I started using a Commodore 64 when I was 7. All of our family was amazed when we realized how to do 'Load"*",8,1' and Load"*",8,1
That always mystified me - what magic incantations did they do so that that command would actually load it off disk AND auto start the program. (I never did find out, so I don't know today).
Or how that even worked...
Love it, hate it
.. but, honestly you simply can't discount a film franchise in which two of the four movies have had global revenues of over a billion dollars and shows up on the lists of highest grossing films. At the end of the day, screw artistic merit when you earn zillions of dollars.
You don't have to like it, but there's not escaping that they've been successful. As long as those movies make that much money, you can count on more of them.
The technical term is "Asses in seats". Hollywood knows summer blockbusters are basically plotless action flicks that really have little artistic merit, but damn do they get those asses into those seats.
And it's just fine. Every other creative medium has similar things going for it - books can be pulp or they can be literature, or span the wide gap between them. Movies can be thought-provoking, life altering with tons of subtext, or they can consist of people just blowing crap up. You see this in video games too - from your standard FPS shooter that sells and makes billions to your indie game exposing some human condition.
Just because Depression Quest is a thought-provoking video game doesn't mean you can't have your Call of Duty.
Ironically, though, Michael Bay isn't a bad a filmmaker as you think. He actually does do quite a few things right that other filmmakers do wrong.
There's a big difference - the Apple watch starts around $400 which is impulse buy territory for lots and lots of people. I think it's pretty neat, especially the ResearchKit stuff.
$400 is NOT "impulse buy" territory.
In fact, there are many cheaper Android Wear devices out there.
What is interesting is basically in one day, Apple has basically outsold practically all smartwatches sold to date combined - even best selling ones like the Moto 360 really only moved around 100K units in total. And Apple's watch costs more, and works with less, to boot.
Granted, I have no use for one (I don't even have an iPhone capable of using it), and while I got bored with the in-store demo, I will say at least there seems to be potential there - lots of apps are updated with Apple Watch support, so there seems to be lots of room for extension. At least it seems not as limiting as Android Wear where the interactions seem limited to what Google allows you to do.
And why should the stockholders by legally liable, when they make none of the decisions, after all?
Stockholders MAKE decisions.
In a corporation, you the head honcho, the chief executive officer. He handles the day-to-day running of the company. He gets his marching orders from the Board of Directors who set the general direction of the company and what they'd like to see the company do. The Directors set the goals for the CEO, who then tries to execute them on the company.
The board of directors is held responsible for their decisions via the stockholders - who in general set the principles behind how the company operates, but are even further isolated from the day-to-day running of the business.
You see this happen all the time - when Carl Icahn decides he wants to strongarm a company into doing something. He does it by owning lots of stock. Or as it seems, every Apple quarterly update where some stockholder or another keeps wanting Apple to get rid of all the green initiatives and corporate responsibility they do so they could make more money. (All the green power, supplier responsibility stuff increases Apple's costs). Usually resulting in Tim Cook responding with "if you feel that way, take your money out of Apple and put it elsewhere".
There is nothing fucked up about that. That technology worked on the cheap (compared to Xerography or God forbit, modern laser/inkjet printers.)
Just because it is old, that doesn't mean it is shit. Enter the #2 pencil.
But the parts and everything needed to maintain the machine are probably the more expensive parts of the whole thing.
Photocopiers (aka xerography) back then were still very cheap to operate, especially the larger enterprise models designed for high-volume copying. And it's usually only cost a few pennies per page.
The ironic thing is today, the modern photocopier is closer to a laser printer than anything - the "digital" photocopier is really a scanner and printer in one unit. They generally are cheaper to operate than a laser as they're designed for high-volume use and since they're already printers, it's just as easy to make them networked printers and scanners for an office scenario. And the price per page hasn't gone up at all, either - a regular desktop laser printer might do 5 cents per page, while the "office center" machine can do it for under a penny a page.
Drill a small hole into a fire-resistant safe where your power and SCSI/IDE/SATA/USB/ETH cables go, then put your drives in there. Won't be easily stolen and will likely survive a house fire. Googling the terms "fire-resistant safe" revealed dozens of good options.
