No, not really. At least I don't think so. I think our expectations are that it will improve and continue to be amazed. There's a difference between good and impressive. There's even a difference between excellent and impressive.
A car analogy: A Ford Focus is an excellent car. It is not impressive.
Err... Yes, yes I am old. Whatever gave you that idea? I know what you like... Fortunately, Ms. KGIII is still awake and my (bad) signing and attempts to sit-wiggle/sit-dance aren't awakening her.
I think that's the trinity folk and not all Christians subscribe to that, as far as I know. There's God the Father, God the Sun, and God the Holy Ghost. They are one and the same divinity, the holy trinity, but different manifestations of that self.
At least that's how I understand it. I am not actually a Christian but I know some. I even spent some time studying with the Jehovah's Witnesses and, at one point, spent a goodly amount of time with a young lady who was a Mormon. For the record, no we did not have sex but we did sort of have a relationship - it's complicated. She's dead now. Ah well... She was good people.
You should find a way to use it as the duress password so that, if used, it sets off a loud klaxon alarm complete with the brilliant strobing lights. It would be awesome.
When I was a wee lad, and the Sun still had a price-tag attached, we had these rectangular cases. Inside was a scroll of paper the case had off-set slits in it that were large enough to read the text on the scroll. You'd scroll, read a question, and flip it over to find out the answer. When you hit the end, you turned it over, flipped it upside down, and repeated the process. That meant one scroll would have something like 500 questions on it.
After going through them enough times, I'd memorized all the questions and was master and commander at the game, much to the angst of my siblings and parents as they relied on their wits.
Well, it wasn't *that* long ago, they were made of plastic. Like real plastic, not stone and papyrus. I went looking to see if I could find an example but they appear to have disappeared off the face of the planet and can't be found online. They had nature, sports, geography, history, "current" (ha!) events, and things like that. I had quite a collection of 'em. It was a step-up from a hula-hoop or a stick and an bicycle rim. We didn't have much in the way of electronics for kids, at least not like that.
I did have a neat 101-in-1 type of deal and I'd purloined an older sibling's chemistry set. Come to think of it, I might have purloined the 101-in-1 electronics kit set from him too. Ah well... He wasn't using it and I've surely made up for it. Not long ago, I sent him a much more recent version and got one for myself. Mine was delivered to Maine so I haven't played with it yet.
At any rate, the trivia did have multiple choice in some cases. You might even have had to scroll a few lines to read the question. I'll be damned if I know what brand they were under but they were fun until, much like you, I'd found a way to cheat. Well, I consider it cheating to memorize all the answers. I'd even fake being wrong at times. Ah, those were the heady days of youth.
You jest but there's almost certainly a group of people who agree with that sentiment, or could be easily convinced to express agreement zealously. I suspect that group of people is larger in number than many people realize. That's even more disturbing is how many folks are in that camp who don't realize they are members of that camp.
Now that I think about it, I don't want to think about it.
For starters, I think you're mistaking water-resistant with water-proof. They are not synonyms. As for the time with regards to resistant, I believe it is cumulative.
A long time ago, I lost data. I lost a lot of data. At the time, I lost data that was more than ten years old. That was back around 2000. I do not lose data now. I have not lost meaningful data since. I will never lose data again.
I do not even store much data locally. Even though I am not home, it is pushed out to my home network. From there, it is mirrored and pushed out to disparate physical locations. I have hardware at friend's houses. I have hardware at other property that I own. I have hardware in my garage/workshop.
Storage is cheap and connectivity is near ubiquitous (for me). I can not justify not taking the time to create a good backup system and automate it. The only thing that is not automated, entirely, is verification. I do that manually and on a regular basis.
Even as I'm typing this, I'm using a computer but I'm actually connected to a computer at my home via VNC. Data isn't even stored on that computer but is pushed out over my own network and stored/retrieved from there. Once it is configured, it's good to go. I test it and make sure that backups are not just verified but are actually working as expected when restored. I'd like to automate that part away but I've not really figured out a good way to do so.
I'm pretty anal about backups. There's not a lot that I'm anal about but backups are one of those things. I never, well almost never, save a single copy of anything. Drives are cheap. I'll buy more. One catastrophic data-loss was unacceptable and, unfortunately, that data loss included my backups - as I wasn't even storing them off-site. I will not lose data again. Yes, I backup things I don't need. That's okay. I'll buy more disk space. I even send out data to be stored with professionals but I only bother with that twice a year.
