Stickier food may be better to eat off of the floor, as the part that touched the floor is somewhat more likely to stick to the floor, rather than some of the floor sticking to the food that you eat.
Its an interesting subject that probably needs more investigation.
Sticky foods often leave a layer on the floor and as a result the part you pick up has only been in contact with the floor. However, around the edges of the contact the sticky food is very good at picking up loose dust and the like.
Runny liquid-covered foods may stay on the floor at the slightest contact, avoiding the sticky problem, but what about dirt that gets mixed into the top layer of the dropped food during the impact?
Hard dry foods have surprisingly little contact area with the floor. No citation but I do recall seeing studies where even slight moistness leads to a very large increase in bacteria picked up.
Venture capital won't buy you out they will instead 'buy in' - that is they will put money into your company in return for equity. That means you have capital to invest in getting the product to market, and the downside is loss of some amount of control and equity. If you need this capital and can work with your new co-owners this can work very well. However, if it doesn't go smoothly there will be a lot more pain. You only get a small fraction of the investment amount to keep personally.
The other sort of deal which is to buy you out by purchasing all or most of your shares is actually much rarer. In this case you have a contract to stick around and you get to keep the money even if things don't pan out so well (maybe you lose some bonuses but not the main purchase amount). You lose control of future developments and if things go really well you won't get much of the upside.
I've personal experience of these. My comment is that unless you need the investment or buyout money, you will be happier not doing a deal.
Oh yeah, you're right that's pretty much what I did - its starting to come back to me. I used to know all the hex codes for assembly commands, registers, etc. I doubt that much memory is going to come back though...
Yeah fun times!
Actually it was 5k RAM and 20k ROM. Oh that cassette, but it was better than the ZX 80 though!
Vic 20 ran a great BASIC with an early version of the sprites that were quite a hit on c-64.
My memory of PEEK and POKE was writing 'machine code' to memory because I didn't have an assembler and BASIC was too slow.
Changing over to IPv6 involves the cost of time spent, plus buying new routers, and who knows what other annoying and time-consuming things. I just can't think of any reason to invest in this when I have all the IPv4 addresses I need. My office networks are happy using NAT. My public servers have all the IP addresses they need for the foreseeable future.
Until someone can explain to me some actual real benefit me and people like me are not going to undertake expensive upgrades. This is why a protocol launched in 1996 FFS is still not adopted, there's just no advantage - its solving a problem that has not arrived yet. When the problem does arrive I will be the last affected because I already have IP addresses.
I agree. We hire ability not qualifications. You've got to do stuff to show your ability - that could be an open source project, projects for your relatives, whatever, but you need to show you've got get up and go and you get things done.
The second thing I want to say is be patient. You're going to get an entry-level position and you've got a lot of learning to do. If you're willing to learn and you show ability, then you'll get more responsibility.
I agree with many of the comments on the usefulness of many phone 'features'. But think the issue here is design. I've had phones with cameras and never used them. Then my latest phone had a different design. Previously to take a photo it was click, navigate, click, select, etc. Now I just slide back the lens cover and push on the dedicated hardware button which is just where I'd expect it to be if holding the phone like a camera. Its still not a great phone (and response time is awful) but now I never think 'wish I had my camera here' because I can at least get a couple of snaps on the phone.
So if you make the features intuitive to find and easy to use they will get used a lot more.
I agree. I've seen plenty of benchmarks purporting to show Chrome isn't the fastest, but in my experience it is so much faster it is almost unbelievable. Like pages which take 6 seconds in firefox completing in 2 seconds - that is a seriously big improvement.
I downloaded Chrome just to have a look, didn't expect to do more than have a quick go and then leave it as one of my browsers for testing. But the speed is so much better that I've switched almost entirely to Chrome.
Great highly efficient turbo-diesels are currently widely available. Think Peugot, VW, etc, even ford.
What we need is to go to plug-in hybrids (or full electric) to get the effective consumption below 2 litres/100km. Until then I am sticking with my 5l/100km diesel.
I assume you're referring to the Prius. I agree. The font visibility is awful too. My Peugot 307 gets exactly the same mileage under my typical driving conditions as a Prius I hired for 3 weeks (5.5 to 6.0 l/100km) and is a million times nicer to drive.
More than half of the people I know with PhDs in physics now work in IT, even though most were in experimental rather than theoretical areas. So perhaps some good basic training in CS is a good idea as preparation for their eventual after-physics career.
Oops! My bad. I mixed up Numerical Recipes by Press Teukolsky, Vetterling and Flannery http://www.nr.com/ with the completely different (but still relevant and excellent) Handbook of mathematical functions by Abramowitz and Stegun http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abramowitz_and_Stegun. Sorry about that chief!