Or just go and use IOSafe drives - they're armored and protected. They routinely do demos where they ask users to store some data on it and they'll put the drive in a fire, toss it off a building and then submerge it, then they'll extract the hard drive (or SSD, if desired for added resilience) and show that the data is still accessible.
Yes, the enclosure's destroyed in the test, but the drive inside is safe and usable.
I've seen 3 episodes so far and it's been enough to make me wonder why regular TV is such crap in comparison.
Ratings, aka eyeballs. And these aren't the L+SD/L+3/L+7 (Live+Same Day, +3 days, +7 days) numbers you see reported in the papers, no
Network TV is funded solely by advertising so every show they put up has to attract the eyeballs. And when attracting eyeballs, going for the lowest common denominator means you have the widest market of eyeballs available.
Going after tech-savvy intelligent people is entirely stupid, as they're more likely to either download the show (no ratings), use a DVR and skip ads, both of which don't contribute to the C ratings. It doesn't matter how good a show does on Netflix - that's not the numbers the networks care about.
Netflix, OTOH, is funded by subscribers, and not commercials. So they need to generate good programming to keep subscribers coming back and paying their $9/month. Here the economics are different - Netflix needs to find out who its customers are (and in general, they're more affluent, tech savvy, and want programming that makes them think, or appeals to geek/nerd culture, etc), and produce that kind of programming to keep the money flowing in. Same goes for other subscription oriented channels like HBO. It's also why public TV (e.g., PBS) or state-funded TV (e.g., BBC, CBC) generally has better programming.
Now, if you look closely, you'll probably figure out why a la carte channels probably will be a race to the bottom - they need to attract cable subscribers, and those in general are more like network viewers so you cannot produce much high quality content as those don't gather eyeballs as much as the latest reality show featuring some big celebrity would. At least when they were bundled those speciality channels were insulated a bit from having to produce content that appeals to the masses and could spend money to make better programming. When it's instead all about getting as many subscribers as possible, well, you can see where it's headed.
As the demographics of Netflix change, so will the programming. Luckily this will take a long time so a show like Daredevil will be on for a while. Netflix will have to broaden its original programming in order to not just maintain its subscriber base, but to increase it.
There really isn't any reason they needed to do this, besides incompetence or malice.
Most likely incompetence.
You have to remember, LG makes money on the monitor, they don't make money on the software. Once you buy the monitor, the software's just a bonus to help you manage the windows more effectively.
The problem is, this makes the software a cost center - so a company like LG would basically say "we need software to do this" and give you $0 to develop it. I.e., get the thing out ASAP and spend no more than a day on it (including any sort of "QA" you want to do). Remember, it costs LG money to make the software which they hope will sell a few extra monitors.
Disabling UAC is supposed to be "hard" in nature - Microsoft provides no API for it, so you have to actually go in and twiddle with the controls itself (trivial to do - just hook it to Spy++)...
Here in Europe radars remain essential because of Russian planes (both fighters and nuclear bombers) are flying around with their ADS-B switched of, just to test how quick European forces respond to possible treats./blockquote.
ADS-B isn't mandatory on planes yet. There are plenty of aircraft in North America that are NOT ADS-B equipped, notably General Aviation ones where ADS-B Out devices still remain in the $5000+ category of avionics cost. Even in Canada, when Transport Canada mandated use of 405 ELTs there was great pushback because the approved ELTs still costed $5000 at implementation. The price has dropped a little bit - you can get 'em for around $3000 or so. But it also requires about $2-4000 worth of work to hook it up (especially if it doesn't have a built-in GPS and has to be wired to the onboard GPS). It's hard enough that it the mandate was pushed back.
To have ADS-B Out, you need either a Mode-S transponder with ES (Extended squitter), or a dedicated ADS-B Out transmitter. Mode S is common on commercial jetliners, so the ES part pretty much comes "for free". General Aviation aircraft typically have Mode C transponders and need to be fitted with the requisite gear.
