even going as far as crossing out words multiple times till I was completely happy) and it looks butt-ugly if I try to write with any speed. And this is coming from someone who learned cursive script at six years old, used it all through school and the better part of his life since.
With typefaces it's all about character recognition, an in a larger extent word recognition. That's why monospaced fonts are more difficult to read, and all caps requires more concentration. So while Fraktur is indeed more complicated the truth is that if you spent some time reading the texts you would quickly get used to it. Back when it was common, people did in fact find it more difficult reading latin letters.
The three months is a conservative guess.
And you're over-simplifying the issue. You can certainly learn the characters in a day or two, but the difficulty is in understanding how the language is encoded to script. When characters are grouped they are pronounced completely differently than on their own.
Nobody ever had any illusions about signatures being secure or that it proves identity. It's merely a form of documentation or record keeping to prevent common errors. You still rely on face-to-face or other documents for identification. I've never heard of anybody being denied payment or service because they can't reproduce a signature alone.
I don't think arguing endlessly over common usage is really helpful. I've never seen a definition that you couldn't punch holes through. People get the biggest impression from images. That's why when they see robots and planets on the cover they think "Sci-Fi shit" and when they see dungeons and dragons it's "fantasy shit".
Maybe we should all embrace this simple usage and use more descriptive terms when we want to be more specific.
Your defintion certainly excludes the majority of works traditionally considered Sci-Fi, but if you define "Hard SF" as a sub-category of science fiction you can distinguish it from thematically similar works.
Virtually all fantasy fiction works that way, and it's one of the things that distinguishes it from traditional legends and fairy-tales. Many of them love to draw on alchemy for inspiration, some of it every bit as detailed and thorough as most science fiction.
To be fair that can be thought with Java and on modern machines. You can do enough resource wasting with BASIC interpreter too.
And in all honesty, how relevant is it to be copying Assembler routines on architectures that haven't even heard of floating point numbers?
If you want to learn obscure architectures there are plenty of emulators which will do the job.
With Ink however you will generally get much less use than what you calculate because apart from office-environments most people will go many weeks without running out, which means that some of the ink will dry up. Some people will only print a handfull of pages before they find out their ink is ruined.
Unused toner will keep for many months or years and are much more reliable.
For Bulk printing I would guess that a nice continuous ink system would be most effective, but then again inkjet printer wear out much quicker.
They're not. And they don't even need to be in light of how effective advertising can be. Or would you like to point to a verdict that found otherwise?
What they can do is protect a trademark, which can also apply in varying degrees to the shape and design of the product if it is particularly unique.
He's correct. They aren't. Any food engineer could look at a product and it's packaging and tell you how it's done. Even calling it reverse-engineering is a bit of a push.
It's all about the brand for packaged food companies. That's why there are so many commercials for breakfast cereals and candy to convince people that only real Coco-Pops taste like Coco-Pops.
There have been many psychological studies to show just how stupid and gullible people are in this regard.
It's sensitive to protocol (e.g. gaming vs. HTTP/HTTPS/etc), not to the identity of the party on the other end (e.g. MSNBC vs. Fox News or YouTube vs. Dailymotion).
Have you got a source for that? They don't seem to want to explain what the premium is exactly for on their site.
Untrue. Networks can be expanded long before proper uses emerge. Having a 2Mbps connection back in the 90's and early 2000s, you didn't know what to do with all the bandwidth. The best Idea people had was file sharing, but there was still absolutely no way you were going to max out your connection.
These networks had been designed to offer these next-generation video and audio service, but no-one seemed interested.
Actually this is exactly the kind of abuse that Net Neutrality laws are trying to tackle. The ISP will try and come up with excuses to make it sound reasonable ("Yeah, our VOIP service is like totally separate from our Internet service." or "It would be super hard for us to do this for competitors), but at the end day your ISP is using the open (and considerably cheaper) infrastructure of the Internet to offer a phone service (which they make a killing on by the way) with a high reliability, yet they deny the same kind of reliability to their unbundled competitors.
This isn't like the plain old telephone service, where voiceband signals are processed by separate infrastructure, this is like having one traffic lane and asking everyone else to pull over as soon as the highway operators taxi service comes down the road at top speed.
