POTUS would only ever deign to visit major capital cities. All of which are capable of, or are being adapted for, handling the A380 - that's what it was designed for. It wouldn't be much use as a commercial airliner if it could only fly to a few destinations.
The helicopters used by the prez are european (Augusta/Westland models) which they fly over to the US in kit form, just so they can be assembled by american workers.
It's not one 747. Last time "W" visited the UK, it took 3 (yes three) jumbos to haul him and his entourage from the USA.
I'd say the number of people who go on the trip is mainly a function of ego. Apart from the staff and security, you really don't need to carry journalists around, too. They could easily fly themselves, however it is a nice treat to use to reward the people who write nice things about El Presidente.
I would hazard a guess and say that they had more waiting, on standby, just in case one of them broke or they needed to do something different in a hurry - such as deal with a medical emergency.
The scope hasn't changed. It's always been to transport the absolute maximum possible with absolute safety, total reliability, highest possible speed and lowest cost.
However, that's not a practical proposition and does contain some mutually contradictory requirements. The good news is that as aircraft get bigger, faster, more reliable and flexible the gap between the "do everything" that's being asked for is getting closer to what can be achieved.
8) a desktop based on "what do you want to do?", rather than "guess which one of the cutely named, but obscure application with far too many overly-complicated and poorly explained options, might just do half of what you want"
yes, I agree that instability in the interface is a bad thing and makes vendors stay away from Linux. However it's not impossible to design a decent ABI (or API, even) with enough flexibility to allow for future developments.
What I'm concerned about is that Linux seems to have stalled - if minor point releases, bug fixes and new hardware are all they're doing, then I think it will be hard to keep developers interested in doing kernel work - it will seem too much like real work, but unpaid. Linux used to be exciting and cutting-edge, now it just seems to be in the doldrums.
Looking at the changes to the kernel over the year, there have been a few minor releases. The change notices for these summed them up as
".. most of it really is one-liners, and mostly not very exciting ones at
that."
So it seems to me that all the advances have been in products and peripheral applications, rather than in the fundamental core of Linux: the operating system. This is a rather ominous sign as it makes me think that the development initiative has pretty much stalled - since nothing new in the way of functionality or features appeared. Support for new hardware and bug fixes are always nice, but they indicate a "support-phase" project rather than new developments.
... is that it's OK to bet the farm - in reality, someone else's farm - because no matter how badly the bet goes, you'll still come out of it OK (in the long term - you might lose your job, buy hey when things pick up, you'll get another. No biggie). However, the person who does suffer is the ex. farm-owner, or vagrant as they're now known.
What we need is for the upside/downside/inside risks that all the banks are exposed to, to be made public. That way customers can decide for themselves which bunch of cowboys to entrust with their cash. Sadly, as we've found out, they're all as bad as each other.
Money is all about numbers, so quantifying "risk" in numerical terms is not only valid, but to be encouraged. You wouldn't bet on a horse if the odds were quoted as "almost impossible", "very unlikely" etc. You'd want to know what possible return you'd get for your bet and roughly what would be the chances of winning.
The problem in the financial world is one of thinking there's a single factor called "risk". In fact there are many, interlinked factors: The risk the business will go bust is one - however from that sprout a whole range of subsidiary risks: from losing all your investment to getting back 95% of it.
Similarly with mortgage risk and any other type of investment. What the financial markets need is a better understanding of the causal links between risks and to price the returns on investments accordingly.
That will be a *big* job, and one that will take years or decades to iron the bugs out of.
All it means is that they sit in an office surfing for who knows what, instead of getting "out there" and discovering the news first hand.
A lot (most?) TV and print media have well publicised portals for eye witnesses to call in, or send their photos. It's certainly cheaper than having to employ one of your own (or, god forbid, having to pay out for agency or newswire product) to get the pictures for the evening news. Plus, of course, eye witnesses give the impression of "real people" - so it's got to be genuine, hasn't it?
In fact, this sounds more like another step in dumbing down our media. Cutting costs and corners. If the quality of the service drops, well it doesn't matter since they're all doing it, so things keep in balance.
This sounds like the "normal" threats that governments have been telling us all to be scared of for years. All this bunch have done is put an internet "spin" on them.
e-bombs? yeah - right
extremists: (yawn!)
economic downturn: puh-leeze
casualties: huh?
Now, I'm all for taking sensible precautions, such as keeping my wallet in an inside pocket and locking the house before going out. However, I refuse to be bullied into changing my lifestyle just in case the one-in-a-billion chance that something bad, but foreseeable, might just happen to me.