So no, primary and secondary radar aren't going away anytime soon. The FAA is encouraging ADS-B adoption by providing free weather and traffic information for those who provide ADS-B Out - the ground stations receive a plane's ADS-B information, then consult the databases and return it traffic and weather (centered around the plane). If you only have ADS-B In, you can sometimes piggy back on that data. (Inflight weather is generally a cost option - either through satellite networks, or through SiriusXM WX service, you're still looking at over $1000/year for the service).
How often do you edit multiple document without closing the word-processor in-between or loading up other application?
Because the user that logs in, runs Word, Excel, etc. and then doesn't close any of them until they shut down is a rare beast.
Depends on the OS, actually.
Windows is Application-oriented, so you work on a document in an application, then when you're done with the document, you close the application more so than closing the document.
MacOS (and OS X) however are document-oriented - you work on a document in an application, then when you're done, you close the document itself, which may or may not close the application.
So on OS X, it's entirely possible that your situation happens, and if you have a lot of RAM, it can be beneficial because you can double-click a document and have it open without waiting for the application to start up - it just tells the application to open the document immediately.
Which model is better? Debatable - there are pluses and minuses to both - OS X works great if you work in the same applications all day every day so the apps stay open, while Windows means you reclaim idle memory back.
Cheat: "To violate rules in order to gain advantage from a situation."
He is specifically trying to find a way around the rules that does not violate the letter of the law. It is ipso facto not cheating.
It's a novel and creative approach, and shows both his personal initiative and ability to think outside the box. I would offer him a post myself.
And given most FoI requests get redactions, is it really cheating at all?
I mean, he requests his tests. But what he gets back could be the test itself, with the questions and (for multiple guess) answers redacted.
That seems perfectly legitimate - he had his request fulfilled (and I'm sure if it was after the exams they'd release the full exam without redactions).
Or the appropriate body asks for an extension and releases the papers after the exams are over. Most FoI laws have something for that as well (e.g., the paper doesn't currently exist right now, but it will in a couple of weeks...).
Of course, full irony happens if they release him his exam papers after he's taken them...
What's more : File Explorer in Windows XP (or old IE) behaves very conveniently, you feed it "ftp://192.168.0.1" and it works like a regular file manager window, AND you can access the ftp at least download-only from every web browser in the house. So it is very convenient, very easy to set up and works all the time, and in other words rewarding to the user.
It works still in Windows 8.1.
It's actually provided by a service called "WebClient" that's basically a userspace filesystem handler for Windows. It's handy if you need an FTP client in a pinch. I think it handles WebDAV and other common disk-like protocols as well.
All three Apple users who know these steps have probably already done so. The other several hundred million are fucked, and Apple has now publicly taken a stance that they plan to hang those millions out to dry.
Yeah. Because it's SOOO hard to use Firefox, or Chrome, instead of Safari.
That's really how you do it - if it means that much to you, then you can always use browsers that do not use the OS X security store.
Like Chrome and Firefox. They run great on OS X.
Of course, a big problem is that Apple sells a lot of product in China, so CNNIC is pretty much required otherwise no Chinese user will be able to do anything.
I mean, what about Android? Is CNNIC going to be removed from it?
Standards bodies usually try to avoid patents but this is often not practical because there are so many patents and the best solution is often patented.
No they don't.
A standards body works like this - industry wants to come up with a new standard for some reason - perhaps faster part, new technology whatever. So the standards body convenes a group of people from industry who then argue out the merits and the specifications of the new technology standard. Along the way, patents get hashed out - and a lot of politicking goes on in getting your patent in the standard.
When it comes to patents and standards, you have two options - you could not offer the patent for licensing and have the standards body work around it, or you can have it become part of the standard, with the caveat that you must license to anyone and everyone as FRAND terms.
Depending on the patent, one way may be better than the other, but in general, it's usually nicer to have people paying you so you make it FRAND. Which means at times there's a lot of back scratching to get your patent in the standard.
Most standards are patented. Ethernet, WiFi, etc., they usually all have some form of license fee to be paid.
We found out where all of California's water has gone
California has plenty of water - they're not a landlocked state. They've got access to the largest ocean in the world for water.
Of course, the problem is it isn't USABLE for a lot of things.
The earth's surface is 2/3rds water. Unfortunately, freshwater makes up under 1% of that.
Kleeneness is next to Godelness.
