"Breaking habits and protocols is a very good habit to get into. Habit in any venue is about unflinching acceptance of a set of presuppositons."
Yet, there are habits that are good for the individual. I would guess that this mechanism of habit formation evolved because it provided an advantage -- such as being able to hunt more efficiently, or being able to perform repetitive tasks without devoting too much brainpower to them, like gutting fish, skinning rodents, or winnowing grain. This still holds true today -- it allows multi-tasking more efficiently.
If the presuppositions that your habits are based on are correct, then the habit you've developed could be the most efficient way of doing something. And the amount of work put into finding a better way of doing something may be greater than the relative advantage of the new way of doing it.
The presumption you're working from here is that we should each be as inventive or creative as possible... which I'm not so sure is correct. I'd bet that net production for a group is at it's highest when there are plenty of drones and a few especially-suited-for-it innovators.
Not to bitch too much, but I love the fact that redundancy mod points are used on posts that are earlier to comparable posts. Before marking something redundant, check out the posting time of all the comments. Or, even better, sort the posts by posting time, rather than by thread or rating.
Feel free to mod my parent into oblivion, if you like. Or this one. But redundancy usually applies to the latter of two similar posts.
"Now maybe since the thing looks prettier, they'll start working on adding some revolutionary functionality"
Well, that's a problem. If you decide to add functionality, especially revolutionary functionality, after you've fleshed out your framework and GUI, then you have weird-ass code that isn't cohesive, nor coherent. You should start with the functionality, and finish with the bells and whistles.
But from the summary, I'm pretty sure I'm not missing anything -- just an overview of a new skin for Windows and Windows Media Player. Maybe some changes to the UI,too, that go past skin-depth.
What I really want to know about the next build of Vista is whether or not it's even close to what the final build will be. Well, not the final build (which won't exist until they stop supporting it and releasing patches), but the build at release.
Yuo're still dealing with unnecessary bloat. It doesn't make any sense to have to insert code to deal with a dozen formats for data, or to create conversion utilities.
The whole point of a standard is to increase efficiency by eliminating the need to reinvent the wheel.
What you are talking about is not standards at all. Have each company create its own standard, and then have everyone else implement code to translate their format into the native format used by an app? That's not a standard at all, that's proprietary formats that people happen to share the code for. Every time you have a new company, you'd need to go back and insert new code into your post-market software.
I understand what you are saying, that adhering to a standard stifles innovation, or causes people to waste resources by working with that standard if it's not optimal.
Sure, sometimes the standard is not the best option available. Look at Betamax and VHS -- most experts now would agree that Betamax was a better format than VHS. However, because more people adopted VHS, the video publishers (which equate to developers, here) published their content solely in VHS after a while -- it became the standard.
"That is what you get when you have average developers of average ability following the average standard.""
But we are talking about the noun, standard. Not the adjective.
The article isn't talking about the average developer of average ability. Nor is it possible to have an average standard -- standard is a binary variable.
"So just code all the 'standards' into your program so that it just fu*king works! , regardless of what is or becomes the 'standard'. Please spare your customers all the BS excuses as to why the program that they bought doesn't function correctly."
Yes, and all developers, even small startups with possibly innovative products, have the resources to code the thousands of lines necessary.
And, of course, apps are only developed for PCs.
Let's make sure we have as much code bloat as possible when bringing new apps to the market.
Hell, for that matter, why can't my toaster, my microwave, my computer and all its peripherals all have two plugs, one for American outlets and one for European outlets? And also, have a huge battery case in case I wanted to string together a bunch of 6-volt batteries?
For that matter, why do we use TCP/IP? Why can't every computer be capable of reading every method of transmitting data via electric pulse?
/sarcasm off
Why would you think that introducing inefficiency would be the best solution?
Assuming a normal distribution on the bell curve, aiming for "standard" is to aim right for the big, juicy middle of the curve. Doesn't that mean you're aiming for average overall?
No. Did you read the article, and understand any of it? If you did, maybe you'd understand what is meant by "standard."
A standard, in this context, is not a statistical point or distribution of points that falls on a bell curve. It is not the "average" level of quality, it's not even a measurement of quality. It is, instead, a set of criteria that is generally accepted by consensus of the community. Typically, this is to allow interoperability and product substitution capacity, and is necessary for consumer adoption of new technology.
Look at Betamax vs. VHS, for example. Would it do you any good, as a movie distributor, to create a new standard for videocassette content delivery that is better than Betamax or VHS? Because VHS is only "average"?
To take that a step further, say you are developing what you hope to be the next "standard" for in-home movie content delivery, the Laserdisc. Would it make sense for you to develop an entirely new interface between the TV and your device, when most of your potential customers already have televisions that have coaxial cable connectors?
