"Profit is set to be divided equally among workers, and the members elect their supervisors..."
Profit sharing is the only thing that would motivate most workers to participate in this. Your average worker wants their employer to succeed, but only as it positively affects their paycheck. Geologists and IT workers might love their work. The majority of factory workers do not. However, there is a lot of brain power going to waste in those workplaces, because most views go along the lines of "Why should I give them ideas? Any extra money it saves/makes goes into management pockets. Screw that."
I personally go to work for the paycheck. I save my brain for personal projects which I do because I love to do them. Unless my employer tied profits to my paycheck, I'm not giving them extra work for free. Communistic capitalism, which is how I think of this, can work... but only if it serves a definite capitalistic purpose. Nobody but the devoted really care if their company grows if that same worker hasn't gotten a raise in 5 years. In fact, they are probably hoping it fails just so they can get on unemployment and get paid to look for a better job.
I'm sure someone can show that the economics show that helpful workers earn more, but on a personal level, it really doesn't work that way very often. This is what drives entrepreneurs. You get out only what you put into a work. When you punch a time clock, you get the same whether you put in 110% or the bare minimum not to get fired.
He's a big Star Wars fan (as in actually owns figures, not just a movie fan). He's seen the latest one 5 times that I know of. At a minimum of $8 per ticket, he's given the franchise $40 + drinks/popcorn/milkduds. This is on top of the 3 or 4 collectable box sets of the originals he owns (mucho dinero). He also got one of the downloaded copies of Episode 3. He hates the quality of it, but it's a piece of Star Wars history to him.
I on the other hand saw the movie once, really liked it, but won't fork over any more money to see it again. I'll wait for someone to loan me their DVD to watch.
Now, who should the studios more likely sue, him or me? What's ironic though is that if I'm correct, I'll be the one 100% legal. He'll be the one committing a crime, even if Hollywood benefitted much more from him. It's people like my friend that they are in business at all.
Give them a dollar, and they'll suck you dry. I'm almost scared to use anything but cash at the theater for fear of what other craziness they may come up with next if they had my name on a reciept.
"Look, I'm 32 and I'm part of the generation that "grew up" with computers."
I'm in about that same age group, and agree. However, maybe I should have phrased it as having grown up with computers in the classroom. I think teachers often rely on the teaching they received as their first "template". Teachers not having grown up with such pervasiveness, while knowledgeable, but me left clueless as to how to incorporate technology. Most know when a good time is to play a tape (or DVD today, I suppose), as teachers have used video reels for many, many years. Many may not know when the optimal time is to pull out a PC, such as what topics best favor online activity, local group interactivity, teleconferencing, online research, etc.
Studies find that many students don't know how to do more than basically use a search engine, e-mail, and instant message. More in depth online research wasn't something I was taught until college, and that was part of a composition class.
I know many colleges now offer technology courses to education majors. Getting through college without technical knowledge is impossible these days. However, I would put emphasis on a class of specific classroom technology use.
My college's librarian taught the intro to computers class (and while as a media degree field, the depth of the class was severely lacking)... the next class (still very basic) in my computer science degree program was taught by a Ph.D. in CS.
I worry that too many, not just teachers, are stopping after that first class. Of course, you are a slashdotting math professor. Math teachers/professors were always the ones ahead of the curve when I was in school. That's a Teacher Karma +2 bonus.;) However, a 7th Grade Spanish teacher (not fresh out of college... say, around 45-55) might not have the same grasp or any idea how technology might work to their students' benefit, though they may be brilliant as a teacher. Especially in math, I applaud your efforts to push students to use the old noodle, not just the network. And, you can seamlessly draw technology into the picture. That is what I would like for all teachers, all the way down to at least 3rd grade. (Kindergarten is pushing it with PC's, but that's just IMHO.) I think "retrofitting" some experienced teachers helps, but the real changes will come when schools are filled with those like yourself at all levels.
"Would microsoft support OSDL the same way they supported java?"
MS will abuse (s/abuse/support/) OSDL in newer and more creative ways than Java! Unfortunately, support for OSDL is also on the list of dropped features from Vista. But, good news, I hear MS will start rolling out linux support!...starting with supporting linux command line text editors in 2015, and emacs promissed by 2041!
