Dan? Is that you? I just read on your website under the GUI Builder section that you've just had a baby. Do you have a link to your peer-reviewed journal article where you described the experience of a male having a baby?:-)
Seriously though, that's a pretty impressive project you're working on. Keep up the good work. Are you doing it by yourself?
Well, couldn't you have just highlighted the character, inserted a frame, played with the borders and repositioned the resulting character with custom kerning and anchor it to the preceding text?
Two things I really want fixed before I consider Open Office full-time (and I don't know if 3.1 does so I apologise if they've already been addressed) are: a) font rendering; and b) performance.
Now, the font rendering issue might seem a bit of a nitpick, but if I have to spend over 9 hours a day looking at the thing I want the fonts to look nice. MS-Office is not perfect. But I find it better than Open Office. My experience with Open Office has been horribly rendered fonts that can be ignored if I were just typing a page or two but I need to be comfortable if I am using it day-in-day-out. If I make adjustments to freetype (or whatever the normal OS renderer is) then I want Open Office to render it the same. It needs to render fonts exactly the same as the OS in general.
The performance issue is, for me, less of an issue. BUT it cannot feel 'sluggish'. If I am typing I want my applications to be responsive. Start-up time is less of an issue that I can ignore.
Well, I think I'm going to have to go the RMA path as well. Just trying to email their 'support' is like extracting teeth. I've been given a 'case file' now, so I'll see how that pans out; but if it's not fixed by next Friday I think I'll just go the RMA path. The only good to come of this is that I have an answer relating to why the drives were mysteriously disappearing (not showing in BIOS after cold-reboot, for example). Fortunately I have about 20 HDDs here (no kidding) and can swap out the ones with the dodgy firmware for the time being.
Just one more thing: after the drives 'disappear' I can get them back by unplugging the power and SATA cables. After that the BIOS finds them again and things go smoothly. For now it's a minor inconvenience for me, but it puts the integrity of the drives in question (to me).
Two of my drives are on the list of potentially affected drives. This is actually reassuring because one of the drives for a few weeks now has had mysterious issues similar the description in the article. I just wonder where I can download the firmware update... it appears that I have to contact seagate support, which I cannot do without registering on their website!
Too bad the author did not develop the game multi-platform:(
Yes it is a shame. But what does it have to do with Wine? You're talking about two different subjects: a) Will the game run under Wine; and b) is the game cross-platform. Obviously the cross-platform approach is ideal (and I agree with you I think). But you're conflating two different subjects. A program able to run under Wine is not cross-platform.
Oops. Sorry snowgirl. You didn't say "purposefully grown (and replanted and regrown"... someone else did. I apoligise. But my overall argument still stands.
And by the way, snowgirl, this isn't personal. I am not some dope smoking hippy either. I just honestly think you've got it wrong. Which is why I mentioned the anecdotal comments your boy friends (who happened to work in the logging and paper industries) made; because you seem to believe what they said. Note the word 'anecdotal'. Yeah, it's very interesting what they said. Did they believe what they told you? Probably, but that is beside the point. For a start they are biased comments. Second, they were just comments! They were not the results of some extensive studies (or, if they were you didn't express it like they were). Anyway, as I said, I think you mean well and probably believe what your saying, but I think you're wrong. That is all. No offence intended.
They are not "plantations" no one waters them, no one irrigates them...
Who said anything about irrigating?
If we walked away from these replanted forests, they would grow just fine, like they always did, and what are we replanting them with? The exact same trees that were there to begin with.
You keep say "replanting" and "regrown". Nature doesn't need replanting. I actually don't know what you're talking about. But in your original comment you said:
Almost all paper is made from trees that are grown (and replanted and regrown)
Places where things are purposefully grown (and replanted and regrown) are, by definition, plantations.
The exact same trees that were there to begin with.
The exact same trees. The exact same trees compared to what? Before they became plantations? I doubt you even really know what was there beforehand (i.e. BEFORE the plantation). If a clearcut plantation regrows into another homogenous group of human chosen trees then.. what's your point? Productive plantations are big groups of homogenous species. This doesn't happen very much at all in nature. In fact it's damn rare.
Perhaps I really should take some pictures of these forests, etc, and show people what "clear cut" logging actually looks like... if anything, for only a month or so, it's stumps, then clear cut, then growing NATURAL trees in NATURE, not in controlled "plantations".
No offence, but I'm not sure you really know what "NATURAL trees in NATURE" really means; you certainly don't seem to know what a plantation is if you're suggesting that plantations have to be watered, irrigated, and with people tending to them.
Go ahead and take some photos. You won't be taking photos of a forest being clearcut though, you'll be taking a photo of a plantation being cut.
