...that have more nerve endings per unit area and where people are very sensitive to all kinds of surface stimulation. Of course it would require different models for men and women but that's not such a big deal.
I was an active collector of Infocom games until recently, but I had to give up because (1) I eventually acquired all 35 games and (2) the special edition versions of the game still sell for incredible prices. Check out this copy of Starcross that just sold on ebay for $500. People still have fond memories for these great games.
And just how slowly would something have to spin before you agreed that it wasn't spinning? 1 revolution/day, 1 revolution/year, 1 revolution/century, 1 revolution/million years?
Hyperthreading makes one core look like two. Reverse hyperthreading makes two cores look like one. So if we chain reverse hyperthreading with hyperthreading we can make one core look like one core but have twice as many features for the marketing department to brag about.
You can get an overview of the general principles here. This books is pretty old but it's still good and in some ways it's better than modern texts because it doesn't take anything for granted. This is a good modern popular account of the kinds of processes involved. By time you've read all three of these you should be in a pretty good position to think about how feet might develop. None of this tells you anything about how feet actually did develop - it just removes roadblocks that make such development seem impossible. If you actually want to find out more about how feet develop a good starting point might be here though I haven't read that.
...so I'm submitting my patent for spintronic email now. I've a hunch there's something similar in the retail line. One-spintro-clicking? Spin-one-tricking? Spin-one-tron-clicking? Inventing is hard. I'm sure that if I could just see the right combination of spintronics and one-click I'd be rich.
Exactly. Out of all the thousands, or maybe millions of patent clerks that have ever lived only one has ever produced good original work in physics. So let's hope that there are no patent clerks contributing to this project.
There's this really neat concept called the 'internet portal' where people post links to news stories with a small amount of text which you can read to decide whether or not the link is interesting enough to follow.
... and e-mail with discussing vaguely defined subject as network security or information security may not be transmitted
What does that mean? Was this story processed from Chinese using babelfish? Does anyone at/. edit or are they too busy writing stories justifying why they shouldn't bother editing?
...I've spent too much time in companies where people write nice, neat, tidy, well documented and easy to maintain code, but nobody actually knows how to do anything other than plumb one API into another. Every so often I'd come across a tool that someone had written that actually did something and I'd be bemused. How the hell did this lot write that? And I'd dig down through the source code and eventually find that under the mountain of wrappers and delegators and empty architecture there was actually a nugget, like V'ger, that did real work. And someone would explain to me "that's the code that Joe wrote years ago, he left and now we daren't touch that stuff, we just maintain the wrappers".
The truth is that you need both kind of people in software companies. And the other truth is that the people who write the nuggets do interesting work that is worthy of displaying publicly in a contest. And the rest do work that isn't.
It's no *programming* contest at all. It's much more like an algorithm-solving+text formatting race. They don't test your REAL programming skills - your ability to create your own programming libraries, the organization of your source code, the maintainability, etc.
Oh please! That's like saying the Olympics aren't a real contest because they only test the prowess of athletes, not their ability to tidy up the locker room after use, their politeness towards other clients at the gym or how nice their outfits look on TV.
What objective standard do you intend to use?
What is the demarcation line for government or anyone to step in because 'success' has been too great.
Whether or not it is in the public interest. We allow companies to grow because it is generally in the public interest. Western liberal countries provide a far higher standard of living for their population than other nations partly because they allow companies the freedom to provide people with the goods and services that they want. But if a company appears no longer to provide such benefits, eg. by stifling competition that would have been in the public interest, then it's time to reconsider.
Who gets to decide?
A body selected by a democratically elected government.
If I owned a farm and had a bumper crop of corn one year, should I be penalized for being successful?
I don't see the connection between this and Microsoft. Nobody penalises successful farmers in the US and there's no obvious reason why it would be in the public interest to do so.
Actually, plug a device into a PowerBook while the lid is closed and you have non-trivial chance of it waking up, waking up the driver for the device, crashing, remaining on, and doing serious damage because the case can't dissipate the heat while the lid is closed. I'm now careful not to plug in a device while the lid is closed. A few times I tried backups at the end of the day leaving my laptop to finish the process during the night and trusting it to hibernate automatically when finished. But most times I just had an unrecoverable black screen in the morning. I now run the backup app during the day and manually put the machine to sleep at the end. I really don't see that Windows is that much worse than other OSes.
I also can't help noticing that none of my colleagues at work trust Linux enough to hibernate the PCs they use. They always shut down properly before closing the lid.
I wonder why people still make Windows hibernation jokes. Yes, it was incredibly bad at one point. But nothing was as bad as the sound driver for a Linux laptop I had which would occasionally scream at maximum volume when restored from sleep. (And at that time I had to write a bunch of scripts to wake things like networking back up again after sleeping, something that "just worked" under Windows.) Despite my affection for the device, even my MacOS X PowerBook fails to wake properly from sleep on a semi-regular basis (twice this weekend in fact). So please, enough with the Windows hibernation jokes. They're not funny any more.