If I may be so bold... Why, pray tell, are you putting your personal data on it? Yes, your name and whatnot is on there. Why the other stuff? There's no storage of credit cards, there's no reason to have it tied to a private email address, there's no need to put things on there that you don't want to lose. If you're expecting security from a mobile device, a device that can be lost or stolen, then you're doing it wrong at the very start of the security process.
Nothing, and I mean that literally, is both secure and convenient. One might even go so far as to speculate that security and functional are diametrically opposed. Instead, you make choices based on risk vs. reward. Expecting this device to be secure is, well, naive. Don't put information you want to be kept private on your mobile devices - don't even put them on computers.
There's a reason that Russia has reverted to keeping their confidential data on paper. That's a good choice for them to have made. Now consider how much (or little) you value your personal information and act accordingly.
I couldn't imagine that they'd go through with canceling it without a replacement at hand but I never saw any follow-up articles about the outcome. As I recall, there was a hearing and then an investigation, and then was supposed to be another hearing - that one never made the rounds at my various online news haunts. Between the A-10 and the Spooky, well... We've got some aircraft that can loiter and lay down some serious firepower as needed.
One of the things about the A-10 is that it is pretty much just a giant bad-ass gun with wing. I do mean bad-ass. I don't remember the specs on that bit of kit but is fantastic. I kind of want to play with one. How could I not want to? At any rate, I don't think the Marines want them so much as they want someone else to have that capacity. I seem to recall a topic being that the Marines could take over the program and I believe they declined to do so. I'm not positive as to why they'd decline but I'd speculate that it's not really a part of their core mission and would dilute "scant" resources.
Hmm... They neither said nor insinuated any of the things you're attributing to them. There is no "in other words" by my reading. Where'd you get that from your reading of their post?
I've not seen 'em ever suggest that others couldn't disagree or publish their disagreement. What'd they say that makes you presume they're insinuating such? Or are you actually suggesting that they shouldn't be allowed to disagree with the paper or comment about the oddity of their name, who owns it, or how they feel about the publication?
On top of that, the report didn't even mention a missile. I don't have a dog in the fight or an opinion but I did actually read the link. (How else can I form an opinion, if I don't take the time to learn the facts?)
Presumably you won't. That's not what this conversation is about. Why you'd expect the US to pop in, interrupt, and drone on about an entirely different subject is beyond me. Does that happen often in your world? In your world, do people, especially country representatives, just regularly pop in and say completely off-topic things about entirely different events that are only barely related? If they do, then that might be where you learned the behavior.
Thank you. Someone understand the concept of transcripts. I'm not gonna go watch a dozen videos. That text is more than enough.
And, I guess, that *can* be related to the initial quote of, "he'll attack foreign people and countries." In other words, meaningless rhetoric - from both sides. I'm still not seeing any references for the "countries." I guess we could say those people would be citizens of foreign countries and, as citizens, they are a part of it so then he'd saying he'll attack foreign countries. However, that's pretty meaningless. There's a gazillion reasons to not like Trump, this doesn't appear to be one worth even mentioning. Reading it, it looks like he's saying something akin to, "Kill 'em all and let God sort them out."
Hmm... Now, it has been a while (about 30 years) and I am not a pilot - but I did serve in the Marines. I don't recall seeing any A-10s in use by the Marines. Perhaps you mean Harrier? As near as I know, the USAF flies the A-10. It might even be past tense, I seem to recall reading that they were going to drop it.
The deflectors were done by some witty Brit and then he crashed - and lived, by the way. I think he was shot down. The Germans found out it when they examined his downed craft and realized it was brilliant but they wanted better. Enter Focker (spelling) who was a Dutchman and working for the Germans at the time. He figured out the interrupter gear and that lead to "Bloody April" as I recall.
I'm lazy and just got back a little while ago so, to the others suggesting they fire missiles backwards, that's do-able and whatnot but doesn't seem to work that well in reality. They did so with mounted rifles in WWII (and WWI) but those were projectiles fired with force and not projectiles that carry their own propellant. As I recall, getting a missile to reliably ignite and stay lit, while flying backwards at Mach 1 or higher, is not an easy task. It turns out, it's more complicated than GI Joe has led some folks to believe.