Every physics graduate should have a grounding in numerical methods. This requires some programming, but the critical point is that the numerical methods drives programming not the other way around.
Every physics graduate should have the ability to find and use Numerical Recipes by Abramowitz and Stegun. Doesn't matter if they're using the C version, Fortran or whatever. This means you need to teach some programming, but more importantly the skills to understand the recipes.
Even with free lawyers from the EFF, the costs and risks of civil litigation could be substantial for what looks like a fairly small company. The alternative of focusing on maximising the free publicity and then keeping 100% of your effort on providing a great service might be a better business strategy.
I'm just guessing, but if I was in Revision3's shoes I'd think long and hard before starting law suits that could easily tie up scarce resources. The upside could be big I suppose but it would be a gamble and also any payoff would surely be a long way in the future.
According to CNET article http://news.cnet.com/coops-corner/?tag=cnetfd.blogs
"At this point, Revision3 says it's not planning to file a lawsuit. Not because it doesn't have a case but pursuing a court remedy would likely cost a lot of money."
Sorry if I wasn't clear, let me try another way of describing the two ways a 'bounce' email can originate.
1. If the sending server gets a 500 response then it can send a bounce email (optional). In this case, this would be the spammer's mailserver sending this email (not that they would)
2. If the recipient server sends a 200 response and then sends a bounce or auto-reply then the email comes from the recipient mailserver - in this case one of google's mailservers.
I think there's a big difference between these two cases.
No, this is not how it works (when implemented correctly). What should and mostly does happen is the recipient server sends back an error code in the 500s, eg 550 no such user. The sending server may then generate a non-delivery email to the sender. This is OK behavior. In the case being discussed, this would *not* lead to backscatter because the sending server is the spammer's server not the legitimate mailserver for the domain. What is happening is that instead of google's mailserver sending a 500-response it is accepting the email (probably with a 200 response) and *then later* sending the 'bounce' email which has been quoted above.
5. Does it have 30 years of technology refinement behind it?
If electron mobility was important silicon would have been replaced by Galium Arsenide years if not decades ago. GaAs can pass all of the first 3 requirements suggested by the parent - but not in a scalable way. For example you can get a good quality insulator on it, but its just bloody hard to do.
Slashdot Mirror
Stickier food may be better to eat off of the floor, as the part that touched the floor is somewhat more likely to stick to the floor, rather than some of the floor sticking to the food that you eat.
Its an interesting subject that probably needs more investigation.
Sticky foods often leave a layer on the floor and as a result the part you pick up has only been in contact with the floor. However, around the edges of the contact the sticky food is very good at picking up loose dust and the like.
Runny liquid-covered foods may stay on the floor at the slightest contact, avoiding the sticky problem, but what about dirt that gets mixed into the top layer of the dropped food during the impact?
Hard dry foods have surprisingly little contact area with the floor. No citation but I do recall seeing studies where even slight moistness leads to a very large increase in bacteria picked up.
Great comment, sorry I don't have mod points today!
Venture capital won't buy you out they will instead 'buy in' - that is they will put money into your company in return for equity. That means you have capital to invest in getting the product to market, and the downside is loss of some amount of control and equity. If you need this capital and can work with your new co-owners this can work very well. However, if it doesn't go smoothly there will be a lot more pain. You only get a small fraction of the investment amount to keep personally.
The other sort of deal which is to buy you out by purchasing all or most of your shares is actually much rarer. In this case you have a contract to stick around and you get to keep the money even if things don't pan out so well (maybe you lose some bonuses but not the main purchase amount). You lose control of future developments and if things go really well you won't get much of the upside.
I've personal experience of these. My comment is that unless you need the investment or buyout money, you will be happier not doing a deal.
Oh yeah, you're right that's pretty much what I did - its starting to come back to me. I used to know all the hex codes for assembly commands, registers, etc. I doubt that much memory is going to come back though...
Yeah fun times! Actually it was 5k RAM and 20k ROM. Oh that cassette, but it was better than the ZX 80 though! Vic 20 ran a great BASIC with an early version of the sprites that were quite a hit on c-64. My memory of PEEK and POKE was writing 'machine code' to memory because I didn't have an assembler and BASIC was too slow.
Try google docs - while you 'can' hit save you never do. The history features completely solve all of the above problems.
Until someone can explain to me some actual real benefit me and people like me are not going to undertake expensive upgrades. This is why a protocol launched in 1996 FFS is still not adopted, there's just no advantage - its solving a problem that has not arrived yet. When the problem does arrive I will be the last affected because I already have IP addresses.
The second thing I want to say is be patient. You're going to get an entry-level position and you've got a lot of learning to do. If you're willing to learn and you show ability, then you'll get more responsibility.
