I don't know how severe a 3.4 quake is, maybe it really is inconsequential
FEMA (for kids! Sorry it was the quickest result on Google) sez that earthquakes below about 4.3 on the Richter scale cause "no damage": http://www.fema.gov/kids/intense.htm Remember, it's a logarithmic scale, so a 3.4 is almost 1/10th as destructive as a 4.3.
I honestly believe that an 18-wheeler or tour bus passing in front of my house would cause significantly more shaking than a 3.4 quake. I don't have a seismometer in my house to prove it, alas.
(Far from villagers, too, BTW)
Yes, yes, I apologize for my ignorance of geography. But my point remains, and is valid-- these people are scamming the poor guy.
The only person at fault here is the local building code, if they let people inhabit buildings that can't withstand anything less than a 5.0 on the Richter. (Assuming that the people who filed for damages actually had damages... which I highly doubt.)
These villagers were scamming the poor guy. $9 million in damages from a *3.4* quake? Cripes, a bus crossing in front of my house is close to 3.4... either their houses are made from eggshells, or this is the scam of the century.
I'd feel terrible if useful research was suspended because of profiteering townsfolk.
Ok, that second link can't possibly apply to fantasy (i.e. made-up) langauges. All they're saying is that if your game has content in both English and Spanish, it has to be approved by both the English- and Spanish-locale approval processes. Which is much more innocent than your implication.
The sound point, from the thread you linked, is just an oversight in the API that they're working to correct, and the Microsoft reps in the thread seemed quite apologetic over it. It's not some horrible conspiracy against you.
Plus, any XNA game you developed that's rejected, or impossible-to-finish, due to those limitations? You can just release it on PC for free, anyway! Sure you lose console customers, but you can always patch your game and come back later for approval.
Seriously, I don't know what your beef with Xbox Creator's Club is, especially when you admit that Sony and Nintendo have absolutely nothing comparable.
Microsoft didn't post a loss this year. They posted their first-ever reduction in revenue... those are two different things, and the author of this article is a retard for not knowing the difference.
In fact, considering all factors (and Vista), Microsoft has been weathering this recession much better than most companies.
In addition to that, it's already what one of their major DB competitors, Microsoft is doing. SQL Express is fine for a lot of apps (admittedly not as many as MySQL), and Microsoft's free "give them a taste" product before you upgrade to SQL Server.
This dialog brings up so many questions. Like, "what error?" and "what request?" and "what object?"
It also helps that Lotus Notes never seems to define what an object *is* in practical terms. I'm sure they're referring to the objects in their OOP code, but it's not like the end user knows what those are, or for that matter, should ever seen the term "object" in the UI.
It's still vendor lock in if there's no competing product that reads their open formats. I'm also too busy/retarded/cheap to create my own.
Any program capable of reading an Office format in an 100% compatible manner, by definition, needs to include all of the features (those stored in the file) of the Office application. Now for a word processor, this isn't *that* big a deal, since it can include many advancements over the competition that aren't visible in the file format-- a better spell checker, for example.
But take Excel. The vast majority of Excel features need to be included in the file format. Meaning, that any third party app that can read Excel files completely need to implement 100% of Excel's features-- there are two implications here: 1) That's really, really hard. OpenOffice isn't even close, and they're probably the closest of all third-parties. 2) You've created a world where the only differentiator between different spreadsheet products is usability, and Microsoft is certainly better at that then it's competition.
Uh, the first Microsoft OS that supported multiple monitors was Windows 98. I don't know why you'd expect Office 97 to support that in the first place.
Ok, if you have fiber to your house, you're not allowed to comment. No matter how rural you *think* you are, you're not even close to what we're talking about here.
Hell, I live in a town with a population of approx. 8000, about 25 miles from Seattle. We don't have fiber... probably mostly because Verizon sucks ass, but still. (That said, we were one of the first towns to get cheap DSL for some God-knows reason, so I guess I can't complain.) So I'm stuck on DSL, oh, and since we're not one of the states that Verizon offers dry-loop DSL, I have to pay for a fucking landline phone, too. Ugh.
In short, if you're better-off than a town of 8000 about 25 miles away from the largest city in the state, you're not rural.
Uh, yah, but I'm pretty sure we don't have a *right* to electricity either in the US. If you build a property in the middle of nowhere, you're required to pay for the electricity to be installed there.
That said, we generally all agree access to electricity is a good thing, but I'm not sure if the premise of the article is sound.
If everyone who currently doesnt believe in global warming, believes so because they A)Want to stick with the status quo, B)Believe the government is out to get them or, C) Believe the liberal elitist secret organization is out to get them. Is a denier.
