They do that because you typically can't use financial aid to purchase from other sources. Consequently the folks that can buy elsewhere and it's mostly the financial aid students that buy the books at greatly inflated prices.
It's not unheard of to walk literally across the street and have the prices be a fraction of the price as at the official book store. I remember having college instructors specifically suggesting that we buy our books elsewhere if we could due to the gouging.
Not to mention that it's often times cheaper to import the books from China after they were exported to there than buy the ones that are sold on the local market.
What makes you think that it wasn't a semi-autonomous piece of artwork that was making the decisions? Apart from artwork being more intelligent than your average college president?
Honestly, more of the pictures are of minorities and people in wheel chairs and the names are now more multicultural. Sure it makes a difference in some ways, but it's not a legitimate reason to push out a new book when the previous version was perfectly fine. The math itself hasn't changed much.
That's why my mother and her colleagues are using open source text books. Apart from the cost of proof reading and printing them, they're free for whoever wants them. All she has to do is examine them for errors and select the sections that she wants printed.
It's perfectly legal and quite cheap. A remedial math book goes for less than $30 which is a small fraction of the cost of a typical text book for those courses.
Yeah right. Perhaps at your school. But in recent times you'd buy a text for maybe $50 used, the next quarter you'd get maybe $15 or so for it, and that's assuming that they'd pay for it at all.
Your conclusion though is correct. I can't imagine how this is going to result in lower prices. Especially since open source texts can be had for under $30 when the prof makes it happen.
The point is that certain mistakes shouldn't be made again. Many languages provide facilities for it. Sometimes it requires more drastic measures like deprecating a call and replacing it with something new. Not that I really understand the nuances, but there was that whole strlcopy() change in the past. It wasn't strictly speaking necessary, however it did cut down on a lot of mistakes that programmers would make.
It was from what I gather important enough that it's not just what the designers of Pascal did, it was added to others as well. Turns out that having a limit to the number of characters is a good thing.
Assuming that out side forces are never brought to bear. Until companies are held accountable for exploits in their code it's not going to change. Requiring companies to share even a portion of the expense when a vulnerability is exploited would do wonders for the situation.
Umm, you misspelled fully featured. Name one other browser that's as feature complete as Firefox that is less bloated. I bet you can't do it, because the only browsers I ever see listed as being faster are also ones that are focused on being minimalist or are tied to a specific platform. They have in recent times pretty uniformly recognized that being minimalist isn't winning them market share and started grafting on the features which led to Firefox being accused of bloat.
Probably that Firefox is far less focused on adding new features than it is on refining the features that it has. Sure they've been adding features, but for the most part the additions are there to complement the ones that are already there.
As opposed to some of the other browsers like Chrome which have been adding significant features in recent memory. Such as extensions. Firefox has had extensions for years and suffered in some ways for it.
Which is probably fine if you're using OSX. Otherwise, I think most folks these days are using Go oo which is I guess in the process of merging with Libreoffice.
Speed is nice, but really what has in the past hurt OO.org and such the most is the less than perfect interoperability with MS Office. If you're going to use a minority office suite then you damn well better be able to interoperate.
Voting machines aren't hard to get right. It's a matter of proper motivation. Being able to hand the Republicans the governorship of Georgia back a few years back was really the point. No technique is perfect against corruption.
The best thing is around here where the counting is done in a glass room where people can walk around the outside watching.
No they didn't. For the first part their calendar doesn't end for a few more years after that. And secondly, they never said that was the end of days, it just means that the calendar flips and that will likely bring with it changes as they saw it. End of the world is not the conclusion that anybody should be making.
It's about profits. If they don't release a new version then the only people that will pay for new copies are people who are buying new computers and too lazy to reject the EULA on the new copy and recycle their old license.
Additionally, MS for practical reasons limits the amount of functionality that they're willing to add to the OS after it's been released. Which means that it can be quite a challenge to add support for some things later on, and without any profit motive for doing it either.
I'm personally surprised that MS doesn't ditch this approach more or less altogether and go with a more Apple approach. Well, the approach taken by pretty much everybody else. Release a minor revision every year or so and a major revision when need be. Then only charge a small amount of money for the minor revisions.
Except what they don't ever really talk about is that each time they double the Martys or the docs in a given point in time, they double the amount of time that period in history takes up. Shortening their useful lifespan by that much. Since they've already lived in that stretch of time doesn't automatically tack that on to the end of your life.
Consequently, they would be aging significantly with respect to everybody else in their original time line. For a few relatively short trips it's not a big deal, but it adds up over time.
That's one solution. The other being more or less what he did do, which is leave some hints for Marty in the future. This one is definitely the simplest way of handling it, although for reasons related to plot development Marty forgets to top off the tank before going to retrieve the doc.
And that explains that they're second only to MS in market share and why they're more broadly available than the other browsers? Or perhaps it explains why it is that the other browsers are suddenly getting features that Firefox has had for years?