Get it because it'll make you cool like everyone else (Go Go Gadget Peer Pressure!), keep it because you don't miss the ads and just one click brings up any content you do want, as well as whitelist features.
It's about quality education. Schools can throw all the technology they want at kids, but computers alone won't give children an education.
Teachers must be properly trained to use this technology to its fullest. I'm afraid that won't realistically happen until the next generation of teachers emerges that has grown up all their lives around computers.
Computers should never come at the cost of student-teacher time, nor at the cost of fewer teachers. Nor, should schools compete with each other as to "who has the bigger, faster" setup. If it isn't actually improving education, it is worthless.
Saving schools money is good, as long as those savings are going to improve the educational experience, and not back into the budget for someone's pet project.
I remember my high school trying out computers. We only touched them when we all had to do something, and take turns, etc. The computer was a glorified typewriter, and the students were still required to hand write drafts, for instance. (I cheated, and scribbled on my notebook until a PC opened up.) But, I was patient. I knew most of the kids had never even used a computer. I, and the geeks I hung out with, averaged 2-4 at home. Still, I would have loved a school laptop back then. I finally bought my own in college.
College was different, but not much. I was more of the outsider for having it, as most of my peers had regular pen and paper. Then again, most were asking for printouts of my delicately constructed lecture outlines to compare to. While others left for the library to do a short paper, I was already half done before leaving class. Of course, I was left to my own faculties come test time.
But, that is another problem. A student who doesn't know how to work without a computer may be at a disadvantage at the college level, much as a student who doesn't know how to work with a computer is at a severe disadvantage. I remember the same debate over calculators being introduced into the SAT. Some college professors (not all, or even a majority) do not care what you work best with. They'll plop down a blue pad in front of you, and tell you to put all your fancy gadgets away.
Did computers help me in school? Not really. I didn't really care about education until college, and what mattered there was choosing a smaller school where I had lots of one on one time with professors when I needed it. They could have given away iPods and iBooks, and whatever else colleges are giving away now. Take them in exchange for 100+ student classes? No way!
As a side note, while I think moving some text to computers is good, I think I would be wearing some very thick glasses if I had to have read Anne Frank on a laptop.
"...it seems unlikely that Vista will ship without support for all three, if it does then that will give Apple something else to crow about since Safari supports RSS, Atom and RSS."
Are you thinking of the same Microsft that I am? Apple has always been ahead of Microsoft. MS doesn't really care. They won't lose customers to Apple over RSS vs. Atom, and users who don't use IE anyways won't care what MS supports.
It doesn't seem like a big win to me either, but neither does becoming an IETF standard seem like a win (though, imo, I'd like to see all widely used technologies standardized). Whichever gets used most is the one that will win. Slashdot's choice in using RSS seems like a bigger win in comparison, imo. The content sources will drive the victories here, and companies will simply follow them, not really choosing a side.
At least, that's the Microsoft camp's policy. Back the horse you know is already winning the race, take no chances. The last big chance I think MS took was on MS Bob... oh god, the agony, the agony!
"Because you don't build something as complex as a shuttle, and have a new model every other year."
You still run a 386?
The space shuttle may be complex, but we went to the moon in under 10 years on computers of the equivalent power of a Commodore (so I hear). The shuttle is overly complex. It should either be put in a museum, or given enough fuel to fly it unmanned over the Atlantic and sunk right next to the Titanic.
People are booking personal space flights, and now you can book a flight for 2 around the moon for $200,000,000, FAR less than the shuttle program costs. NASA has a mainframe mentality. The small agile start ups with complex yet highly manageable and cost effective are the cluster computing mentality.
If today's NASA were in charge of the military during WWII, the sword wielding Mongolians would have developed the atomic bomb before the US. IMO, the future of space is in private ventures. Even if they weren't technologically backwards (most NASA "inventions", like Tang, Teflon, and Velcro, are just urban legends), NASA will only put some Johnny D. Rightly on the Moon or Mars. I'm planning on my Mars retirement vacation though the combined company/state funded Le Soviet Virgin Galactic 50 years from now. NASA is the equivilant of a state run automotive company competing with private ventures. It worked long for VW, it did not work for Yugo, and it isn't working for NASA.