My wager is that that's an extremely small percentage of the people currently being described as "deniers".
If they believe the GW isn't happening due to mis-truths, lies, and blatant falsehoods that have been foisted onto them, then they are just sheep.
Again! You go back to the old language!
Anybody rational isn't going to believe that GW isn't happening. They might believe that it's not happening due to human activity. They might believe that it's happening but it's not harmful to our way of life. Don't you see how many hundreds of possibilities you're grouping in with the one label?
It's not a black and white issue!
Every individual you talk to has their own opinion for their own reason. Talk to them. Find out what it is. If it's something clearly wrong, then address it. If not, well, then maybe you have to take a long look at yourself.
BUT we are all but sheep. I just trust doctors, and scientists more then politicians.
The only one of those groups who have demonstrated positive change in my personal life has been doctors. I don't know any scientists, and I don't know any politicians, and so I have no particular reason to trust or distrust them.
I definitely don't have enough insight into the scientific process, as applied to GW research, to judge whether it is being abused to make data mislead the public, which is the claim of many people here.
The thing is, most anti-AGW proponents come off as people not wanting to change anything because it isn't convenient for them. So naturally, denying everything allows things to proceed as they are now, along the current status quo.
Unless you probe the person, you'll never figure out what point of the grandparent's scale the person falls in. You're just blithely assuming that they're "denying everything" when in fact they may not.
In short, you're practicing the worst kind of prejudice, lumping everybody who doesn't agree with you exactly into the same group.
Try treating people as individuals, who have formed their own opinions. You might gain more traction.
1) ARM-based netbooks exist, 2) But the majority of them seem to be running Windows CE (which seems to disprove the article's premise), 3) They don't have substantially more battery life than an Atom-based netbook, 4) And they generally cost as much, or more, than a typical netbook (someone in this thread linked to an Nokia N900 for >$500!!), 5) And there is at least one model available in tbe US that runs Linux.
But my general point still stands: we've been reading hype about the ARM-based Linux netbook now for over two years. Most of this hype seems to emanate from Slashdot for some reason, probably because Slashdot is one of the very few tech sites that gives a flying crap about Linux.
Yet, despite these years of hype, and despite the crazy enthusiasm displayed by posters at this site, the ARM-based Linux netbook is an extremely niche device, which absolutely no advantages over Atom-based netbooks. Give the hype a rest.
Tell you what, when ARM-based Linux netbooks are flying off the shelf (as they will be Any Day Now(tm) I'm sure), then you can start up the hype machine again, ok? Deal? For right now, I'm sick of reading the same old articles and the same old comments about an item which is, for all practical purposes, a work of fiction.
"Active promotion" is one of those neat terms where you can simply change the definition anytime someone comes up with a counter-case. "Oh, yes he's promoting XCode, but it's not nearly active enough to count." etc. I'm not willing to play that game.
The real point is that the vast majority of companies are perfectly fine with discussing competing products. (If not "actively promoting" them.) Most companies buy competing products if only to learn from them.
I'm pretty sure this is a Microsoft stunt to make their market share look better. If you can't make geeks buy Windows, then make sure they don't buy anything at all because of all the sweet smelling vapourware on the perpetual horizon. Then again I'll blame them for most things, including a sock I lost.
That's nothing, when Vista came out I lost a pair of underpants... while I'd been wearing them!
If you're so bad at office politics that your only response to something like this is to switch jobs, then you'll have severe problems no matter where you go.
Try pulling yourself away from the screen and figure out how to convince a person in power over you that your point of view is correct. That skill is a hell of a lot more useful than any programming language or tool will ever be.
We keep seeing this story over and over and over again.
WHERE ARE THE NETBOOKS!?
Please, direct me to a ARM-based Linux netbook I can buy from a store right now. Any one. Even if I have to climb the dominating tower of Atom-based Windows netbooks to reach them.
Can we all agree to put a moratorium on this story until the product it's talking about *actually exists*? Thanks.
The open source community could easily get rid of C#/Mono, all they have to do is make something with all of C#/Mono's features, but is so much better that nobody wants to use C#/Mono anymore.
Sadly, that has not happened. Until it does, though, you can hardly be upset at people for wanting to use the best tools available.
Slashdot Mirror
You haven't presented any evidence that they're sentient. Nor has anybody else, for that matter.
The earthquake that started that mud flow was a 6.3. That's about 1000 times more powerful than a 3.4.
I don't know how severe a 3.4 quake is, maybe it really is inconsequential
FEMA (for kids! Sorry it was the quickest result on Google) sez that earthquakes below about 4.3 on the Richter scale cause "no damage": http://www.fema.gov/kids/intense.htm Remember, it's a logarithmic scale, so a 3.4 is almost 1/10th as destructive as a 4.3.