And why did I ask, I know the answer to my own question. Joking about Windows hibernation is an example of FUD.
Spelling nazism is tolerable only if the word is rather difficult and rare
and has been spelled incorrectly due to ignorance of the submitter
What about spelling Republicanism rather than spelling Nazism? I think your spelling of 'insightful' deserves a good dose of that even if it isn't quite heinous enough to deserve Nazism. (Spelling Republicanism typically involves being incarcerated on property leased from foreign countries with all of your rights suspended. But it doesn't involve things like getting your fat rendered to make soap.)
You are a moron. Before I'm modded down as flamebait I shall justify that statement.
When science thinks they understand something, credit should be made to God.
Science is not a person. Science is not plural.
But God has been here FOREVER!!
Just saying this in capital letters doesn't make it so.
He has been proven to be true.
Propositions or sentences are proven to be true. 'True' isn't an adjective that can be applied to characters from mythology. Maybe you mean "He has been proven to exist." But your inability to construct meaningful sentences is already losing you credibility.
Unlike any other religion or science...
What is the subject of this sentence? Are you saying that Christianity, the religion, sent Jesus. Or that God did? Do you have any idea what you are saying and how to construct a sentence.
Nobody else can say their God walked the earth except Christians.
Anyone can say that. Watch my lips "The evil God Urgzal, eater of babies, walked on Earth".
Anyway, it was pretty easy demonstrating what a moron you are. You have demonstrated an inability to think beyond what most 5 or 6 year olds can achieve.
I'd dismiss you as a troll but as I've seen so much evidence that many people do 'think' like you I'm taking you seriously.
You mean cochineal? It's pretty commonplace stuff and has been used to color many foods over the years. A friend of mine once tried to dye his hair with it years ago. The idiot failed to realize it colors skin just as well as hair and isn't easy to wash out.
Slashdot Mirror
...that have more nerve endings per unit area and where people are very sensitive to all kinds of surface stimulation. Of course it would require different models for men and women but that's not such a big deal.
...to ensure that the users can only visit right wing pro-war web sites? Or is that part of the operation handled further upstream?
I was an active collector of Infocom games until recently, but I had to give up because (1) I eventually acquired all 35 games and (2) the special edition versions of the game still sell for incredible prices. Check out this copy of Starcross that just sold on ebay for $500. People still have fond memories for these great games.
...you realise that they aren't bears, but giant mutant rats. And the boars used to serve up vodka at the local bar.
With McClellan kicked to the curb my sig is out of date. Never mind, sigs are ten a penny and I'll find another one.
And just how slowly would something have to spin before you agreed that it wasn't spinning? 1 revolution/day, 1 revolution/year, 1 revolution/century, 1 revolution/million years?
Hyperthreading makes one core look like two. Reverse hyperthreading makes two cores look like one. So if we chain reverse hyperthreading with hyperthreading we can make one core look like one core but have twice as many features for the marketing department to brag about.
You can get an overview of the general principles here. This books is pretty old but it's still good and in some ways it's better than modern texts because it doesn't take anything for granted. This is a good modern popular account of the kinds of processes involved. By time you've read all three of these you should be in a pretty good position to think about how feet might develop. None of this tells you anything about how feet actually did develop - it just removes roadblocks that make such development seem impossible. If you actually want to find out more about how feet develop a good starting point might be here though I haven't read that.
...so I'm submitting my patent for spintronic email now. I've a hunch there's something similar in the retail line. One-spintro-clicking? Spin-one-tricking? Spin-one-tron-clicking? Inventing is hard. I'm sure that if I could just see the right combination of spintronics and one-click I'd be rich.
Which article did you read? The one we're all talking about involves sea-living vertebrates feeding on invetrtebrates already on land.
And there was me thinking it was the butler.
Exactly. Out of all the thousands, or maybe millions of patent clerks that have ever lived only one has ever produced good original work in physics. So let's hope that there are no patent clerks contributing to this project.
The truth is that you need both kind of people in software companies. And the other truth is that the people who write the nuggets do interesting work that is worthy of displaying publicly in a contest. And the rest do work that isn't.
Having said that, plumbing competitions aren't completely unheard of.
I also can't help noticing that none of my colleagues at work trust Linux enough to hibernate the PCs they use. They always shut down properly before closing the lid.
And why did I ask, I know the answer to my own question. Joking about Windows hibernation is an example of FUD.
Anyway, it was pretty easy demonstrating what a moron you are. You have demonstrated an inability to think beyond what most 5 or 6 year olds can achieve.
I'd dismiss you as a troll but as I've seen so much evidence that many people do 'think' like you I'm taking you seriously.
...Oakland Technology Exchange.
You mean cochineal? It's pretty commonplace stuff and has been used to color many foods over the years. A friend of mine once tried to dye his hair with it years ago. The idiot failed to realize it colors skin just as well as hair and isn't easy to wash out.