Even more, I resent other people, who can't tell the difference between the possible and the probable laying down all sorts of restrictions, with the force of law and punishment, on the pretext that "it's for my own good".
These guys are the biggest threat to the internet (and everything else) today. --- There, I feel better now.
Though I suspect the auhor was in a hurry (and the editor was asleep) as 5 of the ten are basically the same: linux distros.
In fact I have a feeling that, apart from the version numbers, this will also be the author's personal list for the 10 coolest / hottest products for 2009, 2010... Though it comes nowehere near being mine - nor probably yours, either
So some guys thought up a few possibilities about what could (do they really mean "what they'd like to.." ) happen to MS and posted them on the 'net
Next, they ask people to vote on each one - as if voting will make it happen.
Well, so what? we know that the whole of web 2.0 is based on popularity contests, and massaging the egos of the ravening masses, in the hope that on their way to have their say, they'll accidentally click on an advertisment and earn someone a few tenths of a bean in revenue.
So long as people treat this as what it is: a video game, we'll be alright. The problem occurs when enough idio^H^H^Hndividuals who had their vote, start asking why the "winning" scenario (or celebrity, or event, or personality or whatever) didn't come to pass.
As it is, we know what'll happen to M$, they'll do an IBM. Mystery solved.
... that is to recognise that the internet is not and never can be regulated. It's a trans-national structure, with no controls and little public understanding of how it works.
Once you accept that internet regulation is not possible, you have three possibilities:
ban it - cheap and simple
keep your children off it; also cheap and simple
The third choice (as always) is to do nothing: also cheap and simple.
Of course, few parents seem to be willing these days, to accept responsibility for their childrens' well-being and will therefore demand that the government "do something". In which case option #1 seems like the simplest path.
The moral is that unless the people who should be responsible are prepared to do the right thing and regulate their own and their children's access to what is effectively an adult medium, the alternative harms us all.
Not only does this show that the individual making these proposals is not qualified to consider the subject, but it also tells us that the advice he is giving is incompetent.
In practice, of course, this is not really a serious proposal - it's merely a way of seeing (from the reaction) who amenable the public would be to being censored.
Sadly, most people have such a degree of scorn for this and other governments, that they won't take this seriously - or make any comments about it. The consequence being that the "public opinion" - whichever way it comes out - will be decided by a small, ignorant, but vocal minority who have their own agenda or fears.
Whatever happens, it won't represent the opinions of the people - but that's "democracy" for you.
Most of the items listed have been around or known about for a long time.
The thing that made them a success in 2008 (except for USB 3 - which shouldn't be on the list as it's merely an administrative milestone, so far - wait until the real products become mainstream) was being adopted in popular products. Flash, GPS and swimwear aren't new. Flexible screens and memristors are valid entries - and the rest simply shouldn't be there.
Yes, it's a novel idea and hopefully one that will catch on. However, it's certainly not practical for "proper" monitors, or coffee-table sized thingys (like the toy microsoft demo'd a couple of years ago). Although I suppose in those cases, there is less need for small targets, as FFS is less of a problem
I still think the whole concept of touch screens for office use is fundementally flawed. It requires you to have your arms raised to operate the screen - which is an unnatural position and very tiring to do for long periods of time. It does look impressive on s.f. files - with guys wavinhg their arms around. However, in terms of results obtained for human energy expended they're very inefficient and I suspect the consequences would make RSI claims pale into insignificance.
That was when the 2.4 kernels came out. They were the first ones with SMP, the last major improvement to the kernel and the linu architecture. Since then, releases have basically had minor tweaks, a few new features, bug-fixes and support for newer processors - but nothing as game-changing as the work done 6 or 7 years ago.
This leads me to the conclusion that linux is basically a mature product, which has reached the top of it's development cycle and is, for all intents and purposes, in its maintenance mode and therefore in decline.
However, it's not alone: Windows peaked with XP and it too, is suffering from bloat, lack of innovation and decline, also.
There's no way to discover, on your own, that there are magic words, let alone work out what they will do or where they may be applied.
For that reason, adventure games are more than mere problem / puzzle solving games. They require of the player some skills to hack around inside the source (or to know someone who has) to get the most out of them.
As for versions written since the early 80's - I haven't a clue. They all seem to be variations on the earlier theme, so once the (original) problem had been solved, they held no interest for me.
The biggest problem isn't the hardware - it's the interfaces. 25 years ago, all the 5 1/4 inch hard drives had either SASI (not SCSI, that came later) or HP-IB (IEE-488) interfaces. I have couple lying around still. Now, the data on these may be OK - they haven't been mistreated, however there are no interface cards for PCI buses, nor the drivers to use them with any modern operating system.