Next time I am in Borneo, Papua New Guinea or the Amazon maybe I can take some photos as well. But you'll still think that acres of plantation trees being felled is comparable. They'll just grow back.
If you want to save trees, DON'T WORRY ABOUT PAPER OR WOOD PRODUCTS, those industries cannot use the wood fast enough.
I respect your belief, but I think you're wrong. Those plantations that grow the trees that you say will supply paper endlessly are, I hate to say it, finite in area. Therefore, the paper they can produce is finite. Now, I guess the other thing you're saying is that they're plantation trees being felled. Now, that is correct. But before it was a plantation it was probably a native forest. Now, those forests were cleared many years ago, so arguing the point now is... pointless--they're plantation trees now. Also, what happens when those areas can no longer supply the growing consumption of paper and other wood-derived products? They'll have to clear some more native forest for more plantations.
Now, the other issue you raise:
What you DO want to worry about are the people CLEAR CUTTING RAIN FOREST LAND in order to grow enough crop in order to feed their family
There is some merit to what I think you may have been trying to argue. There are poor people. People on the edge of existence. They have to clear rainforest to grow crops to exist. Yep, that is true. But why are you shifting the focus onto these people struggling to survive? A better question is (to ask yourself): "I use 1000 peices of paper a day, and toilet paper, and I eat 3 square meals. How many trees do I need to clear to achieve that"? Shifting the blame onto the South American indian who grows a few tomatos and lettuce crops is insane. Where does your food come from? McDonalds? Yeah, McDonalds don't cause deforestation; after all, they're just a little building in a carpark and they import all their beef. Beef raised on, umm, treeless paddocks, or in Sth America on huge ranches. Not our fault. It's all those pesky farmers. They're the real problem. Maybe you should ask yourself why these poor people are forced to 'intrude' into uncut rainforest areas. Is it them supporting themselves or, indirectly their rich superiors, or even more indirectly, you?
Just one last thing. I thank-you for passing on all those interesting anecdotes that your boy friends have told you. But, alas, I think they're wrong as well.
I think we're getting too reliant on trusting other people to keep our data. Don't get me wrong, there should be a minimum (and maximum) length of time that 3rd parties keep records of our transactions... they're the 3rd parties transactions as well, after all.
Expecting a 3rd party to keep records of transactions beyond a reasonable (or lawful) amount of time is, I think, crazy. 100, 50, or even 20 years ago this wasn't expected. Of course the third parties had to keep (paper) records for a certain amount of time. Beyond that though, why should they maintain them? If I, personally, want those records then I can damn well keep them myself.
Now, I do agree with what I think the summary is asking. To a point. I think that if I had to access a phone bill (for example) it should be no harder or no easier than it was before huge multi-multi-TB databases. I don't agree that I should be able to query the database myself when I am no longer a customer. The record should be there for a nominal period (as required by law), after which it is deleted (the same as shredding paper records). During the time when the record is 'active' but I am no longer a customer, then I should be able to get a copy of that record... but, not through an online service. If I need the record badly, then I can request it, by telephone or whatever and they can manually send it to me. I don't see why the company should keep maintaining a "lookup online" service for lost customers.
Now, the real is to 'How long should companies make e-bills available' is: as long as you're a customer.
'But I want the luxury of checking things online. How can I do this if they don't allow e-access'? You can't. Bad luck. You can get a copy by ringing or emailing or whatever, you just don't have a web interface. Get over it.
How long should records be kept? As long as the law states.
couple of 1G or larger SATA disks, which I place in a front-loading holder and put in the fire, safe after they're written
Bruce, I have no reason to doubt you; but are you sure it's OK to put SATA drives into the fire? I know it's probably romantic to sit in front of a nice fireplace made from SATA disks, but wouldn't logs be cheaper (NO, NOT the/var/log kind)?
I know. But, sometimes the simplest solutions are the best. Get a permenant marker and write on the silly things. After they're all appropriately marked keep them wherever... camera bag, wallet, in the device, wherever.
The upward movement of the Yellowstone caldera floor â" almost 3 inches (7 centimeters) per year for the past three years â" is more than three times greater than ever observed since such measurements began in 1923.
Why is the QUEEN so special that she can give people special titles?
You're correct of course. Another way of looking at it, though, is that this whole thing is not about the queen of England at all; it's about honouring Terry Pratchett.
Slashdot Mirror
Dan? Is that you? I just read on your website under the GUI Builder section that you've just had a baby. Do you have a link to your peer-reviewed journal article where you described the experience of a male having a baby? :-)
Seriously though, that's a pretty impressive project you're working on. Keep up the good work. Are you doing it by yourself?
Well, couldn't you have just highlighted the character, inserted a frame, played with the borders and repositioned the resulting character with custom kerning and anchor it to the preceding text?