I like WWI documentaries too - not just WWII and science/physics. I am not a historian. In fact, I don't even intent to know the above information. It just kind of happened. Eventually, you see, hear, or read it enough times and it sticks with you.
The Century of Warfare The World at War WWII The Complete History
Those are good series. I believe YouTube has all of 'em and I want to say all of them were BBC.
I'm a gun-toting, red-blooded, patriot that loves things that go boom and vroom. I love this country and I'll lie, cheat, and steal to do what I can to ensure the rest of the planet knows it.
That said, err... You don't know much about Russian aircraft, do you? They've got great pilots and make "reliable enough" aircraft - historically. Today, they're not just reliable, they're well designed. The Russian aerospace industry is actually really good. For example, check out the Su-27 (a bit old now) doing something called 'the cobra.' Then, some crazy Russian decided he'd bring it to a near stall and keep going with the maneuver - and he flips it, it's not really a loop, it's just a flip. Like a kick-flip on a skateboard, kind of.
No. If you try that cobra in combat you're gonna die. But... It shows some serious skill, physical integrity of the plane, and some serious balls. Also, it is awesome.
Needs more jurisprudence. You should also ask the judge, "Your honor, do you wear Amicus Briefs of boxers?" Judges love a good joke. Seriously, if you've ever got to go to court for a speeding ticket that you want to fight, make sure to ask him that. He'll dismiss the case and probably invite you to a cake and ice cream party!
Don't click that link. My daughter was over for the holidays and shared that with me. She gets a kick out of it. I admit to chuckling a couple of times. The scary part is my daughter's an actual medical doctor. Yup... And she shared that with me. And one about some Salad Fingers. That was just... It was just different.
Awesome, thanks. My memory's fuzzy in my old age. I've put some strange chemicals through that brain of mine. I'm not shocked when I forget, I'm shocked when I remember. I thought I remembered DEC on the chips on MODEMs and NICs. I'm pretty sure that I'd even seen them on stuff that wasn't branded Digital.
Now that I think about it, I was not a resident at the time, I think they did some of their networking stuff in Augusta, Maine. I didn't live in Maine back then but I've heard people mention it. That makes me curious and I'll have to spend some time with Google tomorrow. I'll see if I can dig up any information about what's left of them.
I don't know how true it is but I've read that a DEC employee was the first person to send out what we call spam today. Some invite to a conference, trade show, or sales event and was UCE/spam. Something like that. Alas, It's nearly 0100 and Google is so very far away. Meh, it'll give me something else to look up when I'm more alert and more likely to retain it.
I'll be home in the spring. I'll have to see if I kept one of the old workstations. I'd not be surprised to find out that I had and that it still has its peripherals and an OS installed. As I recall, they were incredibly heavy and sturdy. They were made out of a heavy gauge sheet metal with not a whole lot of plastic. I almost want to say that I've come across one from sometime after the sale as it was just a re-badged workstation. That has to have been somewhere close to 15-20 years ago.
To Google or not... If I start this trip, I'll never get to sleep. Ah well, I cheated. It looks like it was the AlphaStation that I'm thinking of. Sadly, it doesn't look like it is very well documented: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There's a slim chance that I have some paperwork from over the years. If I do then I'll see if I can get it scanned and then send the physical copies off to the Archive.
Pricing for the XP1000 starts at $7,152 (U.S.) for a system running Windows NT with a 500 MHz Alpha 21264 processor, ELSA GLoria Synergy graphics, 128 MB of RAM and a 4 GB Wide-Ultra SCSI 10,000 rpm hard drive.
That is $10,170.61 adjusted for inflation. And so much for going to sleep and being bright eyed and bushy tailed in the morning.
An intro into formal critical thinking might take a year, I agree. I think it might be something that could be compressed *IF* it were taught in pieces as they aged. "Why do you prefer the color read?" That sort of thing and all the way up through to understanding fallacies and, perhaps, some of their formal names.
As for statistics, I'm thinking we can absolutely benefit from some. I'm not going to say that I'm skilled enough to suggest where that line should be drawn. I simply don't know. However, in reading that paragraph and the one below it - I'm forced to ask this: Are you suggesting that they need it or that we need to do it?
