Browser response, not speed, is what annoys most people on Firefox, since version 1.
Instead, it's the lack of threading - that the notion "UI, the rending engine, and plugins should run in separate threads, with the UI thread having the highest priority".
Konqueror runs Flash player in its own process "nspluginviewer", which I can renice to 19 - just like how IE runs Flash in the lowest priority by default. Still, on Firefox 3, a few tabs running CPU-intensive Flash can still effectively freeze the browser UI.
An oldie but goodie by George Polya. Readable by high school students, and not only applicable to mathematics alone, although it surely has the emphasis.
It was on the reading list of Intl. Math Olympiad training for at least one team.
1) DRM is ALWAYS cracked at some point. Although for some software, as long as it's not cracked during the first week or two, it has accomplished its mission.
2) At that point DRM is useless. DRM has its values before the crack.
3) DRM is usually intrusive, but not always.
I like DRM to go away as much as you do, but DRM is not something totally useless and only add cost like you like to portray in your post.
> Seriously, you don't? Largely because of the music industry's reluctance to use distribution methods and pricing that makes buying music "legally" > attractive
For a lot of people, the only attractive pricing is called "free". Only in a fantasy world people are aware/civilised enough not to p2p no-string-attached DRM-free music they buy. In THIS world, it won't work - so pick the lesser evil between DRM or traceable files.
Plus, if a file you purchased ended up on p2p, I'm not sure whether you'll get sued - actually, it's rather stupid to sue someone with the only evidence being a name attached on a file.
However, the non-zero potential of getting sued should act as a good deterrence to the non technicals - which, while not perfect, makes it a good compromise.
Some of the places where "their lawyer couldn't work their magic" explicitly prohibit locked phones for consumer protection (e.g. Hong Kong), so this argument doesn't hold. The "legal reason" must be something else.
The classification of business philosophy as masculine or not isn't sexist.
However, if you then say it is the "wrong" philosophy then you become a sexist.
There's no right or wrong, it all depends on the situation and what would benefit you most.
NOT thinking the rest of the industry as enemies would only work if they return your favour. Too bad there are people called shareholders (mind you, both male and female shareholders), most of whom care about their investments, only their investments - and don't give a shit about the philosophy that the company is run on.
You're also slightly mathematically mistaken because intellectual abilities between two populations are not directly comparable without any summary statistics.
If you take the "average" or "median" of intellectual abilities of all men, and the average of intellectual abilities of all women, they're essentially equal.
However, a greater "variance" among men's intelligence (or ability by any measurement, for that matter), means that there are more men at both ends of the spectrum.
All other points regarding compartmentalizing, tradeoffs, micro level, asking for directions, caring for families, etc. are observations totally irrelevant to chess at best, folklores or stereotypes at worst.
There's a wide assumption that the researchers themselves really want to publish all results.
Unfortunately, as in almost the entire field of "science" nowadays, it's not the case.
Researchers themselves have a tendency to hide failures - given that most experiments result in failure, they tend to focus on reporting the ones reporting success.
This use of time simply makes most sense - they don't have the time to report all the failures, and reports of failures not as valuable as reports of success only makes it worse - think about what kind of views your peers will have towards you if most of your publications are negative results.
Sadly, this thinking is parasitic and is very prevalent across all research fields.
Journals are very selective given the limited number of pages they have. If I were a journal, I'd pick reports of success first. It's the evil of centrally-controlled publication, and the mindset that, "if a research is of any good value, it must appear on some journal".
Granted, peer review is a good thing, but there must be a way to give researches credibility without getting published on some journal.
Compounded with big-pharma-sourced funding with very fine strings attached...we have a really screwed up system.
I recently bought a Thomson SpeedTouch 516 ADSL modem.
The interface is crap, restrictive, and the option to turn it into bridge mode disappeared from the UI (I had to telnet into the modem using information from the forums to do it).
What's most infuriating - on the first page of their manual, there's a "SPEEDTOUCH SAFETY INSTRUCTIONS AND REGULATORY NOTICES". Under which there's a section called "Directive".
It looks like a bunch of EULA crap that cannot be enforced -
Unless express and prior approval by THOMSON in writing, you may not:
1. *Disassemble*, de-compile, reverse engineer, trace or otherwise analyse the equipment, its content, operation, or functionality
(you cannot even peek into the openings)
2. or otherwise attempt to derive source code (or the underlying ideas, algorithms, structure or organization) from the equipment
(getting more ridiculous)
3. or from any other information provided *by THOMSON*, except to the extent that this restriction is expressly prohibited by local law
(This is *REALLY* stupid)
4. Copy, rent, loan, re-sell, sub-license, or otherwise transfer or distribute the equipment to others
(Their lawyers really believe I cannot sell the thing on Craigslist. I suggest they retake Law 101.)
5. Modify, adapt or create a derivative work of the equipment
(it also looks like i cannot connect the modem to a router, too, i guess?)
6. Remove from any copies of the equipment any product identification, copyright or other notices
(sue me, i'm about to throw away the manual)
7. Disseminate performance information or analysis (including, without limitation, benchmarks) from any source relating to the equipment
(from this statement i conclude the SpeedTouch 516 must perform like crap. OOps, have I violated it already?)