Perhaps JavaScript wasn't the wisest path to take, but it's hard to argue with results. Especially since at the rate that Firefox is getting faster and the rate at which the other browsers are adding bloat, I'd be surprised if Firefox keeps it's reputation for being slow much longer. Barring something changing the present course.
They're working on it. It's just a matter of wanting to do it correctly rather than just doing it to say they've done it. Sort of like how they've resisted cheating on the Acid tests like some of the other browsers have been.
Just about any moron can make a new browser window per tab and not have them talking to each other. But it takes a fair amount of work to get them connected enough for performance reasons without causing one tab to crash others.
I know you're joking, but that was a lot more common in the past. A part of proper base running back before the MLB absorbed most of the PCL teams involved such shenanigans. These days at most you get somebody giving the catcher a concussion.
Duh, you must be new here. That's why it's called mathematical research and not physics or some other specialty. The main difference is that with math you're focused on the mathematical challenge rather than the what actually happens stuff.
Not that there's anything wrong with it or that it never gets applied, it's just not usually referred to as mathematical research if it has a direct and obvious application.
That's not the reason why it's not useful, the reason why it's not useful is that it requires thinking on top of the rest of the thinking involved with base running. Yeah players often times do know that they can make 2nd base on their hit, but sometimes they're wrong and need to hold up. Or more likely a bumble allows them to take 2nd.
Plus, this would run afoul of the already lax standards for staying in the baseline when running the bases.
Indeed, and it's not just Apple that's doing it. My Eee PC has the version of SSD that looks a lot like a stick of RAM. For that exact purpose, a Netbook manufacturer does not have a lot of room to put things, and by using an SSD stick, they can actually fit it in the case. They'd have a hard time putting a Hard disk in, except perhaps a microdrive in a case that size.
SSD has it's place. Cost is the primary concern I have, otherwise my desktop would have it. However, my Eee PC 900, has one and for that purpose it's great. Since the device is meant to be manhandled and hauled about, having an SSD even if it's more expensive than a standard disk makes sense. Plus because the SSD is so much smaller than a 2.5" disk, or probably a 1.8" disk, it makes it a lot easier to keep the packaging wee small.
Slashdot Mirror
They do that because you typically can't use financial aid to purchase from other sources. Consequently the folks that can buy elsewhere and it's mostly the financial aid students that buy the books at greatly inflated prices.
It's not unheard of to walk literally across the street and have the prices be a fraction of the price as at the official book store. I remember having college instructors specifically suggesting that we buy our books elsewhere if we could due to the gouging.
Not to mention that it's often times cheaper to import the books from China after they were exported to there than buy the ones that are sold on the local market.
What makes you think that it wasn't a semi-autonomous piece of artwork that was making the decisions? Apart from artwork being more intelligent than your average college president?
Honestly, more of the pictures are of minorities and people in wheel chairs and the names are now more multicultural. Sure it makes a difference in some ways, but it's not a legitimate reason to push out a new book when the previous version was perfectly fine. The math itself hasn't changed much.
That's why my mother and her colleagues are using open source text books. Apart from the cost of proof reading and printing them, they're free for whoever wants them. All she has to do is examine them for errors and select the sections that she wants printed.
It's perfectly legal and quite cheap. A remedial math book goes for less than $30 which is a small fraction of the cost of a typical text book for those courses.
Yeah right. Perhaps at your school. But in recent times you'd buy a text for maybe $50 used, the next quarter you'd get maybe $15 or so for it, and that's assuming that they'd pay for it at all.
Your conclusion though is correct. I can't imagine how this is going to result in lower prices. Especially since open source texts can be had for under $30 when the prof makes it happen.
The point is that certain mistakes shouldn't be made again. Many languages provide facilities for it. Sometimes it requires more drastic measures like deprecating a call and replacing it with something new. Not that I really understand the nuances, but there was that whole strlcopy() change in the past. It wasn't strictly speaking necessary, however it did cut down on a lot of mistakes that programmers would make.
It was from what I gather important enough that it's not just what the designers of Pascal did, it was added to others as well. Turns out that having a limit to the number of characters is a good thing.
Assuming that out side forces are never brought to bear. Until companies are held accountable for exploits in their code it's not going to change. Requiring companies to share even a portion of the expense when a vulnerability is exploited would do wonders for the situation.
Umm, you misspelled fully featured. Name one other browser that's as feature complete as Firefox that is less bloated. I bet you can't do it, because the only browsers I ever see listed as being faster are also ones that are focused on being minimalist or are tied to a specific platform. They have in recent times pretty uniformly recognized that being minimalist isn't winning them market share and started grafting on the features which led to Firefox being accused of bloat.
Probably that Firefox is far less focused on adding new features than it is on refining the features that it has. Sure they've been adding features, but for the most part the additions are there to complement the ones that are already there.