Your examples make me wonder if I'm not understanding you properly. Your examples seem things needed by those who make administrative choices as opposed to things that benefit the students. It could just be that the examples you've given are just that, examples. It could also be that you think those are specifics that a graduate needs to know.
Just to be clear, I am not suggesting that I'm qualified to decide where the lines should be drawn. I am, on the other hand, suggesting that we review where the lines are currently drawn and have a good, honest, open discussion about where the lines should be drawn if we want to do what's best for our youth. I can throw opinions and ideas out there but I'm not necessarily qualified to make authoritative suggestions. Then again, I don't know how to do surgery but I can tell a doctor that something hurts and needs to be looked at.
Why do people keep repeating this nonsense? They did not lay off all their testers. Don't be daft and actually try to do some critical thinking on your own. They laid off (and gave lateral promotions) to a bunch of their testers because they were overlapping and creating more trouble than they were helping with. They still have a huge number of testers.
Err... That doesn't mean they're *good* testers or anything like that. It just means that they've still got thousands of them - thousands. I have no idea why people keep making such silly claims. You're like the third person that I've seen make that claim in this one thread. I've corrected it enough times in the past so I skipped replying to them as I figured they were just stupid or trolls. At this point, I'm just curious as to why people don't actually bother to verify the things they read on Slashdot.
If you believe everything you read on Slashdot, you're nothing short of a fucking idiot. Really, a fucking idiot. Slashdot is full of idiots - I know, I am one! Let's clear a few things up, shall we?
Things we know to be true, or true with a reasonable level of confidence:
Bill Gates does not eat human babies. RMS has taken a shower. Mozilla is not killing Thunderbird. The judge used the All Writs Act to issue the order to Apple, it is not a warrant. Copyright is not trademark. Trademarks are not patents. You can not get a copyright on your pet frog. Somalia is not a Libertarian Paradise. Democrats don't generally all want to put you in government housing, make you eat only certain foods, and take all of your money to give to the poor. Republicans don't actually want to issue babies with guns, give the government to the businesses, and aren't all religious folks. Some Muslims are terrorists. Some Muslims are not terrorists. Steve Jobs was not an alien. Elon Musk has an asshole - he probably won't let you do that to it. Libertarians are not generally anarchists, some are minarchists. If you say a fire department is socialist, you're stupid and adding nothing to the conversation. The moon is not made of green cheese, we know this because we've been there. There's no evidence to suggest that the editors will ever do a good job. IoT is possible to do in a sane way. Cloud computing is not new, novel, or always the best choice. You can actually see the source code for Windows if you want to jump through the hoops - it's free. Linux is awesome, even if you don't use it. So isn't OS X, so isn't Windows. It should be a surprise that it works as well as it does, not that it fails as often as it does. Chance are, most of us are not experts on any given subject so trying to authoritatively state facts, draw conclusions, or opine is just your ego - and probably wrong. Dogs are better than cats. Bicycles are not viable transportation for everybody. None of us have a clue what we're talking about - but we'll fight about it. Obama is an American. There were WMDs in Iraq, just not a whole bunch of them. You don't need a citation when someone says that gravity is just a theory. Elephants don't wear pajamas. Pointing out a spelling or grammar error does not mean you win an argument about which IDE is best. Security is a process, not an application. Nothing usable is ever completely secure. Firearms are inanimate objects, also that's probably a rifle and not a gun. When a privately owned site doesn't let you say what you want, that is not against the law. No, dogs really are objectively better than cats. The terms 'liberal,' 'SJW,' 'feminist,' 'fascist,' and more have lost their meaning. That's your fault. You're probably quoting Benjamin Franklin wrong. He probably wouldn't be spinning in his grave. He'd probably be shagging cute chicks and playing DOOM. Linus swears, a lot. If you're surprised by this, you're an idiot. If you're bothered by this, don't read/listen. Nobody asked your opinion.
I can go on, boy can I go on...
Anyhow, those are a few things that we know. One of the things we know, beyond reasonable doubt, is that Microsoft has not fired (or laid-off) all of their testers.
Slashdot Mirror
No, not really. At least I don't think so. I think our expectations are that it will improve and continue to be amazed. There's a difference between good and impressive. There's even a difference between excellent and impressive.
A car analogy: A Ford Focus is an excellent car. It is not impressive.
Chantilly lace and a pretty face?