Well said. Prepared statements do not solve all problems. Malicious content can be inserted without inserting SQL.
I don't know if its true but crikey ran with this earlier today: http://www.crikey.com.au/Media-Arts-and-Sports/20081017-And-the-Wankley-Award-goes-to-Conroys-net-filtering-scheme.html
Won't criminals simply avoid this measure by using other ways to communicate?
Users don't want features. They want benefits.
I agree with many of the comments on the usefulness of many phone 'features'. But think the issue here is design. I've had phones with cameras and never used them. Then my latest phone had a different design. Previously to take a photo it was click, navigate, click, select, etc. Now I just slide back the lens cover and push on the dedicated hardware button which is just where I'd expect it to be if holding the phone like a camera. Its still not a great phone (and response time is awful) but now I never think 'wish I had my camera here' because I can at least get a couple of snaps on the phone.
So if you make the features intuitive to find and easy to use they will get used a lot more.
I agree. I've seen plenty of benchmarks purporting to show Chrome isn't the fastest, but in my experience it is so much faster it is almost unbelievable. Like pages which take 6 seconds in firefox completing in 2 seconds - that is a seriously big improvement. I downloaded Chrome just to have a look, didn't expect to do more than have a quick go and then leave it as one of my browsers for testing. But the speed is so much better that I've switched almost entirely to Chrome.
Great highly efficient turbo-diesels are currently widely available. Think Peugot, VW, etc, even ford. What we need is to go to plug-in hybrids (or full electric) to get the effective consumption below 2 litres/100km. Until then I am sticking with my 5l/100km diesel.
I assume you're referring to the Prius. I agree. The font visibility is awful too. My Peugot 307 gets exactly the same mileage under my typical driving conditions as a Prius I hired for 3 weeks (5.5 to 6.0 l/100km) and is a million times nicer to drive.
Wonderful. ENM is about as good a book about physics as is possible without (much) actual mathematics. Wish I had mod points today.
More than half of the people I know with PhDs in physics now work in IT, even though most were in experimental rather than theoretical areas. So perhaps some good basic training in CS is a good idea as preparation for their eventual after-physics career.
Oops! My bad. I mixed up Numerical Recipes by Press Teukolsky, Vetterling and Flannery http://www.nr.com/ with the completely different (but still relevant and excellent) Handbook of mathematical functions by Abramowitz and Stegun http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abramowitz_and_Stegun. Sorry about that chief!
Every physics graduate should have a grounding in numerical methods. This requires some programming, but the critical point is that the numerical methods drives programming not the other way around.
Every physics graduate should have the ability to find and use Numerical Recipes by Abramowitz and Stegun. Doesn't matter if they're using the C version, Fortran or whatever. This means you need to teach some programming, but more importantly the skills to understand the recipes.
Even with free lawyers from the EFF, the costs and risks of civil litigation could be substantial for what looks like a fairly small company. The alternative of focusing on maximising the free publicity and then keeping 100% of your effort on providing a great service might be a better business strategy. I'm just guessing, but if I was in Revision3's shoes I'd think long and hard before starting law suits that could easily tie up scarce resources. The upside could be big I suppose but it would be a gamble and also any payoff would surely be a long way in the future.
According to CNET article http://news.cnet.com/coops-corner/?tag=cnetfd.blogs "At this point, Revision3 says it's not planning to file a lawsuit. Not because it doesn't have a case but pursuing a court remedy would likely cost a lot of money."
Currently USA way ahead followed by Japan, Spain then Poland. Not really the top four I would have guessed.
Sorry if I wasn't clear, let me try another way of describing the two ways a 'bounce' email can originate.
1. If the sending server gets a 500 response then it can send a bounce email (optional). In this case, this would be the spammer's mailserver sending this email (not that they would)
2. If the recipient server sends a 200 response and then sends a bounce or auto-reply then the email comes from the recipient mailserver - in this case one of google's mailservers.
I think there's a big difference between these two cases.
No, this is not how it works (when implemented correctly). What should and mostly does happen is the recipient server sends back an error code in the 500s, eg 550 no such user. The sending server may then generate a non-delivery email to the sender. This is OK behavior. In the case being discussed, this would *not* lead to backscatter because the sending server is the spammer's server not the legitimate mailserver for the domain. What is happening is that instead of google's mailserver sending a 500-response it is accepting the email (probably with a 200 response) and *then later* sending the 'bounce' email which has been quoted above.
5. Does it have 30 years of technology refinement behind it?
If electron mobility was important silicon would have been replaced by Galium Arsenide years if not decades ago. GaAs can pass all of the first 3 requirements suggested by the parent - but not in a scalable way. For example you can get a good quality insulator on it, but its just bloody hard to do.