Two things I really want fixed before I consider Open Office full-time (and I don't know if 3.1 does so I apologise if they've already been addressed) are: a) font rendering; and b) performance.
Now, the font rendering issue might seem a bit of a nitpick, but if I have to spend over 9 hours a day looking at the thing I want the fonts to look nice. MS-Office is not perfect. But I find it better than Open Office. My experience with Open Office has been horribly rendered fonts that can be ignored if I were just typing a page or two but I need to be comfortable if I am using it day-in-day-out. If I make adjustments to freetype (or whatever the normal OS renderer is) then I want Open Office to render it the same. It needs to render fonts exactly the same as the OS in general.
The performance issue is, for me, less of an issue. BUT it cannot feel 'sluggish'. If I am typing I want my applications to be responsive. Start-up time is less of an issue that I can ignore.
How does that work?
Well, I think I'm going to have to go the RMA path as well. Just trying to email their 'support' is like extracting teeth. I've been given a 'case file' now, so I'll see how that pans out; but if it's not fixed by next Friday I think I'll just go the RMA path. The only good to come of this is that I have an answer relating to why the drives were mysteriously disappearing (not showing in BIOS after cold-reboot, for example). Fortunately I have about 20 HDDs here (no kidding) and can swap out the ones with the dodgy firmware for the time being.
Just one more thing: after the drives 'disappear' I can get them back by unplugging the power and SATA cables. After that the BIOS finds them again and things go smoothly. For now it's a minor inconvenience for me, but it puts the integrity of the drives in question (to me).
Two of my drives are on the list of potentially affected drives. This is actually reassuring because one of the drives for a few weeks now has had mysterious issues similar the description in the article. I just wonder where I can download the firmware update... it appears that I have to contact seagate support, which I cannot do without registering on their website!
Does not work under Wine
Too bad the author did not develop the game multi-platform :(
Yes it is a shame. But what does it have to do with Wine? You're talking about two different subjects: a) Will the game run under Wine; and b) is the game cross-platform. Obviously the cross-platform approach is ideal (and I agree with you I think). But you're conflating two different subjects. A program able to run under Wine is not cross-platform.
That's probably the most creative computer game I've seen in years. Simple. Effective. Looks like fun.
I thank-you for passing on all those interesting anecdotes that your boy friends have told you.
How is this relevant to paper?
It's not.
they're the 3rd parties transactions as well, after all.
I agree with everything you're saying.
It was an example. To make a point. So, I chose something that I thought many people could relate to.
Oops. Sorry snowgirl. You didn't say "purposefully grown (and replanted and regrown"... someone else did. I apoligise. But my overall argument still stands.
And by the way, snowgirl, this isn't personal. I am not some dope smoking hippy either. I just honestly think you've got it wrong. Which is why I mentioned the anecdotal comments your boy friends (who happened to work in the logging and paper industries) made; because you seem to believe what they said. Note the word 'anecdotal'. Yeah, it's very interesting what they said. Did they believe what they told you? Probably, but that is beside the point. For a start they are biased comments. Second, they were just comments! They were not the results of some extensive studies (or, if they were you didn't express it like they were). Anyway, as I said, I think you mean well and probably believe what your saying, but I think you're wrong. That is all. No offence intended.
They are not "plantations" no one waters them, no one irrigates them...
Who said anything about irrigating?
If we walked away from these replanted forests, they would grow just fine, like they always did, and what are we replanting them with? The exact same trees that were there to begin with.
You keep say "replanting" and "regrown". Nature doesn't need replanting. I actually don't know what you're talking about. But in your original comment you said:
Almost all paper is made from trees that are grown (and replanted and regrown)
Places where things are purposefully grown (and replanted and regrown) are, by definition, plantations.
The exact same trees that were there to begin with.
The exact same trees. The exact same trees compared to what? Before they became plantations? I doubt you even really know what was there beforehand (i.e. BEFORE the plantation). If a clearcut plantation regrows into another homogenous group of human chosen trees then.. what's your point? Productive plantations are big groups of homogenous species. This doesn't happen very much at all in nature. In fact it's damn rare.
Perhaps I really should take some pictures of these forests, etc, and show people what "clear cut" logging actually looks like... if anything, for only a month or so, it's stumps, then clear cut, then growing NATURAL trees in NATURE, not in controlled "plantations".
No offence, but I'm not sure you really know what "NATURAL trees in NATURE" really means; you certainly don't seem to know what a plantation is if you're suggesting that plantations have to be watered, irrigated, and with people tending to them.
Go ahead and take some photos. You won't be taking photos of a forest being clearcut though, you'll be taking a photo of a plantation being cut.
Next time I am in Borneo, Papua New Guinea or the Amazon maybe I can take some photos as well. But you'll still think that acres of plantation trees being felled is comparable. They'll just grow back.
