I think that he means "two sensors in order to triangulate" etc.
There was a bit of confusion between sensor and emitter though. *grin*
Basically, it needs one sender and two receivers/sensors in order to triangulate accurately. Yes, it could get by with one sender and one receiver, but then it would need time to establish a baseline in order to triangulate from send/receive1to send/receive2 - which is made harder when the target isn't static either.
I agree - but as it was with a local authority/council, who thought that even the Win2K I was using was new-fangled (and this was working for them last year) and they preferred to stick with Win98, such concepts as Knoppix and LiveCDs were a bit of a no-no.
I could've used them, sure, but if anyone else had seen it would've been more hassle than it was worth.
Yeah, I found that the "clean up word docs" did about 80% of the work, and then it was just a matter of a buttload of search/replace stuff in order to get it to finish the rest.
Worked pretty well, once I'd got the search/replace stuff sussed out.
Mind you, on a big word file you can think it's crashed when actually it's just doing lots of thinking...
I'd have thought that the "Slashdot effect" etc. wouldn't really affect a Google pagerank, as despite the site getting lots of hits, they're all from one link on/.
So it's only gained one link through/. , but loads of bandwidth etc.
The epicentre itself has no depth. However, so far as I understand it, there is a depth at which the earthquake occurs.
For example, the quake that caused the Tsunami on Boxing Day was right on the surface (of the crust, not at sea-level) but others (more often the land-based ones, in fairness) occur further below the surface (land-level)
I used to find that NatWest and Royal Bank of Scotland both wouldn't run on anything other than IE5.5 and NN4.7. That was all they'd tested the site on - they hadn't tested IE6 and NN6/7, so therefore they weren't allowed to access.
However, they've both improved now, although I do tend to type the URL in that goes straight to the secure site, rather than pissing about with browser checkers and so on.
At risk of stating the obvious, it's a beta. Not a full release.
As such, yes it'd be nice if they gave it out with a "full life", but nine months is far better than 30day trial periods etc.
Any sys-admin installing a beta with a defined 270 day limit on it and using it in a "potentially mission critical environment" deserves to be sacked anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
I think that he means "two sensors in order to triangulate" etc.
There was a bit of confusion between sensor and emitter though. *grin*
Basically, it needs one sender and two receivers/sensors in order to triangulate accurately. Yes, it could get by with one sender and one receiver, but then it would need time to establish a baseline in order to triangulate from send/receive1to send/receive2 - which is made harder when the target isn't static either.
Well, except for people like submariners and pilots - sonar and radar are basically just echolocation.
Sonar in particular, of course, but radar is just echo-location using radio waves instead of sound waves.
I agree - but as it was with a local authority/council, who thought that even the Win2K I was using was new-fangled (and this was working for them last year) and they preferred to stick with Win98, such concepts as Knoppix and LiveCDs were a bit of a no-no.
I could've used them, sure, but if anyone else had seen it would've been more hassle than it was worth.
Yeah, I found that the "clean up word docs" did about 80% of the work, and then it was just a matter of a buttload of search/replace stuff in order to get it to finish the rest.
Worked pretty well, once I'd got the search/replace stuff sussed out.
Mind you, on a big word file you can think it's crashed when actually it's just doing lots of thinking...
Ah, beginner's luck.
I was trying to resist using that joke...
If it's an ermine (which really is just a stoat in winter clothing) then it's closely related to the ferret, but still not a ferret.
And yes, I need to get out more.
A serious system fault has occurred in your programming. Please reboot humour.exe ( or humor.exe for American jokes ) immediately.
And Sirocco. I think Passat is a wind too, but could be wrong on that one.
Will the successor to the Touareg be the Bedouin?
Sorry, I did a search for "dupe" and at the time nothing came up...
No, but it does mean that you can say all your bass are belong to us.
Well, the tampon ads are really only going to be useful as an "impulse" buy every month or so... *grin*
Amazingly, no-one seems to have complained yet that this story is a dupe of this one from Sunday.
That must be fairly newsworthy in itself!
Ironic that this comes up at the same time as a poll about "least favourite finger" - now they can all be useful again.
Bondi Buddy.
Awful, truly awful. Both the product, and that I remember what it was called.
I'd have thought that the "Slashdot effect" etc. wouldn't really affect a Google pagerank, as despite the site getting lots of hits, they're all from one link on /.
/. , but loads of bandwidth etc.
So it's only gained one link through
Isn't that what Gmail's for? *grin*
The epicentre itself has no depth. However, so far as I understand it, there is a depth at which the earthquake occurs.
For example, the quake that caused the Tsunami on Boxing Day was right on the surface (of the crust, not at sea-level) but others (more often the land-based ones, in fairness) occur further below the surface (land-level)
Wouldn't there be even more interest in xxx.xxx ?
Indeed - blow.jobs , hand.jobs , rim.jobs and I'm sure there's many more.
Of course, Apple.com could also move to steve.jobs
*gets coat and leaves*
More to the point, how will it protect from online smut, if the children know that .xxx will get them to the dodgy sites?
was *wink* a typographical error, in that context?
I used to find that NatWest and Royal Bank of Scotland both wouldn't run on anything other than IE5.5 and NN4.7. That was all they'd tested the site on - they hadn't tested IE6 and NN6/7, so therefore they weren't allowed to access.
However, they've both improved now, although I do tend to type the URL in that goes straight to the secure site, rather than pissing about with browser checkers and so on.
At risk of stating the obvious, it's a beta. Not a full release.
As such, yes it'd be nice if they gave it out with a "full life", but nine months is far better than 30day trial periods etc.
Any sys-admin installing a beta with a defined 270 day limit on it and using it in a "potentially mission critical environment" deserves to be sacked anyway.
Do you think there might be something to this being posted on 1st April?
I know, I'm just a cynic - but there's that itch at the back of my brain saying "April Fool"