I read recently about anti-information from quantum. How, if you learn this information, you actually know less. I'll bet NASA helped fund that research.;)
"It's a terrible name because it says nothing about what it is, only what it is made of."
XML = Extensible Markup Language. Not exactly an extremely informative name there, but certainly acceptable. I rather it be AJAX instead of:
UJATDUIXFTDUPWRTWPOLANWP = Using Javascript And Templated Documents Usually In XML Format To Dynamically Update Pages Without Refreshing The Web Page Or Loading A New Web Page.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Attributed to Benjamin Franklin
I wasn't pushing OSS in my post, I was pushing Linux and BSD. BSD blows Windows security out of the water, and I've never even seen a virus (or spyware) on my home Linux box. The entire Linux security setup (ground-up, not top-down like MS's "we'll pasty some security here and there") is what first and foremost puts MS at a great disadvantage even before the talk about exploits. That they are OSS is inconsequential to the fact that it is 100% true that all of the giant worms affect MS, not *nix (unless you count peripheral damage.)
So, for Firefox, I wouldn't suggest ditching IE for Firefox, but ditching the MS operating system for a *nix alternative. Very big difference there. I've never had a problem with very fast patching for Linux. Microsoft doesn't even come close on patch release times. As for automatic updates, that's what cron is for. (Also, I'm referring to business users, not home users.)
NPOV is far from the only guidelines at Wikipedia, though. There are two other issues... Self Promotion and Original Work.
Now, it is true that a creator or someone involed can often be a good source of information. I write for a few entries in such a position. However, I've also authored what I thought werea few good factual entries, but rightly (it took a bit of pride swallowing to admit) removed (as original Works, not self promotion).
If you are self promoting, the entry will be wiped out. For instance, you cannot make a personal entry. Just because you as Joe_Blow include factual information, doesn't mean you are a "significant person" to be put in an encyclopedia.
Second, you may have a great theory for how the universe started or a unifying theory of all things. Unfortunately, if you are not published elsewhere first, and get some level of recognition, do not post it to Wikipedia. Instead, post it to Wikibooks or elsewhere. If you get some recognition, gain some sources that site you, then you can move it over to Wikipedia (provided you either A) present it entirely as NPOV or B) Segregate your opinion into one section, and provide another section and openly encourage others to present arguements against).
The original (and this current) seems like advertisement... still. This is info you find on the game's site, not Wikipedia. Is Wikipedia going to do an entry on games barely over a week after release now? Unless it has even some minor social impact, it should be deleted... and that's where my vote is going. Scrap it, and tell the BBC to go pay for its advertising on Google like everyone else. It got free press from/., so, good job for their PR team, now it's time for them to quit screwing around with the legitimacy of earnest sites like Wikipedia.
Not to sell a used car at a funeral, but... when these worms hit is the best time to push linux, especially to companies who see significant downtime and lost sales. Something along the lines of, "You know, if you were running (Insert *nix and/or BSD distro here), you'd still be in business. Right now, your business is doing as much sales as a liquor store being robbed, because being 'robbed' is exactly what's happening. If Windows is the liquor store, (distro) is the well guarded bank. 'Robberies' can still happen, but they are extremely more rare and the 'crooks' will be caught sooner."
"They're like the hot rodders of yesterday who did everything to soup up their cars. It was all about horsepower and bling-bling, lots of chrome and accessories," said Cindy Knight, a Toyota spokeswoman. "Maybe the hot rodders of tomorrow are the people who want to get in there and see what they can do about increasing fuel economy."
The spokeswoman has been talking to marketing too much and engineering too little. IIRC, the hot rodders of yesterday didn't use the term "bling-bling"... maybe Toyota needs to stop hiring their spokespersons directly from hip-hop internships.
Besides, I rather hear from the companies actual engineers saying something like, "(we) are the people who want to get in there and see what (we) can do about increasing fuel economy."
I thought Al Gore invented Napster, then sold the mp3 format he invented to Apple, which took the format technology to create the first beta iPods... and now Al Gore is creating the next step, which is an "Internet" TV channel, which is really a TV channel, but somehow controlled by the Internet masses as the ultimate expression of podcast meets v-bloging meets CNN.
Wanna know the scary part, the last part, which is also the true part, is the least likely scenario most people will actually believe.