I honestly believe that an 18-wheeler or tour bus passing in front of my house would cause significantly more shaking than a 3.4 quake. I don't have a seismometer in my house to prove it, alas.
(Far from villagers, too, BTW)
Yes, yes, I apologize for my ignorance of geography. But my point remains, and is valid-- these people are scamming the poor guy.
The only person at fault here is the local building code, if they let people inhabit buildings that can't withstand anything less than a 5.0 on the Richter. (Assuming that the people who filed for damages actually had damages... which I highly doubt.)
These villagers were scamming the poor guy. $9 million in damages from a *3.4* quake? Cripes, a bus crossing in front of my house is close to 3.4... either their houses are made from eggshells, or this is the scam of the century.
I'd feel terrible if useful research was suspended because of profiteering townsfolk.
Ok, that second link can't possibly apply to fantasy (i.e. made-up) langauges. All they're saying is that if your game has content in both English and Spanish, it has to be approved by both the English- and Spanish-locale approval processes. Which is much more innocent than your implication.
The sound point, from the thread you linked, is just an oversight in the API that they're working to correct, and the Microsoft reps in the thread seemed quite apologetic over it. It's not some horrible conspiracy against you.
Plus, any XNA game you developed that's rejected, or impossible-to-finish, due to those limitations? You can just release it on PC for free, anyway! Sure you lose console customers, but you can always patch your game and come back later for approval.
Seriously, I don't know what your beef with Xbox Creator's Club is, especially when you admit that Sony and Nintendo have absolutely nothing comparable.
Microsoft didn't post a loss this year. They posted their first-ever reduction in revenue... those are two different things, and the author of this article is a retard for not knowing the difference.
In fact, considering all factors (and Vista), Microsoft has been weathering this recession much better than most companies.
[1] Elona Shooter is crack. Seriously. Props to Noa for his first flash game.
I just tried it. I beg to differ.
In addition to that, it's already what one of their major DB competitors, Microsoft is doing. SQL Express is fine for a lot of apps (admittedly not as many as MySQL), and Microsoft's free "give them a taste" product before you upgrade to SQL Server.
By that logic, you're calling George Washington's presidency the "most hated in history."
Microsoft isn't even close to the worst offender here. I once for an error from Lotus Notes that read:
"An error has occurred while processing a request on an object."
Found a handy screenshot at an appropriate domain name: http://lotusnotessucks.4t.com/img/lnEx80_ErrorProcessReqObj.gif
This dialog brings up so many questions. Like, "what error?" and "what request?" and "what object?"
It also helps that Lotus Notes never seems to define what an object *is* in practical terms. I'm sure they're referring to the objects in their OOP code, but it's not like the end user knows what those are, or for that matter, should ever seen the term "object" in the UI.
It's still vendor lock in if there's no competing product that reads their open formats. I'm also too busy/retarded/cheap to create my own.
Any program capable of reading an Office format in an 100% compatible manner, by definition, needs to include all of the features (those stored in the file) of the Office application. Now for a word processor, this isn't *that* big a deal, since it can include many advancements over the competition that aren't visible in the file format-- a better spell checker, for example.
But take Excel. The vast majority of Excel features need to be included in the file format. Meaning, that any third party app that can read Excel files completely need to implement 100% of Excel's features-- there are two implications here:
1) That's really, really hard. OpenOffice isn't even close, and they're probably the closest of all third-parties.
2) You've created a world where the only differentiator between different spreadsheet products is usability, and Microsoft is certainly better at that then it's competition.
Is an open format still what you want?
Uh, the first Microsoft OS that supported multiple monitors was Windows 98. I don't know why you'd expect Office 97 to support that in the first place.
Ok, if you have fiber to your house, you're not allowed to comment. No matter how rural you *think* you are, you're not even close to what we're talking about here.
Hell, I live in a town with a population of approx. 8000, about 25 miles from Seattle. We don't have fiber... probably mostly because Verizon sucks ass, but still. (That said, we were one of the first towns to get cheap DSL for some God-knows reason, so I guess I can't complain.) So I'm stuck on DSL, oh, and since we're not one of the states that Verizon offers dry-loop DSL, I have to pay for a fucking landline phone, too. Ugh.
In short, if you're better-off than a town of 8000 about 25 miles away from the largest city in the state, you're not rural.
Uh, yah, but I'm pretty sure we don't have a *right* to electricity either in the US. If you build a property in the middle of nowhere, you're required to pay for the electricity to be installed there.
That said, we generally all agree access to electricity is a good thing, but I'm not sure if the premise of the article is sound.