The VOIP services of ISP also always happen to be priced totally inappropriately for a VOIP service. They follow the price models of POTS services and even fucking prevent you from connecting to other networks. No sane person or business would ever choose them, only the suckers who don't know any better when they order their internet connection.
So we have:
Bundling
Price Gouging
directly harming competition
It's one of the most extreme examples of anti-competitive behavior we've ever seen.
You're ignoring the condition. Net neutrality means that you don't discriminate between identical services.
Prioritizing either gaming or VOIP traffic over video certainly wouldn't be giving anyone an advantage. Only prioritizing certain "business partners" games however would.
The amount of traffic caused by games and VOIP is minimal compared to that of Video.
It's a light water reactor. So Chernobyl can't happen.
It depends on what you consider impossible to mean. Atomic scale electronic devices are certainly feasible, but it certainly won't be the kind of electronics or processes that Moore would have been thinking of. Atomic distances are around 0.1 nanometers, so a 22nm cell is about 200 atoms wide. And a cell contains multiple components, so the actual elementary components are even smaller.
Matter doesn't behave deterministically on these scales. But boolean logic requires it. There are theoretical ways to work around this, but it would certainly be a radically different way of designing electronics. In other words it won't be a classical transistor.
Computers will continue to get better and faster, but Moore's original law about transistor density won't be able to stand for very long any more.
Thing is Windows Commander is obviously referring to the Microsoft product, wheras as the word "Window" is a common word in computing for a certain GUI element. If someone were to sell satellite receivers as "Sky Butler" they would have a similar point.
Website changes it's URI and you can't find out what it was? You're screwed?
Someone knows you use the tool? You're screwed (At least as much as you would be without it). And you'll probably lose them all at once by havin a Master Password.
Password Managers are the only sane way of creating and keeping track of secure passwords. They're not bulletproof but a hell of a lot better than some of the weird-ass "tips" people give you and other obscurities.
Actually it's a pretty good excuse:
"What's this on you phone?"
"Oh yeah, that. Some stupid Vodafone app that you can't remove. Don't worry, I'll never use it"
Live with the consequences of your ignorance and don't blame other people. If you think that's a platitude, then tough.
Maybe you just put too much faith in government regulation. This probably won't surprise you now, but the government is not liable for people who harm themselves. The main person responsible for your safety is yourself. Don't assume that just because something can be sold means that it's safe and harmless in every way.
Look.. I grew up with the knowledge that the FDA, or the government, made sure that food was healthy and could not be sold otherwise.
Problem being that there is no black and white line between "healthy" and "unhealthy" like lifestyle mags sometimes make out.
The fact that alcohol in unhealthy doesn't make the government stop people from buying it if they want to.
Research beyond the can? Just what kind of research could you have done before the Internet? Called the manufacturer? Sure to be an unbiased source. Pay for a doctor's visit (some people don't have health insurance you know... in fact millions of Americans) to discuss all of your grocery purchase decisions?
How about the common-sense advice of "don't make extrem dietary choices", and if you still do, don't complain if it fucks you up.
What part of I don't have health insurance do you not understand?
And that prevents you from asking a doctor how? As I said, you're responsible for your own safety. So stop coming up with excuses.
After it was clear to me that mercury had always been present in the fish and that the FDA allowed it to continue, along with what I had heard about water quality in general (MTBE), I felt that instead of trusting the tap water and bottled water companies my safest bet was to research water purification techniques and hardware and purify my own water.
You can get a detailed analysis from every water board or supplier which will tell you mineral contents and germ counts. They are tested regularly and rigerously. You can then decide for yourself whether you want to drink it or not.
I would trust that more than my own knowledge and ressources to purify water. What if you get some nasty disease from contaimnation in your equipment? What if it's some elementary error in operating such equipment? Are you going to blame the FDA and the manufacturer for allowing you to purchase something and not making it idiot-proof? Will you point out that while it's common knowledge that drinking water requires regular and expensive testing for contamination, there are a lot of poeple who don't know that?
P.S - I think it is fair to characterize your opinion of my ignorance as an opinion of nutrition labels in general. So is everybody who relies on this information also gobsmackingly foolhardy ignorant?
It's more of an opinion on people who try the latest fad diets like "I'll live off nothing but canned Tuna to lose weight" and expect someone from the government to swipe the can out of their hand.