Err... Yes, yes I am old. Whatever gave you that idea? I know what you like... Fortunately, Ms. KGIII is still awake and my (bad) signing and attempts to sit-wiggle/sit-dance aren't awakening her.
I think that's the trinity folk and not all Christians subscribe to that, as far as I know. There's God the Father, God the Sun, and God the Holy Ghost. They are one and the same divinity, the holy trinity, but different manifestations of that self.
At least that's how I understand it. I am not actually a Christian but I know some. I even spent some time studying with the Jehovah's Witnesses and, at one point, spent a goodly amount of time with a young lady who was a Mormon. For the record, no we did not have sex but we did sort of have a relationship - it's complicated. She's dead now. Ah well... She was good people.
You should find a way to use it as the duress password so that, if used, it sets off a loud klaxon alarm complete with the brilliant strobing lights. It would be awesome.
I still have a hard time not laughing when I read the one about the robe and wizard hat in its entirety. I dunno? Maybe I really am a five year old.
When I was a wee lad, and the Sun still had a price-tag attached, we had these rectangular cases. Inside was a scroll of paper the case had off-set slits in it that were large enough to read the text on the scroll. You'd scroll, read a question, and flip it over to find out the answer. When you hit the end, you turned it over, flipped it upside down, and repeated the process. That meant one scroll would have something like 500 questions on it.
After going through them enough times, I'd memorized all the questions and was master and commander at the game, much to the angst of my siblings and parents as they relied on their wits.
Well, it wasn't *that* long ago, they were made of plastic. Like real plastic, not stone and papyrus. I went looking to see if I could find an example but they appear to have disappeared off the face of the planet and can't be found online. They had nature, sports, geography, history, "current" (ha!) events, and things like that. I had quite a collection of 'em. It was a step-up from a hula-hoop or a stick and an bicycle rim. We didn't have much in the way of electronics for kids, at least not like that.
I did have a neat 101-in-1 type of deal and I'd purloined an older sibling's chemistry set. Come to think of it, I might have purloined the 101-in-1 electronics kit set from him too. Ah well... He wasn't using it and I've surely made up for it. Not long ago, I sent him a much more recent version and got one for myself. Mine was delivered to Maine so I haven't played with it yet.
At any rate, the trivia did have multiple choice in some cases. You might even have had to scroll a few lines to read the question. I'll be damned if I know what brand they were under but they were fun until, much like you, I'd found a way to cheat. Well, I consider it cheating to memorize all the answers. I'd even fake being wrong at times. Ah, those were the heady days of youth.
You jest but there's almost certainly a group of people who agree with that sentiment, or could be easily convinced to express agreement zealously. I suspect that group of people is larger in number than many people realize. That's even more disturbing is how many folks are in that camp who don't realize they are members of that camp.
Now that I think about it, I don't want to think about it.
For starters, I think you're mistaking water-resistant with water-proof. They are not synonyms. As for the time with regards to resistant, I believe it is cumulative.
A long time ago, I lost data. I lost a lot of data. At the time, I lost data that was more than ten years old. That was back around 2000. I do not lose data now. I have not lost meaningful data since. I will never lose data again.
I do not even store much data locally. Even though I am not home, it is pushed out to my home network. From there, it is mirrored and pushed out to disparate physical locations. I have hardware at friend's houses. I have hardware at other property that I own. I have hardware in my garage/workshop.
Storage is cheap and connectivity is near ubiquitous (for me). I can not justify not taking the time to create a good backup system and automate it. The only thing that is not automated, entirely, is verification. I do that manually and on a regular basis.
Even as I'm typing this, I'm using a computer but I'm actually connected to a computer at my home via VNC. Data isn't even stored on that computer but is pushed out over my own network and stored/retrieved from there. Once it is configured, it's good to go. I test it and make sure that backups are not just verified but are actually working as expected when restored. I'd like to automate that part away but I've not really figured out a good way to do so.
I'm pretty anal about backups. There's not a lot that I'm anal about but backups are one of those things. I never, well almost never, save a single copy of anything. Drives are cheap. I'll buy more. One catastrophic data-loss was unacceptable and, unfortunately, that data loss included my backups - as I wasn't even storing them off-site. I will not lose data again. Yes, I backup things I don't need. That's okay. I'll buy more disk space. I even send out data to be stored with professionals but I only bother with that twice a year.
