Comment No links to Penisland? (Score 1) 712
Maybe you won't find your ultimate pen there, but you gotta admit, "penisland.net" is a great URL!
Maybe you won't find your ultimate pen there, but you gotta admit, "penisland.net" is a great URL!
This all comes down to if you want to play it safe (stability motivates you), or if you want to roll the dice and gamble (change motivates you).
I speak from experience. I made a risky choice in 2000 and joined a startup, quitting a secure job at IBM that I would (in all likelihood) still have today. The job I went to paid better, was a lot of fun, exciting, challenging, and in the end a failure. My career has never fully recovered, and I am certain that had I stayed at IBM I would be finincially way further ahead than I am now. By all reasonalble criteria, I should regret my decision.
Yet I *had* to do it: I crave re-invention and change. I wouldn't be happy stuck in the douldrums of a stagnant work environment. I work for myself now, but I have no problems envisioning myself going back to being a cog in a big machine again. I'm open to, and embrace, the possibilities.
But as for you, you have to make that decision for yourself. The operative word about your job is not "fun", it's "happiness". You're in a fortunate position of being satisfied with your career, so you need to decide if you will regret not taking the opportunity to do more (and risk that you will fail). Good luck.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_Summer_Olympics#Highlights
Princess Anne of Great Britain competed in the 1976 Summer Games in Montreal (equestrian). Unsurprisingly, she happens to be the *only* female competitor to not have to submit to a "sex test" at that games.
Google will never innovate again. It's not allowed.
Strange, I'd have thought that offering an fiber-based alternative infrastructure to a pretty good sized city would have qualified as pretty damn innovative. Who else is trying that?
Google has been publicly traded for many years now, and as such "hostage" to outside investors. In that time they've started this project, the self-driving cars, Google Glass, and a bunch of other stuff that "hasn't been done before", certainly not to the scale that Google is attempting.
Obviously, we need our law schools to start teaching the use of carriage returns!
I see your MS natural, and raise you an IBM Model M.
The most perfect input device ever made. I have about 10 of them.
Amen, brother. I also have a stockpile built up of these keyboards. The only keyboard that I'd like to find would be one that has a trackpoint built in. I know IBM made some of these, but I've not been able to find one at an affordable price.
Damn! You beat me to it, that was going to my comment! Tip of the hat to you, good sir!
1. Crook buys real iPad with cash.
2. Crook takes iPad, replaces clay in box, re-seals box to appear unopened.
3. Crook returns new-looking tainted box, receives cash from store.
4. Tainted box returned to shelf.
5. Innocent buys tainted box
6. Innocent discovers clay, goes back to store.
7. Store stuck with clay and packaging.
The sentence you quoted was for Steps 3-4, not 6-7.
Nice. Insult the poster when he states something that is demonstratably correct, then offer absolutely no proof of your claim. Unlike you, some of us are willing to be civil in our discussion, and would even welcome the opportunity to be proven wrong when shown the evidence. By all means, please tell us how you can procure a legal copy of Windows 7 Ultimate on a non OEM machine for less than $46.99. I'm serious, that would be great information to have.
Oh, and mod down the GGP post. Definitely *not* informative.
Agreed. Citation *definitely* required for a comment like this one.
I just did a quick search and found only this reference to any patent licensing agreement in February 2009, where Google paid Microsoft for their "ActiveSync" technology. Hardly enough to imply that Google has purchased a "Thou Shalt Not Sue Me over my Phones" license from Microsoft.
[pedantic] Chris O'Dowd is Irish. [/pedantic]
Why are we still fretting about analog inputs and outputs?
Because there are early adopters out there that bought very high end TVs before HDMI was rolled out. I've seen people with perfectly good quality rear-projection screens (purchased in the late '90s) that can handle HD (1080i), but only has component inputs.
There is no "capability" reason why a set like this couldn't show Blu-ray content at near-highest settings. However, turning off component HD output from a Blu-ray player effectively handcuffs it.
This has also been attributed to George Bernard Shaw and Mark Twain. Agreed, Churchill seems pretty unlikely to have been the one to say this.
Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're guessing.