For that reason, you'll have to refresh the hardware every 5 years or so, just to keep up with the changes to interfaces, O/S's and filesystems.
When you do find a solution - or just get sick of looking for the "perfect" one and therefore settle (which is what we all do in the end), don't just leave it there.
Assume that something will go wrong. So don't just keep one copy - make sure there are at least two. Keep them in geographically separate locations: maybe with a family member, if you can trust them.
Personally, I'd go for two different solutions: maybe one magnetic and one optical. However, whatever you decide on, make sure to get it all back and test it. Even better, rewrite it every few years.
just as you would / should every other person who works with or for you. Hopefully this isn't news.
You probably also have people working for you who are more intelligent than you are - statistically speaking, it's likely. I would expect you have the experience and maturity to deal with that situation, too.
Don't give handwritten responses (in any colour). Instead, emulate what will happen then the little darlings get out into the big wide world of commerce and industry. Make them email their assignments in, then completely ignore them. When pressed (for the third or fourth time) to mark them, skim the first couple of sentences and award a purely random mark based solely on that.
Slashdot Mirror
POTUS would only ever deign to visit major capital cities. All of which are capable of, or are being adapted for, handling the A380 - that's what it was designed for. It wouldn't be much use as a commercial airliner if it could only fly to a few destinations.
The helicopters used by the prez are european (Augusta/Westland models) which they fly over to the US in kit form, just so they can be assembled by american workers.
I'd say the number of people who go on the trip is mainly a function of ego. Apart from the staff and security, you really don't need to carry journalists around, too. They could easily fly themselves, however it is a nice treat to use to reward the people who write nice things about El Presidente.
I would hazard a guess and say that they had more waiting, on standby, just in case one of them broke or they needed to do something different in a hurry - such as deal with a medical emergency.
However, that's not a practical proposition and does contain some mutually contradictory requirements. The good news is that as aircraft get bigger, faster, more reliable and flexible the gap between the "do everything" that's being asked for is getting closer to what can be achieved.
8) a desktop based on "what do you want to do?", rather than "guess which one of the cutely named, but obscure application with far too many overly-complicated and poorly explained options, might just do half of what you want"
What I'm concerned about is that Linux seems to have stalled - if minor point releases, bug fixes and new hardware are all they're doing, then I think it will be hard to keep developers interested in doing kernel work - it will seem too much like real work, but unpaid. Linux used to be exciting and cutting-edge, now it just seems to be in the doldrums.
".. most of it really is one-liners, and mostly not very exciting ones at that."
So it seems to me that all the advances have been in products and peripheral applications, rather than in the fundamental core of Linux: the operating system. This is a rather ominous sign as it makes me think that the development initiative has pretty much stalled - since nothing new in the way of functionality or features appeared. Support for new hardware and bug fixes are always nice, but they indicate a "support-phase" project rather than new developments.
just buy a printer!
What we need is for the upside/downside/inside risks that all the banks are exposed to, to be made public. That way customers can decide for themselves which bunch of cowboys to entrust with their cash. Sadly, as we've found out, they're all as bad as each other.
The problem in the financial world is one of thinking there's a single factor called "risk". In fact there are many, interlinked factors: The risk the business will go bust is one - however from that sprout a whole range of subsidiary risks: from losing all your investment to getting back 95% of it.
Similarly with mortgage risk and any other type of investment. What the financial markets need is a better understanding of the causal links between risks and to price the returns on investments accordingly.
That will be a *big* job, and one that will take years or decades to iron the bugs out of.
A lot (most?) TV and print media have well publicised portals for eye witnesses to call in, or send their photos. It's certainly cheaper than having to employ one of your own (or, god forbid, having to pay out for agency or newswire product) to get the pictures for the evening news. Plus, of course, eye witnesses give the impression of "real people" - so it's got to be genuine, hasn't it?
In fact, this sounds more like another step in dumbing down our media. Cutting costs and corners. If the quality of the service drops, well it doesn't matter since they're all doing it, so things keep in balance.
Now, I'm all for taking sensible precautions, such as keeping my wallet in an inside pocket and locking the house before going out. However, I refuse to be bullied into changing my lifestyle just in case the one-in-a-billion chance that something bad, but foreseeable, might just happen to me.
Even more, I resent other people, who can't tell the difference between the possible and the probable laying down all sorts of restrictions, with the force of law and punishment, on the pretext that "it's for my own good".