Aluminum doesn't rust like steel. Won't matter if you water log your cpu, however for manufacturing cases, aluminum doesn't need to be immediately covered with a coating.
Aluminum's lower weight also lowers overall costs, primarily shipping/receiving/handling. Shipping a 20K lb roll of steel will make far fewer cases than a 20k lb roll of aluminum.
Heat conductivity matters if there is heat generated at the time of construction as well. Cheaper, less coolant running molds/presses can press aluminum.
Aluminum is also much safer to work with. I've worked with both materials, and can tell you that handling aluminum sheets with bare hands is not that big of a problem. Handling steel without Kevlar gloves is extremely foolish!
The manufacturing and handling (both manufacturer and middle man supplier, like Dell) costs are much lower with Aluminum. Cheap products swear by Aluminum. That's why you don't see steel coke cans. Steel is a more expensive material and more expensive to work with. Food containers that use steel are for the most part by necessity, not preference.
I agree. Browsers have to try to support not just standards, but standard mistakes as well as anything that's just "widely used" What I'm saying is, don't blame Firefox, blame the USPTO website. If a site isn't following standards, and the exact non-standard item is what is failing, it's hard to blame the browser.
It's like offroading. If you get a flat tire from a tree limb, don't blame the truck. After all, in my case, all Firefox is doing is tossing it over to a 3rd party app, Quicktime, which doesn't display the tiff's correctly.
I would similarly not blame Firefox for mis-displaying flash websites. I would blame the site for not having a non-flash alternative and/or the Macromedia plug-in.
Slashdot Mirror
"Profit is set to be divided equally among workers, and the members elect their supervisors..."
Profit sharing is the only thing that would motivate most workers to participate in this. Your average worker wants their employer to succeed, but only as it positively affects their paycheck. Geologists and IT workers might love their work. The majority of factory workers do not. However, there is a lot of brain power going to waste in those workplaces, because most views go along the lines of "Why should I give them ideas? Any extra money it saves/makes goes into management pockets. Screw that."
I personally go to work for the paycheck. I save my brain for personal projects which I do because I love to do them. Unless my employer tied profits to my paycheck, I'm not giving them extra work for free. Communistic capitalism, which is how I think of this, can work... but only if it serves a definite capitalistic purpose. Nobody but the devoted really care if their company grows if that same worker hasn't gotten a raise in 5 years. In fact, they are probably hoping it fails just so they can get on unemployment and get paid to look for a better job.
I'm sure someone can show that the economics show that helpful workers earn more, but on a personal level, it really doesn't work that way very often. This is what drives entrepreneurs. You get out only what you put into a work. When you punch a time clock, you get the same whether you put in 110% or the bare minimum not to get fired.
Could be HIV, if the middle bar in the H fell down /.
Or, someone who likes the Vive shampoo. Pronouced the same, I think.
Or, VI = 6, IV = backwards 6 = 9, == 69.
Could be an acronym. "Vote Independant In Venezuela". It's a Pat Robertson conspiracy!
But, my money is on a NIN fan in marketting. It's close to NIN, without the middle I.
He's a big Star Wars fan (as in actually owns figures, not just a movie fan). He's seen the latest one 5 times that I know of. At a minimum of $8 per ticket, he's given the franchise $40 + drinks/popcorn/milkduds. This is on top of the 3 or 4 collectable box sets of the originals he owns (mucho dinero). He also got one of the downloaded copies of Episode 3. He hates the quality of it, but it's a piece of Star Wars history to him.
I on the other hand saw the movie once, really liked it, but won't fork over any more money to see it again. I'll wait for someone to loan me their DVD to watch.
Now, who should the studios more likely sue, him or me? What's ironic though is that if I'm correct, I'll be the one 100% legal. He'll be the one committing a crime, even if Hollywood benefitted much more from him. It's people like my friend that they are in business at all.
Give them a dollar, and they'll suck you dry. I'm almost scared to use anything but cash at the theater for fear of what other craziness they may come up with next if they had my name on a reciept.
"Look, I'm 32 and I'm part of the generation that "grew up" with computers."