If everyone who currently doesnt believe in global warming, believes so because they A)Want to stick with the status quo, B)Believe the government is out to get them or, C) Believe the liberal elitist secret organization is out to get them. Is a denier.
My wager is that that's an extremely small percentage of the people currently being described as "deniers".
If they believe the GW isn't happening due to mis-truths, lies, and blatant falsehoods that have been foisted onto them, then they are just sheep.
Again! You go back to the old language!
Anybody rational isn't going to believe that GW isn't happening. They might believe that it's not happening due to human activity. They might believe that it's happening but it's not harmful to our way of life. Don't you see how many hundreds of possibilities you're grouping in with the one label?
It's not a black and white issue!
Every individual you talk to has their own opinion for their own reason. Talk to them. Find out what it is. If it's something clearly wrong, then address it. If not, well, then maybe you have to take a long look at yourself.
BUT we are all but sheep. I just trust doctors, and scientists more then politicians.
The only one of those groups who have demonstrated positive change in my personal life has been doctors. I don't know any scientists, and I don't know any politicians, and so I have no particular reason to trust or distrust them.
I definitely don't have enough insight into the scientific process, as applied to GW research, to judge whether it is being abused to make data mislead the public, which is the claim of many people here.
The thing is, most anti-AGW proponents come off as people not wanting to change anything because it isn't convenient for them. So naturally, denying everything allows things to proceed as they are now, along the current status quo.
Unless you probe the person, you'll never figure out what point of the grandparent's scale the person falls in. You're just blithely assuming that they're "denying everything" when in fact they may not.
In short, you're practicing the worst kind of prejudice, lumping everybody who doesn't agree with you exactly into the same group.
Try treating people as individuals, who have formed their own opinions. You might gain more traction.
Here is what I concede:
1) ARM-based netbooks exist,
2) But the majority of them seem to be running Windows CE (which seems to disprove the article's premise),
3) They don't have substantially more battery life than an Atom-based netbook,
4) And they generally cost as much, or more, than a typical netbook (someone in this thread linked to an Nokia N900 for >$500!!),
5) And there is at least one model available in tbe US that runs Linux.
But my general point still stands: we've been reading hype about the ARM-based Linux netbook now for over two years. Most of this hype seems to emanate from Slashdot for some reason, probably because Slashdot is one of the very few tech sites that gives a flying crap about Linux.
Yet, despite these years of hype, and despite the crazy enthusiasm displayed by posters at this site, the ARM-based Linux netbook is an extremely niche device, which absolutely no advantages over Atom-based netbooks. Give the hype a rest.
Tell you what, when ARM-based Linux netbooks are flying off the shelf (as they will be Any Day Now(tm) I'm sure), then you can start up the hype machine again, ok? Deal? For right now, I'm sick of reading the same old articles and the same old comments about an item which is, for all practical purposes, a work of fiction.
"Active promotion" is one of those neat terms where you can simply change the definition anytime someone comes up with a counter-case. "Oh, yes he's promoting XCode, but it's not nearly active enough to count." etc. I'm not willing to play that game.
The real point is that the vast majority of companies are perfectly fine with discussing competing products. (If not "actively promoting" them.) Most companies buy competing products if only to learn from them.
Where to purchase: http://en.smartdevices.com.cn/Buy/
I'm not in China, Singapore, or "Hongkong".
Sorry. I should have specified "in the US." How about this: when I can get one at Best Buy, THEN post the story.
I'm pretty sure this is a Microsoft stunt to make their market share look better. If you can't make geeks buy Windows, then make sure they don't buy anything at all because of all the sweet smelling vapourware on the perpetual horizon. Then again I'll blame them for most things, including a sock I lost.
That's nothing, when Vista came out I lost a pair of underpants... while I'd been wearing them!
If you're so bad at office politics that your only response to something like this is to switch jobs, then you'll have severe problems no matter where you go.
Try pulling yourself away from the screen and figure out how to convince a person in power over you that your point of view is correct. That skill is a hell of a lot more useful than any programming language or tool will ever be.
Let me guess, you work for IBM?
We keep seeing this story over and over and over again.
WHERE ARE THE NETBOOKS!?
Please, direct me to a ARM-based Linux netbook I can buy from a store right now. Any one. Even if I have to climb the dominating tower of Atom-based Windows netbooks to reach them.
Can we all agree to put a moratorium on this story until the product it's talking about *actually exists*? Thanks.
The open source community could easily get rid of C#/Mono, all they have to do is make something with all of C#/Mono's features, but is so much better that nobody wants to use C#/Mono anymore.
Sadly, that has not happened. Until it does, though, you can hardly be upset at people for wanting to use the best tools available.