If I may be so bold... Why, pray tell, are you putting your personal data on it? Yes, your name and whatnot is on there. Why the other stuff? There's no storage of credit cards, there's no reason to have it tied to a private email address, there's no need to put things on there that you don't want to lose. If you're expecting security from a mobile device, a device that can be lost or stolen, then you're doing it wrong at the very start of the security process.
Nothing, and I mean that literally, is both secure and convenient. One might even go so far as to speculate that security and functional are diametrically opposed. Instead, you make choices based on risk vs. reward. Expecting this device to be secure is, well, naive. Don't put information you want to be kept private on your mobile devices - don't even put them on computers.
There's a reason that Russia has reverted to keeping their confidential data on paper. That's a good choice for them to have made. Now consider how much (or little) you value your personal information and act accordingly.
I couldn't imagine that they'd go through with canceling it without a replacement at hand but I never saw any follow-up articles about the outcome. As I recall, there was a hearing and then an investigation, and then was supposed to be another hearing - that one never made the rounds at my various online news haunts. Between the A-10 and the Spooky, well... We've got some aircraft that can loiter and lay down some serious firepower as needed.
One of the things about the A-10 is that it is pretty much just a giant bad-ass gun with wing. I do mean bad-ass. I don't remember the specs on that bit of kit but is fantastic. I kind of want to play with one. How could I not want to? At any rate, I don't think the Marines want them so much as they want someone else to have that capacity. I seem to recall a topic being that the Marines could take over the program and I believe they declined to do so. I'm not positive as to why they'd decline but I'd speculate that it's not really a part of their core mission and would dilute "scant" resources.
Hmm... They neither said nor insinuated any of the things you're attributing to them. There is no "in other words" by my reading. Where'd you get that from your reading of their post?
I've not seen 'em ever suggest that others couldn't disagree or publish their disagreement. What'd they say that makes you presume they're insinuating such? Or are you actually suggesting that they shouldn't be allowed to disagree with the paper or comment about the oddity of their name, who owns it, or how they feel about the publication?
"Russian-made" != "Russian."
On top of that, the report didn't even mention a missile. I don't have a dog in the fight or an opinion but I did actually read the link. (How else can I form an opinion, if I don't take the time to learn the facts?)
> If given, it evidently didn't come with a well-trained operator.
I dunno? They hit their target.
Presumably you won't. That's not what this conversation is about. Why you'd expect the US to pop in, interrupt, and drone on about an entirely different subject is beyond me. Does that happen often in your world? In your world, do people, especially country representatives, just regularly pop in and say completely off-topic things about entirely different events that are only barely related? If they do, then that might be where you learned the behavior.
They can tell by the pixels.
Thank you. Someone understand the concept of transcripts. I'm not gonna go watch a dozen videos. That text is more than enough.
And, I guess, that *can* be related to the initial quote of, "he'll attack foreign people and countries." In other words, meaningless rhetoric - from both sides. I'm still not seeing any references for the "countries." I guess we could say those people would be citizens of foreign countries and, as citizens, they are a part of it so then he'd saying he'll attack foreign countries. However, that's pretty meaningless. There's a gazillion reasons to not like Trump, this doesn't appear to be one worth even mentioning. Reading it, it looks like he's saying something akin to, "Kill 'em all and let God sort them out."
Hmm... Now, it has been a while (about 30 years) and I am not a pilot - but I did serve in the Marines. I don't recall seeing any A-10s in use by the Marines. Perhaps you mean Harrier? As near as I know, the USAF flies the A-10. It might even be past tense, I seem to recall reading that they were going to drop it.
The deflectors were done by some witty Brit and then he crashed - and lived, by the way. I think he was shot down. The Germans found out it when they examined his downed craft and realized it was brilliant but they wanted better. Enter Focker (spelling) who was a Dutchman and working for the Germans at the time. He figured out the interrupter gear and that lead to "Bloody April" as I recall.
I'm lazy and just got back a little while ago so, to the others suggesting they fire missiles backwards, that's do-able and whatnot but doesn't seem to work that well in reality. They did so with mounted rifles in WWII (and WWI) but those were projectiles fired with force and not projectiles that carry their own propellant. As I recall, getting a missile to reliably ignite and stay lit, while flying backwards at Mach 1 or higher, is not an easy task. It turns out, it's more complicated than GI Joe has led some folks to believe.