;) However, a 7th Grade Spanish teacher (not fresh out of college... say, around 45-55) might not have the same grasp or any idea how technology might work to their students' benefit, though they may be brilliant as a teacher. Especially in math, I applaud your efforts to push students to use the old noodle, not just the network. And, you can seamlessly draw technology into the picture. That is what I would like for all teachers, all the way down to at least 3rd grade. (Kindergarten is pushing it with PC's, but that's just IMHO.) I think "retrofitting" some experienced teachers helps, but the real changes will come when schools are filled with those like yourself at all levels.
I'm in about that same age group, and agree. However, maybe I should have phrased it as having grown up with computers in the classroom. I think teachers often rely on the teaching they received as their first "template". Teachers not having grown up with such pervasiveness, while knowledgeable, but me left clueless as to how to incorporate technology. Most know when a good time is to play a tape (or DVD today, I suppose), as teachers have used video reels for many, many years. Many may not know when the optimal time is to pull out a PC, such as what topics best favor online activity, local group interactivity, teleconferencing, online research, etc.
Studies find that many students don't know how to do more than basically use a search engine, e-mail, and instant message. More in depth online research wasn't something I was taught until college, and that was part of a composition class.
I know many colleges now offer technology courses to education majors. Getting through college without technical knowledge is impossible these days. However, I would put emphasis on a class of specific classroom technology use.
My college's librarian taught the intro to computers class (and while as a media degree field, the depth of the class was severely lacking)... the next class (still very basic) in my computer science degree program was taught by a Ph.D. in CS.
I worry that too many, not just teachers, are stopping after that first class. Of course, you are a slashdotting math professor. Math teachers/professors were always the ones ahead of the curve when I was in school. That's a Teacher Karma +2 bonus.
You do have a interplanetary firewall, right? I hear the "replicator" virus is pretty nasty.
"Would microsoft support OSDL the same way they supported java?"
...starting with supporting linux command line text editors in 2015, and emacs promissed by 2041!
MS will abuse (s/abuse/support/) OSDL in newer and more creative ways than Java! Unfortunately, support for OSDL is also on the list of dropped features from Vista. But, good news, I hear MS will start rolling out linux support!
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/
Get it because it'll make you cool like everyone else (Go Go Gadget Peer Pressure!), keep it because you don't miss the ads and just one click brings up any content you do want, as well as whitelist features.
It's about quality education. Schools can throw all the technology they want at kids, but computers alone won't give children an education.
Teachers must be properly trained to use this technology to its fullest. I'm afraid that won't realistically happen until the next generation of teachers emerges that has grown up all their lives around computers.
Computers should never come at the cost of student-teacher time, nor at the cost of fewer teachers. Nor, should schools compete with each other as to "who has the bigger, faster" setup. If it isn't actually improving education, it is worthless.
Saving schools money is good, as long as those savings are going to improve the educational experience, and not back into the budget for someone's pet project.
I remember my high school trying out computers. We only touched them when we all had to do something, and take turns, etc. The computer was a glorified typewriter, and the students were still required to hand write drafts, for instance. (I cheated, and scribbled on my notebook until a PC opened up.) But, I was patient. I knew most of the kids had never even used a computer. I, and the geeks I hung out with, averaged 2-4 at home. Still, I would have loved a school laptop back then. I finally bought my own in college.
College was different, but not much. I was more of the outsider for having it, as most of my peers had regular pen and paper. Then again, most were asking for printouts of my delicately constructed lecture outlines to compare to. While others left for the library to do a short paper, I was already half done before leaving class. Of course, I was left to my own faculties come test time.
But, that is another problem. A student who doesn't know how to work without a computer may be at a disadvantage at the college level, much as a student who doesn't know how to work with a computer is at a severe disadvantage. I remember the same debate over calculators being introduced into the SAT. Some college professors (not all, or even a majority) do not care what you work best with. They'll plop down a blue pad in front of you, and tell you to put all your fancy gadgets away.
Did computers help me in school? Not really. I didn't really care about education until college, and what mattered there was choosing a smaller school where I had lots of one on one time with professors when I needed it. They could have given away iPods and iBooks, and whatever else colleges are giving away now. Take them in exchange for 100+ student classes? No way!
As a side note, while I think moving some text to computers is good, I think I would be wearing some very thick glasses if I had to have read Anne Frank on a laptop.
"Until Windows eats his data. (Sorry. Obligatory bullshit Windows flame.)"