Standard != average. Standard = used by the majority.
First, read my post. It's the little phrase "in principle" that you appear to be ignoring.
Second, in practice: An 'AO' rating is sure to hurt sales for games; therefore publishers tone down the content to avoid the 'AO'rating; therefore, indirect censoring has occurred.
If you believe that published game content has not been altered by the ESRB rating system, then you are living in a dream world.
I'm not saying that the ESRB is a 'bad thing' -- I'm just saying that it is, in effect, censoring -- and that teh threat of government action is what caused its implementation.
Absolutely. Although one of the nice side effects of the legal campaign has been "free" marketing... the perception that they couldn't compete due to unfair trade practices, rather than inferior products, helps them with public perception.
"however, upon doing the math, one can see that the ISS has roughly 9 months of orbit still in front of it."
Not really. Falling velocity is not linear with respect to distance. Remember F = G*M(a)*M(b) / r^2. Also, there will be increased drag as altitude drops and atmospheric density increases. So, that roughly 1km/day drop now will be much higher 10 weeks from now.
If you were to graph downward velocity as a function of time (including the calculations relating to changing drag and gravitational acceleration), you'd find that there is an 'elbow' in the curve, like any exponential or logarithmic function... this is the area where the fall becomes drastic. Not having done the calcs myself, I'd assume from TFA that this will occur sometime around 300km altitude.
Not saying that TFA isn't a bit alarmist, but we don't really have 9 months. And considering the time needed to prep a launch, 9 months isn't that long anyway.
In the long run, Dell is going to lose customer base if they do not offer better solutions. Evenutally, demonstrable cost savings for using AMD chips will convince companies to leave Dell.
"I really wanted a higher-performance dual core AMD computer but when I was pricing those out, the price of the upgrade to a dual core AMD *ALONE* was around the price of my entire Dell computer."
That's not because of AMD's pricing, that's because of Dell's pricing. Dell's standard configuration templates are based on Intel chips, so subbing in another brand takes it out of the regular production line.
Try HP for cheaper AMD dual-core processors. I'm sure there are other MFGRs out there, but if you're buying from Dell, then HP should be a good alternative for you.
Got through several pages of the benchmarking before it appeared/.ed.
First concern is that though the chip has been released, motherboards configured for it aren't close to release yet. I'd rather see it benchmarked as distributed, since that's what really matters to the end user.
Second concern is power usage and heat production. If you can't make a chip as powerful as your competitors, you better make sure it is not as expensive to operate. Really, why would someone choose to use a chip that is less powerful, intrinsically costs more to operate, and costs more to cool? Chips are cheap enough that the operating costs are often now more expensive than initial cost.
Your point is still valid, though, since 24-pin NLQ printers took over for the 9-pin printers until thermal printers really hit their stride. 24-pin dot-matrix impact printers (supposedly) had 360 x 360 dpi resolution, although the fonts were only 360 x 180 at best. Still far higher than 100 dpi, though.
" 100dpi = FAX resolution (low-quality)
144dpi = dot matrix
This technology will have to get a little better if it ever goes widespread."
Well, that depends on the intended use of the technology. If it is meant to be used to create presentation-quality displays, then sure. But for any other text-based documents, then 100dpi is no problem.
And by dot-matrix, I assume you mean inkjet/laserjet etc, not dot-matrix impact printers, which have dpis far, far lower.
"5)For the tin-foil hat folks - well some asteroid is bound to destroy us eventually, it would be nice if we were say spread out on different planets."
That's not a tin-foil hat issue, unless of course, as we all know is true, "They" are conspiring to guide the asteroid into Earth for their own nefarious purposes, like destroying civilization on Earth so that they can recolonize from their bases on the moon and Mars.
Asteroid impact on Earth is more of an issue for the FUD-mongerers who are media whores.
Please don't think that those of us who wear tin-foil hats are media whores like the asteroid impact people. We're far better than that;)
I'm not positive whether the letter can be considered 'published' just because it was addressed to the chief of police in Seattle. Many localities have laws protecting the privacy of such complaints, since there could be a fear of reprisal in some circumstances. Although, I don't know if that applies in this instance, or in Seattle.
Slashdot Mirror
"Breaking habits and protocols is a very good habit to get into. Habit in any venue is about unflinching acceptance of a set of presuppositons."
Yet, there are habits that are good for the individual. I would guess that this mechanism of habit formation evolved because it provided an advantage -- such as being able to hunt more efficiently, or being able to perform repetitive tasks without devoting too much brainpower to them, like gutting fish, skinning rodents, or winnowing grain. This still holds true today -- it allows multi-tasking more efficiently.