My opinion derived from the above facts: Thomson are totally controlled by retarded lawyers, and this modem is the last thing I'm getting from them.
Due to this difference in spread, it only means that if the test is made more difficult, a higher percentage of boys than girls are going to "pass" the test.
However, if the test is made easier, the reverse happens - a higher percentage of girls are going to pass the test than boys.
I must agree more investigation should be carried out to see if it is the case.
Male performance (or anything about men, really) is theorized to have a way wider spread than female, who tend to aggregate near the average.
As a result, girls tend to perform better than boys as a whole when the overall bar of standard is lowered (you cannot distinguish the smart boys and the smart girls anymore, but the remaining boys can spread all the way to the bottom), while when things become really, really difficult, you'll find the brightest of boys on top - however, we're talking about maybe the top 5% here.
For more food of thoughts, read this article and thing about if it relates to examples around you. I find plenty.
> but becoming a programmer requires greater than average abilities.
You cannot rate "ability" in general and the put programmers somewhere.
Instead, separate the activities and then rate the population - someone bad at coding might be very good at time management, for example.
If we limit the spectrum to be just across the developers, you'll find a histogram - some good, some average, some bad.
And if you split the genders at this point, you'll find the female histogram with a higher centre and thinner tails, while the male curve with a lower centre and fatter tails.
> Also, here, ladies and gentlemen, is exactly the kind of thinking that encourages obfuscated code.
Explain.
It only takes average skill to write easy-to-follow code. From my admittedly anecdotal experience.
If you pick programmers at random you're likely going to see the women outputting better comments, because the difference in code quality between the brilliant coder and the average coder is not as stark as between the average coder and the bad coder.
All of these can be explained by women gathering around the average and the men spreading across the entire spectrum.
i.e. if you set your bar low, females are going to outperform males. If you set your bar high, you're going to see them even.
Slashdot Mirror
Browser response, not speed, is what annoys most people on Firefox, since version 1.
Instead, it's the lack of threading - that the notion "UI, the rending engine, and plugins should run in separate threads, with the UI thread having the highest priority".
Konqueror runs Flash player in its own process "nspluginviewer", which I can renice to 19 - just like how IE runs Flash in the lowest priority by default. Still, on Firefox 3, a few tabs running CPU-intensive Flash can still effectively freeze the browser UI.
:wq is too verbose. :x ftw
try ZZ
An oldie but goodie by George Polya. Readable by high school students, and not only applicable to mathematics alone, although it surely has the emphasis.
It was on the reading list of Intl. Math Olympiad training for at least one team.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Solve_It
Genetically-identical => no lung defects that made it live only for 7 minutes.
1) DRM is ALWAYS cracked at some point. Although for some software, as long as it's not cracked during the first week or two, it has accomplished its mission.
2) At that point DRM is useless. DRM has its values before the crack.
3) DRM is usually intrusive, but not always.
I like DRM to go away as much as you do, but DRM is not something totally useless and only add cost like you like to portray in your post.
> Seriously, you don't? Largely because of the music industry's reluctance to use distribution methods and pricing that makes buying music "legally"
> attractive
For a lot of people, the only attractive pricing is called "free". Only in a fantasy world people are aware/civilised enough not to p2p no-string-attached DRM-free music they buy. In THIS world, it won't work - so pick the lesser evil between DRM or traceable files.
Plus, if a file you purchased ended up on p2p, I'm not sure whether you'll get sued - actually, it's rather stupid to sue someone with the only evidence being a name attached on a file.
However, the non-zero potential of getting sued should act as a good deterrence to the non technicals - which, while not perfect, makes it a good compromise.
That's why corporate personhood needs to be repealed.
The answer was no back then and hasn't change since no matter how many times the console fanboys tried.
Trying to teach a 80 year old new anything.
Just be nice and do it for them.
Some of the places where "their lawyer couldn't work their magic" explicitly prohibit locked phones for consumer protection (e.g. Hong Kong), so this argument doesn't hold. The "legal reason" must be something else.
The classification of business philosophy as masculine or not isn't sexist.
However, if you then say it is the "wrong" philosophy then you become a sexist.
There's no right or wrong, it all depends on the situation and what would benefit you most.
NOT thinking the rest of the industry as enemies would only work if they return your favour. Too bad there are people called shareholders (mind you, both male and female shareholders), most of whom care about their investments, only their investments - and don't give a shit about the philosophy that the company is run on.
so it's not a closed system. whose entropy are we increasing in order to control our own evolution?
> but I refuse to believe that he could have done it single handedly.
How about with the help of Haliburton, Blackwaters, etc.
He'll just need to cast a TYM POR to prevent anything bad from happening in the first place!
Asteroid is free, Meteor is expensive - costs anywhere from 50 to 99 MP to cast, depending on which FF you're playing.
I'd use an Asteroid over Meteor any day.
You're also slightly mathematically mistaken because intellectual abilities between two populations are not directly comparable without any summary statistics.
If you take the "average" or "median" of intellectual abilities of all men, and the average of intellectual abilities of all women, they're essentially equal.