Wow. Good job at arguing against me and at the same time supporting what I said.
Trees that are used for paper grow VERY fast
Just out of curiosity, what species of tree are they growing?
If you want to save trees, DON'T WORRY ABOUT PAPER OR WOOD PRODUCTS, those industries cannot use the wood fast enough.
I respect your belief, but I think you're wrong. Those plantations that grow the trees that you say will supply paper endlessly are, I hate to say it, finite in area. Therefore, the paper they can produce is finite. Now, I guess the other thing you're saying is that they're plantation trees being felled. Now, that is correct. But before it was a plantation it was probably a native forest. Now, those forests were cleared many years ago, so arguing the point now is... pointless--they're plantation trees now. Also, what happens when those areas can no longer supply the growing consumption of paper and other wood-derived products? They'll have to clear some more native forest for more plantations.
Now, the other issue you raise:
What you DO want to worry about are the people CLEAR CUTTING RAIN FOREST LAND in order to grow enough crop in order to feed their family
There is some merit to what I think you may have been trying to argue. There are poor people. People on the edge of existence. They have to clear rainforest to grow crops to exist. Yep, that is true. But why are you shifting the focus onto these people struggling to survive? A better question is (to ask yourself): "I use 1000 peices of paper a day, and toilet paper, and I eat 3 square meals. How many trees do I need to clear to achieve that"? Shifting the blame onto the South American indian who grows a few tomatos and lettuce crops is insane. Where does your food come from? McDonalds? Yeah, McDonalds don't cause deforestation; after all, they're just a little building in a carpark and they import all their beef. Beef raised on, umm, treeless paddocks, or in Sth America on huge ranches. Not our fault. It's all those pesky farmers. They're the real problem. Maybe you should ask yourself why these poor people are forced to 'intrude' into uncut rainforest areas. Is it them supporting themselves or, indirectly their rich superiors, or even more indirectly, you?
Just one last thing. I thank-you for passing on all those interesting anecdotes that your boy friends have told you. But, alas, I think they're wrong as well.
In response to the tag 'forever'.
I think we're getting too reliant on trusting other people to keep our data. Don't get me wrong, there should be a minimum (and maximum) length of time that 3rd parties keep records of our transactions... they're the 3rd parties transactions as well, after all.
Expecting a 3rd party to keep records of transactions beyond a reasonable (or lawful) amount of time is, I think, crazy. 100, 50, or even 20 years ago this wasn't expected. Of course the third parties had to keep (paper) records for a certain amount of time. Beyond that though, why should they maintain them? If I, personally, want those records then I can damn well keep them myself.
Now, I do agree with what I think the summary is asking. To a point. I think that if I had to access a phone bill (for example) it should be no harder or no easier than it was before huge multi-multi-TB databases. I don't agree that I should be able to query the database myself when I am no longer a customer. The record should be there for a nominal period (as required by law), after which it is deleted (the same as shredding paper records). During the time when the record is 'active' but I am no longer a customer, then I should be able to get a copy of that record... but, not through an online service. If I need the record badly, then I can request it, by telephone or whatever and they can manually send it to me. I don't see why the company should keep maintaining a "lookup online" service for lost customers.
Now, the real is to 'How long should companies make e-bills available' is: as long as you're a customer.
'But I want the luxury of checking things online. How can I do this if they don't allow e-access'? You can't. Bad luck. You can get a copy by ringing or emailing or whatever, you just don't have a web interface. Get over it.
How long should records be kept? As long as the law states.
Heh. Sorry.
couple of 1G or larger SATA disks, which I place in a front-loading holder and put in the fire, safe after they're written
Bruce, I have no reason to doubt you; but are you sure it's OK to put SATA drives into the fire? I know it's probably romantic to sit in front of a nice fireplace made from SATA disks, but wouldn't logs be cheaper (NO, NOT the /var/log kind)?
I know. But, sometimes the simplest solutions are the best. Get a permenant marker and write on the silly things. After they're all appropriately marked keep them wherever... camera bag, wallet, in the device, wherever.
Combine that with a rapid rise in elevation over the past three years
How much of a rise are we talking about?
From wikipedia:
The upward movement of the Yellowstone caldera floor â" almost 3 inches (7 centimeters) per year for the past three years â" is more than three times greater than ever observed since such measurements began in 1923.
home users and very small outfits; but it is situations like that where imaging tools are far more useful.
Especially if the home user is cute and wearing the small outfit. The imaging devices (camera etc) are very useful.
Why is the QUEEN so special that she can give people special titles?
You're correct of course. Another way of looking at it, though, is that this whole thing is not about the queen of England at all; it's about honouring Terry Pratchett.
I think I may apply for a job.