I like WWI documentaries too - not just WWII and science/physics. I am not a historian. In fact, I don't even intent to know the above information. It just kind of happened. Eventually, you see, hear, or read it enough times and it sticks with you.
The Century of Warfare
The World at War
WWII The Complete History
Those are good series. I believe YouTube has all of 'em and I want to say all of them were BBC.
I'm a gun-toting, red-blooded, patriot that loves things that go boom and vroom. I love this country and I'll lie, cheat, and steal to do what I can to ensure the rest of the planet knows it.
That said, err... You don't know much about Russian aircraft, do you? They've got great pilots and make "reliable enough" aircraft - historically. Today, they're not just reliable, they're well designed. The Russian aerospace industry is actually really good. For example, check out the Su-27 (a bit old now) doing something called 'the cobra.' Then, some crazy Russian decided he'd bring it to a near stall and keep going with the maneuver - and he flips it, it's not really a loop, it's just a flip. Like a kick-flip on a skateboard, kind of.
No. If you try that cobra in combat you're gonna die. But... It shows some serious skill, physical integrity of the plane, and some serious balls. Also, it is awesome.
Needs more jurisprudence. You should also ask the judge, "Your honor, do you wear Amicus Briefs of boxers?" Judges love a good joke. Seriously, if you've ever got to go to court for a speeding ticket that you want to fight, make sure to ask him that. He'll dismiss the case and probably invite you to a cake and ice cream party!
You seem like a nice enough guy so I probably shouldn't do this but, well, I'm an ass like that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Don't click that link. My daughter was over for the holidays and shared that with me. She gets a kick out of it. I admit to chuckling a couple of times. The scary part is my daughter's an actual medical doctor. Yup... And she shared that with me. And one about some Salad Fingers. That was just... It was just different.
Awesome, thanks. My memory's fuzzy in my old age. I've put some strange chemicals through that brain of mine. I'm not shocked when I forget, I'm shocked when I remember. I thought I remembered DEC on the chips on MODEMs and NICs. I'm pretty sure that I'd even seen them on stuff that wasn't branded Digital.
Now that I think about it, I was not a resident at the time, I think they did some of their networking stuff in Augusta, Maine. I didn't live in Maine back then but I've heard people mention it. That makes me curious and I'll have to spend some time with Google tomorrow. I'll see if I can dig up any information about what's left of them.
I don't know how true it is but I've read that a DEC employee was the first person to send out what we call spam today. Some invite to a conference, trade show, or sales event and was UCE/spam. Something like that. Alas, It's nearly 0100 and Google is so very far away. Meh, it'll give me something else to look up when I'm more alert and more likely to retain it.
I'll be home in the spring. I'll have to see if I kept one of the old workstations. I'd not be surprised to find out that I had and that it still has its peripherals and an OS installed. As I recall, they were incredibly heavy and sturdy. They were made out of a heavy gauge sheet metal with not a whole lot of plastic. I almost want to say that I've come across one from sometime after the sale as it was just a re-badged workstation. That has to have been somewhere close to 15-20 years ago.
To Google or not... If I start this trip, I'll never get to sleep. Ah well, I cheated. It looks like it was the AlphaStation that I'm thinking of. Sadly, it doesn't look like it is very well documented:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There's a slim chance that I have some paperwork from over the years. If I do then I'll see if I can get it scanned and then send the physical copies off to the Archive.
That page leads me to here:
http://web.archive.org/web/200...
That seems about right. Amusingly it says this:
Pricing for the XP1000 starts at $7,152 (U.S.) for a system running Windows NT with a 500 MHz Alpha 21264 processor, ELSA GLoria Synergy graphics, 128 MB of RAM and a 4 GB Wide-Ultra SCSI 10,000 rpm hard drive.
That is $10,170.61 adjusted for inflation. And so much for going to sleep and being bright eyed and bushy tailed in the morning.
An intro into formal critical thinking might take a year, I agree. I think it might be something that could be compressed *IF* it were taught in pieces as they aged. "Why do you prefer the color read?" That sort of thing and all the way up through to understanding fallacies and, perhaps, some of their formal names.