If the presuppositions that your habits are based on are correct, then the habit you've developed could be the most efficient way of doing something. And the amount of work put into finding a better way of doing something may be greater than the relative advantage of the new way of doing it.
The presumption you're working from here is that we should each be as inventive or creative as possible... which I'm not so sure is correct. I'd bet that net production for a group is at it's highest when there are plenty of drones and a few especially-suited-for-it innovators.
Not to bitch too much, but I love the fact that redundancy mod points are used on posts that are earlier to comparable posts. Before marking something redundant, check out the posting time of all the comments. Or, even better, sort the posts by posting time, rather than by thread or rating.
Feel free to mod my parent into oblivion, if you like. Or this one. But redundancy usually applies to the latter of two similar posts.
"Now maybe since the thing looks prettier, they'll start working on adding some revolutionary functionality"
Well, that's a problem. If you decide to add functionality, especially revolutionary functionality, after you've fleshed out your framework and GUI, then you have weird-ass code that isn't cohesive, nor coherent. You should start with the functionality, and finish with the bells and whistles.
Appears to be /.ed with zero comments.
But from the summary, I'm pretty sure I'm not missing anything -- just an overview of a new skin for Windows and Windows Media Player. Maybe some changes to the UI,too, that go past skin-depth.
What I really want to know about the next build of Vista is whether or not it's even close to what the final build will be. Well, not the final build (which won't exist until they stop supporting it and releasing patches), but the build at release.
Yuo're still dealing with unnecessary bloat. It doesn't make any sense to have to insert code to deal with a dozen formats for data, or to create conversion utilities.
The whole point of a standard is to increase efficiency by eliminating the need to reinvent the wheel.
What you are talking about is not standards at all. Have each company create its own standard, and then have everyone else implement code to translate their format into the native format used by an app? That's not a standard at all, that's proprietary formats that people happen to share the code for. Every time you have a new company, you'd need to go back and insert new code into your post-market software.
And "tilting" doesn't really mean "preparing." To tilt is to joust.
The goal is to reach 120 Mbs. This was more of a proof-of-concept than a get-ready-to-deploy experiment.
Yes, it's a corporate site, but scroll down the site for some good links to follow to learn about HAPs and their use as communications infrastructure.
http://www.elec.york.ac.uk/comms/haps.html
I understand what you are saying, that adhering to a standard stifles innovation, or causes people to waste resources by working with that standard if it's not optimal.
Sure, sometimes the standard is not the best option available. Look at Betamax and VHS -- most experts now would agree that Betamax was a better format than VHS. However, because more people adopted VHS, the video publishers (which equate to developers, here) published their content solely in VHS after a while -- it became the standard.
"That is what you get when you have average developers of average ability following the average standard.""
But we are talking about the noun, standard. Not the adjective.
The article isn't talking about the average developer of average ability. Nor is it possible to have an average standard -- standard is a binary variable.
Something is the/a standard, or it is not.
"So just code all the 'standards' into your program so that it just fu*king works! , regardless of what is or becomes the 'standard'. Please spare your customers all the BS excuses as to why the program that they bought doesn't function correctly."
/sarcasm off
Yes, and all developers, even small startups with possibly innovative products, have the resources to code the thousands of lines necessary.
And, of course, apps are only developed for PCs.
Let's make sure we have as much code bloat as possible when bringing new apps to the market.
Hell, for that matter, why can't my toaster, my microwave, my computer and all its peripherals all have two plugs, one for American outlets and one for European outlets? And also, have a huge battery case in case I wanted to string together a bunch of 6-volt batteries?
For that matter, why do we use TCP/IP? Why can't every computer be capable of reading every method of transmitting data via electric pulse?
Why would you think that introducing inefficiency would be the best solution?
Assuming a normal distribution on the bell curve, aiming for "standard" is to aim right for the big, juicy middle of the curve. Doesn't that mean you're aiming for average overall?
No. Did you read the article, and understand any of it? If you did, maybe you'd understand what is meant by "standard."
A standard, in this context, is not a statistical point or distribution of points that falls on a bell curve. It is not the "average" level of quality, it's not even a measurement of quality. It is, instead, a set of criteria that is generally accepted by consensus of the community. Typically, this is to allow interoperability and product substitution capacity, and is necessary for consumer adoption of new technology.
Look at Betamax vs. VHS, for example. Would it do you any good, as a movie distributor, to create a new standard for videocassette content delivery that is better than Betamax or VHS? Because VHS is only "average"?
To take that a step further, say you are developing what you hope to be the next "standard" for in-home movie content delivery, the Laserdisc. Would it make sense for you to develop an entirely new interface between the TV and your device, when most of your potential customers already have televisions that have coaxial cable connectors?
Standard != average. Standard = used by the majority.