;)
Then BSOD... eat shit and die.
Sorry, that one was just too easy of a setup to pass up.
"...it seems unlikely that Vista will ship without support for all three, if it does then that will give Apple something else to crow about since Safari supports RSS, Atom and RSS."
Are you thinking of the same Microsft that I am? Apple has always been ahead of Microsoft. MS doesn't really care. They won't lose customers to Apple over RSS vs. Atom, and users who don't use IE anyways won't care what MS supports.
It doesn't seem like a big win to me either, but neither does becoming an IETF standard seem like a win (though, imo, I'd like to see all widely used technologies standardized). Whichever gets used most is the one that will win. Slashdot's choice in using RSS seems like a bigger win in comparison, imo. The content sources will drive the victories here, and companies will simply follow them, not really choosing a side.
At least, that's the Microsoft camp's policy. Back the horse you know is already winning the race, take no chances. The last big chance I think MS took was on MS Bob... oh god, the agony, the agony!
Read Entire Story here
This link has entire story cache'd, and looks more like original site. Enjoy.
Read (first page of) story here.
I went blind looking at the MirrorDot background to get that link, there better be like... 5,000 karma in this for me.
"Because you don't build something as complex as a shuttle, and have a new model every other year."
;)
You still run a 386?
The space shuttle may be complex, but we went to the moon in under 10 years on computers of the equivalent power of a Commodore (so I hear). The shuttle is overly complex. It should either be put in a museum, or given enough fuel to fly it unmanned over the Atlantic and sunk right next to the Titanic.
People are booking personal space flights, and now you can book a flight for 2 around the moon for $200,000,000, FAR less than the shuttle program costs. NASA has a mainframe mentality. The small agile start ups with complex yet highly manageable and cost effective are the cluster computing mentality.
If today's NASA were in charge of the military during WWII, the sword wielding Mongolians would have developed the atomic bomb before the US. IMO, the future of space is in private ventures. Even if they weren't technologically backwards (most NASA "inventions", like Tang, Teflon, and Velcro, are just urban legends), NASA will only put some Johnny D. Rightly on the Moon or Mars. I'm planning on my Mars retirement vacation though the combined company/state funded Le Soviet Virgin Galactic 50 years from now. NASA is the equivilant of a state run automotive company competing with private ventures. It worked long for VW, it did not work for Yugo, and it isn't working for NASA.
I read recently about anti-information from quantum. How, if you learn this information, you actually know less. I'll bet NASA helped fund that research.
"It's a terrible name because it says nothing about what it is, only what it is made of."
XML = Extensible Markup Language. Not exactly an extremely informative name there, but certainly acceptable. I rather it be AJAX instead of:
UJATDUIXFTDUPWRTWPOLANWP = Using Javascript And Templated Documents Usually In XML Format To Dynamically Update Pages Without Refreshing The Web Page Or Loading A New Web Page.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Attributed to Benjamin Franklin
I wasn't pushing OSS in my post, I was pushing Linux and BSD. BSD blows Windows security out of the water, and I've never even seen a virus (or spyware) on my home Linux box. The entire Linux security setup (ground-up, not top-down like MS's "we'll pasty some security here and there") is what first and foremost puts MS at a great disadvantage even before the talk about exploits. That they are OSS is inconsequential to the fact that it is 100% true that all of the giant worms affect MS, not *nix (unless you count peripheral damage.)
So, for Firefox, I wouldn't suggest ditching IE for Firefox, but ditching the MS operating system for a *nix alternative. Very big difference there. I've never had a problem with very fast patching for Linux. Microsoft doesn't even come close on patch release times. As for automatic updates, that's what cron is for. (Also, I'm referring to business users, not home users.)
NPOV is far from the only guidelines at Wikipedia, though. There are two other issues... Self Promotion and Original Work.
/., so, good job for their PR team, now it's time for them to quit screwing around with the legitimacy of earnest sites like Wikipedia.
Now, it is true that a creator or someone involed can often be a good source of information. I write for a few entries in such a position. However, I've also authored what I thought werea few good factual entries, but rightly (it took a bit of pride swallowing to admit) removed (as original Works, not self promotion).
If you are self promoting, the entry will be wiped out. For instance, you cannot make a personal entry. Just because you as Joe_Blow include factual information, doesn't mean you are a "significant person" to be put in an encyclopedia.