As for statistics, I'm thinking we can absolutely benefit from some. I'm not going to say that I'm skilled enough to suggest where that line should be drawn. I simply don't know. However, in reading that paragraph and the one below it - I'm forced to ask this: Are you suggesting that they need it or that we need to do it?
Your examples make me wonder if I'm not understanding you properly. Your examples seem things needed by those who make administrative choices as opposed to things that benefit the students. It could just be that the examples you've given are just that, examples. It could also be that you think those are specifics that a graduate needs to know.
Just to be clear, I am not suggesting that I'm qualified to decide where the lines should be drawn. I am, on the other hand, suggesting that we review where the lines are currently drawn and have a good, honest, open discussion about where the lines should be drawn if we want to do what's best for our youth. I can throw opinions and ideas out there but I'm not necessarily qualified to make authoritative suggestions. Then again, I don't know how to do surgery but I can tell a doctor that something hurts and needs to be looked at.
Why do people keep repeating this nonsense? They did not lay off all their testers. Don't be daft and actually try to do some critical thinking on your own. They laid off (and gave lateral promotions) to a bunch of their testers because they were overlapping and creating more trouble than they were helping with. They still have a huge number of testers.
Err... That doesn't mean they're *good* testers or anything like that. It just means that they've still got thousands of them - thousands. I have no idea why people keep making such silly claims. You're like the third person that I've seen make that claim in this one thread. I've corrected it enough times in the past so I skipped replying to them as I figured they were just stupid or trolls. At this point, I'm just curious as to why people don't actually bother to verify the things they read on Slashdot.
If you believe everything you read on Slashdot, you're nothing short of a fucking idiot. Really, a fucking idiot. Slashdot is full of idiots - I know, I am one! Let's clear a few things up, shall we?
Things we know to be true, or true with a reasonable level of confidence:
Bill Gates does not eat human babies.
RMS has taken a shower.
Mozilla is not killing Thunderbird.
The judge used the All Writs Act to issue the order to Apple, it is not a warrant.
Copyright is not trademark.
Trademarks are not patents.
You can not get a copyright on your pet frog.
Somalia is not a Libertarian Paradise.
Democrats don't generally all want to put you in government housing, make you eat only certain foods, and take all of your money to give to the poor.
Republicans don't actually want to issue babies with guns, give the government to the businesses, and aren't all religious folks.
Some Muslims are terrorists.
Some Muslims are not terrorists.
Steve Jobs was not an alien.
Elon Musk has an asshole - he probably won't let you do that to it.
Libertarians are not generally anarchists, some are minarchists.
If you say a fire department is socialist, you're stupid and adding nothing to the conversation.
The moon is not made of green cheese, we know this because we've been there.
There's no evidence to suggest that the editors will ever do a good job.
IoT is possible to do in a sane way.
Cloud computing is not new, novel, or always the best choice.
You can actually see the source code for Windows if you want to jump through the hoops - it's free.
Linux is awesome, even if you don't use it. So isn't OS X, so isn't Windows.
It should be a surprise that it works as well as it does, not that it fails as often as it does.
Chance are, most of us are not experts on any given subject so trying to authoritatively state facts, draw conclusions, or opine is just your ego - and probably wrong.
Dogs are better than cats.
Bicycles are not viable transportation for everybody.
None of us have a clue what we're talking about - but we'll fight about it.
Obama is an American.
There were WMDs in Iraq, just not a whole bunch of them.
You don't need a citation when someone says that gravity is just a theory.
Elephants don't wear pajamas.
Pointing out a spelling or grammar error does not mean you win an argument about which IDE is best.
Security is a process, not an application.
Nothing usable is ever completely secure.
Firearms are inanimate objects, also that's probably a rifle and not a gun.
When a privately owned site doesn't let you say what you want, that is not against the law.
No, dogs really are objectively better than cats.
The terms 'liberal,' 'SJW,' 'feminist,' 'fascist,' and more have lost their meaning. That's your fault.
You're probably quoting Benjamin Franklin wrong. He probably wouldn't be spinning in his grave. He'd probably be shagging cute chicks and playing DOOM.
Linus swears, a lot. If you're surprised by this, you're an idiot. If you're bothered by this, don't read/listen. Nobody asked your opinion.
I can go on, boy can I go on...
Anyhow, those are a few things that we know. One of the things we know, beyond reasonable doubt, is that Microsoft has not fired (or laid-off) all of their testers.