First, read my post. It's the little phrase "in principle" that you appear to be ignoring.
Second, in practice: An 'AO' rating is sure to hurt sales for games; therefore publishers tone down the content to avoid the 'AO'rating; therefore, indirect censoring has occurred.
If you believe that published game content has not been altered by the ESRB rating system, then you are living in a dream world.
I'm not saying that the ESRB is a 'bad thing' -- I'm just saying that it is, in effect, censoring -- and that teh threat of government action is what caused its implementation.
They are not talking about how long it will take for the orbit to decay at 300km. They are talking about how long for the ISS itself to decay.
Absolutely. Although one of the nice side effects of the legal campaign has been "free" marketing... the perception that they couldn't compete due to unfair trade practices, rather than inferior products, helps them with public perception.
Except that the game industry adopted the ESRB system because of the threat of government censorship.
In principal, this is just as much government censorship as direct censorship by government is.
"however, upon doing the math, one can see that the ISS has roughly 9 months of orbit still in front of it."
Not really. Falling velocity is not linear with respect to distance. Remember F = G*M(a)*M(b) / r^2. Also, there will be increased drag as altitude drops and atmospheric density increases. So, that roughly 1km/day drop now will be much higher 10 weeks from now.
If you were to graph downward velocity as a function of time (including the calculations relating to changing drag and gravitational acceleration), you'd find that there is an 'elbow' in the curve, like any exponential or logarithmic function... this is the area where the fall becomes drastic. Not having done the calcs myself, I'd assume from TFA that this will occur sometime around 300km altitude.
Not saying that TFA isn't a bit alarmist, but we don't really have 9 months. And considering the time needed to prep a launch, 9 months isn't that long anyway.
Part of that will just take time to change. Demonstrable cost savings mean something to the PHBs... especially if they can present it to their PHBs.
Although, I do think AMD could do a better job of advertising to the masses... which would definitely help with mindshare.
In the long run, Dell is going to lose customer base if they do not offer better solutions. Evenutally, demonstrable cost savings for using AMD chips will convince companies to leave Dell.
"I really wanted a higher-performance dual core AMD computer but when I was pricing those out, the price of the upgrade to a dual core AMD *ALONE* was around the price of my entire Dell computer."
That's not because of AMD's pricing, that's because of Dell's pricing. Dell's standard configuration templates are based on Intel chips, so subbing in another brand takes it out of the regular production line.
Try HP for cheaper AMD dual-core processors. I'm sure there are other MFGRs out there, but if you're buying from Dell, then HP should be a good alternative for you.
Got through several pages of the benchmarking before it appeared /.ed.
First concern is that though the chip has been released, motherboards configured for it aren't close to release yet. I'd rather see it benchmarked as distributed, since that's what really matters to the end user.
Second concern is power usage and heat production. If you can't make a chip as powerful as your competitors, you better make sure it is not as expensive to operate. Really, why would someone choose to use a chip that is less powerful, intrinsically costs more to operate, and costs more to cool? Chips are cheap enough that the operating costs are often now more expensive than initial cost.
Your point is still valid, though, since 24-pin NLQ printers took over for the 9-pin printers until thermal printers really hit their stride. 24-pin dot-matrix impact printers (supposedly) had 360 x 360 dpi resolution, although the fonts were only 360 x 180 at best. Still far higher than 100 dpi, though.
" 100dpi = FAX resolution (low-quality)
144dpi = dot matrix
This technology will have to get a little better if it ever goes widespread."
Well, that depends on the intended use of the technology. If it is meant to be used to create presentation-quality displays, then sure. But for any other text-based documents, then 100dpi is no problem.
And by dot-matrix, I assume you mean inkjet/laserjet etc, not dot-matrix impact printers, which have dpis far, far lower.
"5)For the tin-foil hat folks - well some asteroid is bound to destroy us eventually, it would be nice if we were say spread out on different planets."
;)
That's not a tin-foil hat issue, unless of course, as we all know is true, "They" are conspiring to guide the asteroid into Earth for their own nefarious purposes, like destroying civilization on Earth so that they can recolonize from their bases on the moon and Mars.
Asteroid impact on Earth is more of an issue for the FUD-mongerers who are media whores.
Please don't think that those of us who wear tin-foil hats are media whores like the asteroid impact people. We're far better than that
Niche != ecosystem.
Within that ESS are many, many niches filled by one or more species. In nature, the tendency is for one species to dominate each niche.
I wasn't referring to domination of an ecosystem at all.
I'm not positive whether the letter can be considered 'published' just because it was addressed to the chief of police in Seattle. Many localities have laws protecting the privacy of such complaints, since there could be a fear of reprisal in some circumstances. Although, I don't know if that applies in this instance, or in Seattle.