These guys are the biggest threat to the internet (and everything else) today. --- There, I feel better now.
Though I suspect the auhor was in a hurry (and the editor was asleep) as 5 of the ten are basically the same: linux distros.
In fact I have a feeling that, apart from the version numbers, this will also be the author's personal list for the 10 coolest / hottest products for 2009, 2010 ... Though it comes nowehere near being mine - nor probably yours, either
yawn!
Next, they ask people to vote on each one - as if voting will make it happen.
Well, so what? we know that the whole of web 2.0 is based on popularity contests, and massaging the egos of the ravening masses, in the hope that on their way to have their say, they'll accidentally click on an advertisment and earn someone a few tenths of a bean in revenue.
So long as people treat this as what it is: a video game, we'll be alright. The problem occurs when enough idio^H^H^Hndividuals who had their vote, start asking why the "winning" scenario (or celebrity, or event, or personality or whatever) didn't come to pass.
As it is, we know what'll happen to M$, they'll do an IBM. Mystery solved.
Once you accept that internet regulation is not possible, you have three possibilities:
ban it - cheap and simple
keep your children off it; also cheap and simple
The third choice (as always) is to do nothing: also cheap and simple.
Of course, few parents seem to be willing these days, to accept responsibility for their childrens' well-being and will therefore demand that the government "do something". In which case option #1 seems like the simplest path.
The moral is that unless the people who should be responsible are prepared to do the right thing and regulate their own and their children's access to what is effectively an adult medium, the alternative harms us all.
In practice, of course, this is not really a serious proposal - it's merely a way of seeing (from the reaction) who amenable the public would be to being censored.
Sadly, most people have such a degree of scorn for this and other governments, that they won't take this seriously - or make any comments about it. The consequence being that the "public opinion" - whichever way it comes out - will be decided by a small, ignorant, but vocal minority who have their own agenda or fears.
Whatever happens, it won't represent the opinions of the people - but that's "democracy" for you.
The thing that made them a success in 2008 (except for USB 3 - which shouldn't be on the list as it's merely an administrative milestone, so far - wait until the real products become mainstream) was being adopted in popular products. Flash, GPS and swimwear aren't new. Flexible screens and memristors are valid entries - and the rest simply shouldn't be there.
Now, using 1 Joule == 1 Watt for 1 Second, that comes out to 566kWh, roughly 10 times what this (and other) electrically powered vehicles can manage.
Looks like they have a long way to go before they have enough juice for mainstream use.
Yes, it's a novel idea and hopefully one that will catch on. However, it's certainly not practical for "proper" monitors, or coffee-table sized thingys (like the toy microsoft demo'd a couple of years ago). Although I suppose in those cases, there is less need for small targets, as FFS is less of a problem
I still think the whole concept of touch screens for office use is fundementally flawed. It requires you to have your arms raised to operate the screen - which is an unnatural position and very tiring to do for long periods of time. It does look impressive on s.f. files - with guys wavinhg their arms around. However, in terms of results obtained for human energy expended they're very inefficient and I suspect the consequences would make RSI claims pale into insignificance.
This leads me to the conclusion that linux is basically a mature product, which has reached the top of it's development cycle and is, for all intents and purposes, in its maintenance mode and therefore in decline.
However, it's not alone: Windows peaked with XP and it too, is suffering from bloat, lack of innovation and decline, also.
For that reason, adventure games are more than mere problem / puzzle solving games. They require of the player some skills to hack around inside the source (or to know someone who has) to get the most out of them.
As for versions written since the early 80's - I haven't a clue. They all seem to be variations on the earlier theme, so once the (original) problem had been solved, they held no interest for me.
For that reason, you'll have to refresh the hardware every 5 years or so, just to keep up with the changes to interfaces, O/S's and filesystems.
Assume that something will go wrong. So don't just keep one copy - make sure there are at least two. Keep them in geographically separate locations: maybe with a family member, if you can trust them.
Personally, I'd go for two different solutions: maybe one magnetic and one optical. However, whatever you decide on, make sure to get it all back and test it. Even better, rewrite it every few years.
You probably also have people working for you who are more intelligent than you are - statistically speaking, it's likely. I would expect you have the experience and maturity to deal with that situation, too.
Don't give handwritten responses (in any colour). Instead, emulate what will happen then the little darlings get out into the big wide world of commerce and industry. Make them email their assignments in, then completely ignore them. When pressed (for the third or fourth time) to mark them, skim the first couple of sentences and award a purely random mark based solely on that.