The difference is in the real-time scheduling requirements that come with a GUI. Very minor delays in GUI rendering have very perceptible impact on the snappiness of a UI. Server workloads (DB, HTTPD or whatever) have less stringent real-time requirements. Throughput ends up mattering more as long as the latency is in a reasonable range.
Microsoft's CAPTCHA is very effective against bots, but it doesn't solve the accessibility issue. You can read letters out loud, I don't think you can do that with cats.
Maybe they also have an archive of meows and barks?
You are drastically over-simplifying the issue. There are two issues here: (a) there are at least two people involved in an abortion, the mother and the child, and there remains significant debate over whether the mother's right to control her body should trump the child's right to live. I'm not going to state my position one way or the other, but Ron Paul is hardly the only pro-life/anti-abortion candidate. Since you're referring to the fetus as a child with equivalent legal standing as the mother, I think I'll take a wild guess and say you're not fond Roe v. Wade. Which is cool, but let's go easy on the implicit assumptions.
You know in other parts of the world (i.e. outside the US) it is not considered demeaning to share a bus with people. I've taken the Greyhound, so I can understand your sentiment. But you have to admit, there is no way metropolitan hubs can work if everyone rides a car alone. The scalability of bus/rail systems simply dwarfs the good ol' 12-lane-highway approach.
And really, is it so bad getting to read on your way to work?
For some reason I don't think corporations support republicans out of love for Intelligent Design. Let's see, not having to worry about antitrust cases probably ranks high on that list. (The current DoJ sure is tough on Microsoft.)
The simpler a system is, the easier it is to secure. India already uses electronic voting machines with great success. Now that is well engineered solution.
No, Diebold, it's not gonna be secure when you introduce 1024 bit encryption.
Hell yeah! Also, what's up with allowing people to actually list facts from cited articles.
On the one hand, Wikipedia is a useful source of information and people can benefit from these facts. On the other hand, how does one choose which facts to include and which not to? Wikipedia should be converted into a bibliography.
<sarcasm/>
Let me get this straight, this guy is arguing that Microsoft main business model revolves around selling 0-day Windows exploits to media conglomerates. The wow starts here, on/.
Wikipedia Natural Science/Math articles are very useful. They really are the best place to start most of the time (so long as you don't end your "research" there).
Humanities are much trickier however. There are many more pitfalls when, say, paraphrasing Heidegger's definition of "Being." It is much easier to verify that a mathematical derivation follows the same steps as a cited source. So Wikipedia editors' reliance on primary sources can't always be taken at face value. For more obscure articles, key alternative interpretations can be missing as well. Incompleteness is Incorrectness' evil twin.
I'm not saying Wikipedia is useless outside the hard sciences. Just keep in mind that other disciplines are not always so lucky.
Yeah both "AOL, Cordance, JanRain, Microsoft, NetMesh, Six Apart, Sxip, Sun Microsystems, Symantec, Verisign, Yahoo! [and] Google." http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/12/openid_20_final.html
Not to mention plugins already available for open source publishing tools such as WordPress.
You might be surprised to find that in shanty towns in Johannesburg people have TVs even though they don't electricity. How you ask? They use car batteries.
You underestimate how important consumer electronics and information access are to people. People don't just go without water because their homes are not connected to the water supply. They grab it from the nearest well. Same is true for electricity.
Famine relief is important, but different types of aid are not mutually exclusive. And one might even argue that the OLPC project is more beneficial in the long term. You know, the whole teach a man to fish cliche.
People make this sort of argument about any kind of cause: why do we care about human rights in China when people are dying of AIDS in Africa. People help in ways they are in a position to help. Folks at the MIT Media Lab are best at making gadgets, god bless 'em for putting their skills to good use. I'd rather them work on OLPC than mail flour to Sudan in bulk. Other organizations have the expertise and the resources to provide that kind of relief.
Slashdot Mirror
The difference is in the real-time scheduling requirements that come with a GUI. Very minor delays in GUI rendering have very perceptible impact on the snappiness of a UI. Server workloads (DB, HTTPD or whatever) have less stringent real-time requirements. Throughput ends up mattering more as long as the latency is in a reasonable range.
Microsoft's CAPTCHA is very effective against bots, but it doesn't solve the accessibility issue. You can read letters out loud, I don't think you can do that with cats.
Maybe they also have an archive of meows and barks?
And really, is it so bad getting to read on your way to work?
For some reason I don't think corporations support republicans out of love for Intelligent Design. Let's see, not having to worry about antitrust cases probably ranks high on that list. (The current DoJ sure is tough on Microsoft.)
Because PDF is a distribution format, not intended to be edited after the final document is rendered. It's useful to have easily editable format.
Exactly, Spore immediately comes to mind for having a remarkably extensive trailer and a live demo. It's still been plagued by delays.
The simpler a system is, the easier it is to secure. India already uses electronic voting machines with great success. Now that is well engineered solution.
No, Diebold, it's not gonna be secure when you introduce 1024 bit encryption.
Hell yeah! Also, what's up with allowing people to actually list facts from cited articles.
On the one hand, Wikipedia is a useful source of information and people can benefit from these facts. On the other hand, how does one choose which facts to include and which not to? Wikipedia should be converted into a bibliography. <sarcasm/>
To quote Maeby from Arrested Development: "that's like comparing apples and a fruit no one's ever heard of."
Let me get this straight, this guy is arguing that Microsoft main business model revolves around selling 0-day Windows exploits to media conglomerates. The wow starts here, on /.
Wikipedia Natural Science/Math articles are very useful. They really are the best place to start most of the time (so long as you don't end your "research" there).
Humanities are much trickier however. There are many more pitfalls when, say, paraphrasing Heidegger's definition of "Being." It is much easier to verify that a mathematical derivation follows the same steps as a cited source. So Wikipedia editors' reliance on primary sources can't always be taken at face value. For more obscure articles, key alternative interpretations can be missing as well. Incompleteness is Incorrectness' evil twin.
I'm not saying Wikipedia is useless outside the hard sciences. Just keep in mind that other disciplines are not always so lucky.
Yeah both "AOL, Cordance, JanRain, Microsoft, NetMesh, Six Apart, Sxip, Sun Microsystems, Symantec, Verisign, Yahoo! [and] Google." http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/12/openid_20_final.html Not to mention plugins already available for open source publishing tools such as WordPress.
I'd say it's more like a short and distort.
You might be surprised to find that in shanty towns in Johannesburg people have TVs even though they don't electricity. How you ask? They use car batteries.
You underestimate how important consumer electronics and information access are to people. People don't just go without water because their homes are not connected to the water supply. They grab it from the nearest well. Same is true for electricity.
Famine relief is important, but different types of aid are not mutually exclusive. And one might even argue that the OLPC project is more beneficial in the long term. You know, the whole teach a man to fish cliche. People make this sort of argument about any kind of cause: why do we care about human rights in China when people are dying of AIDS in Africa. People help in ways they are in a position to help. Folks at the MIT Media Lab are best at making gadgets, god bless 'em for putting their skills to good use. I'd rather them work on OLPC than mail flour to Sudan in bulk. Other organizations have the expertise and the resources to provide that kind of relief.