As opposed to some of the other browsers like Chrome which have been adding significant features in recent memory. Such as extensions. Firefox has had extensions for years and suffered in some ways for it.
Which is probably fine if you're using OSX. Otherwise, I think most folks these days are using Go oo which is I guess in the process of merging with Libreoffice.
Speed is nice, but really what has in the past hurt OO.org and such the most is the less than perfect interoperability with MS Office. If you're going to use a minority office suite then you damn well better be able to interoperate.
Voting machines aren't hard to get right. It's a matter of proper motivation. Being able to hand the Republicans the governorship of Georgia back a few years back was really the point. No technique is perfect against corruption.
The best thing is around here where the counting is done in a glass room where people can walk around the outside watching.
That whole ice weasel thing was so classy of them. Whining about how they weren't being allowed to subvert the Firefox mark.
No they didn't. For the first part their calendar doesn't end for a few more years after that. And secondly, they never said that was the end of days, it just means that the calendar flips and that will likely bring with it changes as they saw it. End of the world is not the conclusion that anybody should be making.
It's about profits. If they don't release a new version then the only people that will pay for new copies are people who are buying new computers and too lazy to reject the EULA on the new copy and recycle their old license.
Additionally, MS for practical reasons limits the amount of functionality that they're willing to add to the OS after it's been released. Which means that it can be quite a challenge to add support for some things later on, and without any profit motive for doing it either.
I'm personally surprised that MS doesn't ditch this approach more or less altogether and go with a more Apple approach. Well, the approach taken by pretty much everybody else. Release a minor revision every year or so and a major revision when need be. Then only charge a small amount of money for the minor revisions.
Oh, great, now I'm reading these posts in Tom Servo's voice.
Except what they don't ever really talk about is that each time they double the Martys or the docs in a given point in time, they double the amount of time that period in history takes up. Shortening their useful lifespan by that much. Since they've already lived in that stretch of time doesn't automatically tack that on to the end of your life.
Consequently, they would be aging significantly with respect to everybody else in their original time line. For a few relatively short trips it's not a big deal, but it adds up over time.
That's one solution. The other being more or less what he did do, which is leave some hints for Marty in the future. This one is definitely the simplest way of handling it, although for reasons related to plot development Marty forgets to top off the tank before going to retrieve the doc.
And that explains that they're second only to MS in market share and why they're more broadly available than the other browsers? Or perhaps it explains why it is that the other browsers are suddenly getting features that Firefox has had for years?
Perhaps JavaScript wasn't the wisest path to take, but it's hard to argue with results. Especially since at the rate that Firefox is getting faster and the rate at which the other browsers are adding bloat, I'd be surprised if Firefox keeps it's reputation for being slow much longer. Barring something changing the present course.
They're working on it. It's just a matter of wanting to do it correctly rather than just doing it to say they've done it. Sort of like how they've resisted cheating on the Acid tests like some of the other browsers have been.
Just about any moron can make a new browser window per tab and not have them talking to each other. But it takes a fair amount of work to get them connected enough for performance reasons without causing one tab to crash others.
I know you're joking, but that was a lot more common in the past. A part of proper base running back before the MLB absorbed most of the PCL teams involved such shenanigans. These days at most you get somebody giving the catcher a concussion.
Duh, you must be new here. That's why it's called mathematical research and not physics or some other specialty. The main difference is that with math you're focused on the mathematical challenge rather than the what actually happens stuff.
Not that there's anything wrong with it or that it never gets applied, it's just not usually referred to as mathematical research if it has a direct and obvious application.
That's not the reason why it's not useful, the reason why it's not useful is that it requires thinking on top of the rest of the thinking involved with base running. Yeah players often times do know that they can make 2nd base on their hit, but sometimes they're wrong and need to hold up. Or more likely a bumble allows them to take 2nd.
Plus, this would run afoul of the already lax standards for staying in the baseline when running the bases.
It will leave you feeling a 14 year old girl.
More likely it should've been:
It will, like, leave you feeling like a 14 year old girl.
Geez, has nobody around here seen Valley girl?
Indeed, and it's not just Apple that's doing it. My Eee PC has the version of SSD that looks a lot like a stick of RAM. For that exact purpose, a Netbook manufacturer does not have a lot of room to put things, and by using an SSD stick, they can actually fit it in the case. They'd have a hard time putting a Hard disk in, except perhaps a microdrive in a case that size.
SSD has it's place. Cost is the primary concern I have, otherwise my desktop would have it. However, my Eee PC 900, has one and for that purpose it's great. Since the device is meant to be manhandled and hauled about, having an SSD even if it's more expensive than a standard disk makes sense. Plus because the SSD is so much smaller than a 2.5" disk, or probably a 1.8" disk, it makes it a lot easier to keep the packaging wee small.