However, a greater "variance" among men's intelligence (or ability by any measurement, for that matter), means that there are more men at both ends of the spectrum.
All other points regarding compartmentalizing, tradeoffs, micro level, asking for directions, caring for families, etc. are observations totally irrelevant to chess at best, folklores or stereotypes at worst.
There's a wide assumption that the researchers themselves really want to publish all results.
Unfortunately, as in almost the entire field of "science" nowadays, it's not the case.
Researchers themselves have a tendency to hide failures - given that most experiments result in failure, they tend to focus on reporting the ones reporting success.
This use of time simply makes most sense - they don't have the time to report all the failures, and reports of failures not as valuable as reports of success only makes it worse - think about what kind of views your peers will have towards you if most of your publications are negative results.
Sadly, this thinking is parasitic and is very prevalent across all research fields.
Journals are very selective given the limited number of pages they have. If I were a journal, I'd pick reports of success first. It's the evil of centrally-controlled publication, and the mindset that, "if a research is of any good value, it must appear on some journal".
Granted, peer review is a good thing, but there must be a way to give researches credibility without getting published on some journal.
Compounded with big-pharma-sourced funding with very fine strings attached...we have a really screwed up system.
I recently bought a Thomson SpeedTouch 516 ADSL modem.
The interface is crap, restrictive, and the option to turn it into bridge mode disappeared from the UI (I had to telnet into the modem using information from the forums to do it).
What's most infuriating - on the first page of their manual, there's a "SPEEDTOUCH SAFETY INSTRUCTIONS AND REGULATORY NOTICES". Under which there's a section called "Directive".
It looks like a bunch of EULA crap that cannot be enforced -
Unless express and prior approval by THOMSON in writing, you may not:
1. *Disassemble*, de-compile, reverse engineer, trace or otherwise analyse the equipment, its content, operation, or functionality
(you cannot even peek into the openings)
2. or otherwise attempt to derive source code (or the underlying ideas, algorithms, structure or organization) from the equipment
(getting more ridiculous)
3. or from any other information provided *by THOMSON*, except to the extent that this restriction is expressly prohibited by local law
(This is *REALLY* stupid)
4. Copy, rent, loan, re-sell, sub-license, or otherwise transfer or distribute the equipment to others
(Their lawyers really believe I cannot sell the thing on Craigslist. I suggest they retake Law 101.)
5. Modify, adapt or create a derivative work of the equipment
(it also looks like i cannot connect the modem to a router, too, i guess?)
6. Remove from any copies of the equipment any product identification, copyright or other notices
(sue me, i'm about to throw away the manual)
7. Disseminate performance information or analysis (including, without limitation, benchmarks) from any source relating to the equipment
(from this statement i conclude the SpeedTouch 516 must perform like crap. OOps, have I violated it already?)
My opinion derived from the above facts: Thomson are totally controlled by retarded lawyers, and this modem is the last thing I'm getting from them.
Due to this difference in spread, it only means that if the test is made more difficult, a higher percentage of boys than girls are going to "pass" the test.
However, if the test is made easier, the reverse happens - a higher percentage of girls are going to pass the test than boys.
Maybe it's a redundant link, but it's a good read:
http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm
I must agree more investigation should be carried out to see if it is the case.
Male performance (or anything about men, really) is theorized to have a way wider spread than female, who tend to aggregate near the average.
As a result, girls tend to perform better than boys as a whole when the overall bar of standard is lowered (you cannot distinguish the smart boys and the smart girls anymore, but the remaining boys can spread all the way to the bottom), while when things become really, really difficult, you'll find the brightest of boys on top - however, we're talking about maybe the top 5% here.
For more food of thoughts, read this article and thing about if it relates to examples around you. I find plenty.
http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm
for (;;)
{
}
vs
while(1)
{
}
> If you really were as good as you'd like to think you are - why would you be so insecure?
Same question to you when people say women aren't as good at mathematics?
It's not defensive or insecure. It's called justice.
We have to speak up for one another now before it becomes a systematic discrimination.
> but becoming a programmer requires greater than average abilities.
You cannot rate "ability" in general and the put programmers somewhere.
Instead, separate the activities and then rate the population - someone bad at coding might be very good at time management, for example.
If we limit the spectrum to be just across the developers, you'll find a histogram - some good, some average, some bad.
And if you split the genders at this point, you'll find the female histogram with a higher centre and thinner tails, while the male curve with a lower centre and fatter tails.
> Also, here, ladies and gentlemen, is exactly the kind of thinking that encourages obfuscated code.
Explain.
It only takes average skill to write easy-to-follow code. From my admittedly anecdotal experience.
If you pick programmers at random you're likely going to see the women outputting better comments, because the difference in code quality between the brilliant coder and the average coder is not as stark as between the average coder and the bad coder.
All of these can be explained by women gathering around the average and the men spreading across the entire spectrum.
i.e. if you set your bar low, females are going to outperform males. If you set your bar high, you're going to see them even.
> there's explanations for why men produce less communicative code than women do?
Your comment makes it sound like it's a proven fact.
Saying "men produce less communicative code thatn women do" is just as true as saying "women understand mathematics less than men do".