Second, you may have a great theory for how the universe started or a unifying theory of all things. Unfortunately, if you are not published elsewhere first, and get some level of recognition, do not post it to Wikipedia. Instead, post it to Wikibooks or elsewhere. If you get some recognition, gain some sources that site you, then you can move it over to Wikipedia (provided you either A) present it entirely as NPOV or B) Segregate your opinion into one section, and provide another section and openly encourage others to present arguements against).
The original (and this current) seems like advertisement... still. This is info you find on the game's site, not Wikipedia. Is Wikipedia going to do an entry on games barely over a week after release now? Unless it has even some minor social impact, it should be deleted... and that's where my vote is going. Scrap it, and tell the BBC to go pay for its advertising on Google like everyone else. It got free press from
I've voting deletion.
Not to sell a used car at a funeral, but... when these worms hit is the best time to push linux, especially to companies who see significant downtime and lost sales. Something along the lines of, "You know, if you were running (Insert *nix and/or BSD distro here), you'd still be in business. Right now, your business is doing as much sales as a liquor store being robbed, because being 'robbed' is exactly what's happening. If Windows is the liquor store, (distro) is the well guarded bank. 'Robberies' can still happen, but they are extremely more rare and the 'crooks' will be caught sooner."
I noticed this quote from TFA:
"They're like the hot rodders of yesterday who did everything to soup up their cars. It was all about horsepower and bling-bling, lots of chrome and accessories," said Cindy Knight, a Toyota spokeswoman. "Maybe the hot rodders of tomorrow are the people who want to get in there and see what they can do about increasing fuel economy."
The spokeswoman has been talking to marketing too much and engineering too little. IIRC, the hot rodders of yesterday didn't use the term "bling-bling"... maybe Toyota needs to stop hiring their spokespersons directly from hip-hop internships.
Besides, I rather hear from the companies actual engineers saying something like, "(we) are the people who want to get in there and see what (we) can do about increasing fuel economy."
I hear the same thing happens when you install Windows XP on a Pentium 4. I can't wait for Vista, then we can go back to 386... I loved my 386 DX.
I thought Al Gore invented Napster, then sold the mp3 format he invented to Apple, which took the format technology to create the first beta iPods... and now Al Gore is creating the next step, which is an "Internet" TV channel, which is really a TV channel, but somehow controlled by the Internet masses as the ultimate expression of podcast meets v-bloging meets CNN.
Wanna know the scary part, the last part, which is also the true part, is the least likely scenario most people will actually believe.
Aluminum doesn't rust like steel. Won't matter if you water log your cpu, however for manufacturing cases, aluminum doesn't need to be immediately covered with a coating.
Aluminum's lower weight also lowers overall costs, primarily shipping/receiving/handling. Shipping a 20K lb roll of steel will make far fewer cases than a 20k lb roll of aluminum.
Heat conductivity matters if there is heat generated at the time of construction as well. Cheaper, less coolant running molds/presses can press aluminum.
Aluminum is also much safer to work with. I've worked with both materials, and can tell you that handling aluminum sheets with bare hands is not that big of a problem. Handling steel without Kevlar gloves is extremely foolish!
The manufacturing and handling (both manufacturer and middle man supplier, like Dell) costs are much lower with Aluminum. Cheap products swear by Aluminum. That's why you don't see steel coke cans. Steel is a more expensive material and more expensive to work with. Food containers that use steel are for the most part by necessity, not preference.
Yeah, I gather. A bit misleading. But as the sign says, my fault for not previewing closely enough.
I agree. Browsers have to try to support not just standards, but standard mistakes as well as anything that's just "widely used" What I'm saying is, don't blame Firefox, blame the USPTO website. If a site isn't following standards, and the exact non-standard item is what is failing, it's hard to blame the browser.
It's like offroading. If you get a flat tire from a tree limb, don't blame the truck. After all, in my case, all Firefox is doing is tossing it over to a 3rd party app, Quicktime, which doesn't display the tiff's correctly.
I would similarly not blame Firefox for mis-displaying flash websites. I would blame the site for not having a non-flash alternative and/or the Macromedia plug-in.
Images go in tag.
And code posted to