I'm not even making a slashdot-type "nobody reads the article" joke here - literally no one anywhere is going to read the article when you use high-level SAT words and phrases like:
regime (not referring to a country's leadership)
If its supposed to be ironic, I get it, but if its not then you failed miserably and don't even understand your own ideas.
I think its good to have as big of a vocabulary as possible and I actually recognize most of these words or could figure it out from contrast, and I consider myself to have a fairly above-average vocab due to having an English teacher for a Mom, but repeatedly using "big" words like those is just a shortcut to letting us know you're an asshole without much to say.
The message board post saying it was a fake was a fake. It was in French and they were joking about how they're so good at making repros that its theirs and its a fake. Except they were joking.
This doesn't prove its real, but I wouldn't be quite so quick to jump to the conclusion that its a fake.
The guy who has it seems to be worried about plugging into the "7.6V" power input, but its pretty obvious that a 7.5V psone power supply will run it just fine.
In cases like this, skepticism is to be expected, but the "proof" that its "fake" was an admitted joke, so lets roll it back to "maybe fake" instead of "definitely fake" until more info comes out.
I'm gonna say what everybody else already said with the added bonus of a harsh reality check.
Regardless of the expensive area you've chosen to live in, there is no excuse for you to not be able to survive 3 months without income. Love her or hate her, Suze Orman would be tearing you to shreds if you asked her this question, so i'm going to do so by proxy.
There are people out there that have to feed a family of 3 on $25,000 a year. They have to spend every dime they make on a place to live and food - and for that reason its somewhat acceptable if they're having difficulty saving a cash cushion, they'd have to be REALLY thrifty and still not really make it.
Meanwhile, a rough estimate of your income after taxes means you're probably taking $100-$125,000 a year home. With that level of cash in your pocket, you'd have to be snorting cocaine with $100 bills and then wiping your ass with it to not have more than a 3 month cushion after even just a couple years of employment.
You should be glad that you're making enough that you don't ACTUALLY have to worry about food or shelter. Not making the mortgage payment on your $600k mcmansion does not classify as "worrying about shelter" because it was your choice to overdo it.
Once you break through the median family income, your goal should be to save as much as possible, not to spend it all and have nothing to show for it.
You need to, right now, go to a retirement investtent web site such as Vanguard.com, open an account, and start putting 25% paycheck in it until you have a years worth of income saved up, then you can drop that back to 10-15% or so. If you do this, you basically won't ever have to worry about money again.
Yes, you won't be able to buy a new BMW 5 series every 2 years, no, you won't be able to move out of that $600,000 crapshack and into a million dollar crapshack in 5 years. But for the love of god, don't openly worry about your finances when you make over $200k a year! You have a spending problem, not an earning problem.
While it seems like the federal government is out of line taking the right to govern away from the states, in reality it is the states that are taking away the right to govern from local governments that ACTUALLY WANT municipal broadband.
Ensuring that municipalities maintain their rights to roll out local broadband isn't a perversion of states rights, its preventing states rights from perverting local rights.
I have an x25-m G2 80GB and a crucial M500. The crucial drive has substantially better random iops, and the system does feel faster booting off it than the x25-m. But the difference in "feel" is like a 7200rpm platter drive vs a 10,000rpm platter drive... same ballpark but the 10k is just a bit snappier.
Newer SSDs are definitely faster than earlier ones, but we've kind of hit a wall with needs for even more speed. The slowest (non-broken) SSD you can buy today will be no less beneficial in real world home-user operation than the fastest SSD you can buy. Its just that there is a little bit of room for improvement over 2008-2009 era SSDs. (Don't take this as a disagreement, just an elaboration).
Interesting timing - I just went 10 years without upgrading my sound equipment, but I just recently decided to replace my ~40 year old large advent speakers with a pair of Mackie HR824 studio monitors and a HSU ULS-15 sub. Got the Mackies already and they're fantastic, a definite upgrade overall. The sub hasn't come yet, but I'm pretty excited for it. 15" sealed sub with a ton of linear excursion and very low distortion - there are louder subs out there, and there are more expensive subs out there, but this thing kills it for $999 according to the reviews. I picked "moderately expensive but only to a point." I recognize its more than most people spend on audio, but I absolutely won't spend stupid amounts of money on cabling or external DACs or anything like that, my source is my computer running over a toslink cable to my 10 year old Denon receiver. (And a set top bluray player for movies).
I used to reinstall XP every year or two to get it back to a fresh copy, but I ran the same install of 7 from 2009 until... well, the present though that computer is my second one instead of my main one now. Including installing games and at one point switching from an nvidia to an ATI video card. Runs as awesome as ever. This problem has basically been solved... SSDs and huge amounts of ram help.
I just wish people would stop linking to Daily Currant articles. Their version of "Satire" is posting articles that aren't funny, but ARE plausible, just to incite a reaction. Its not like The Onion where the humor is usually right in the headline.
I wouldn't have a problem with it if they were skilled writers and I cracked up laughing while reading the article. Except its crap like "Sarah Palin: âEat Less Chinese Foodâ(TM) to Reduce Trade Deficit" or "Hilary: I'm running!"
I wouldn't be surprised if Sarah Palin said something like that, and I wouldn't be surprised if Hilary Clinton was running for president. Except there's no humor in fabricating plausible stories.
While its true that cameras with large sensors tend to have shallower depth of field, its actually a side effect of needing to use longer focal length lenses to get the same field of view. You might need 70mm on a 35mm camera to frame a subject for a portrait but only 12mm on a point and shoot to frame the same subject. Longer focal length means bigger actual lens aperture for the same f-stop, and thats what decreases depth of field.
For example, a 35mm f/2 lens on a full frame camera will have the same depth of field as a 35mm f/2 lens on a 2/3" CCD point and shoot, but the 35mm on a full frame camera is going to be a standard angle and 35mm on the point and shoot is going to be considerable telephoto.
People generally don't use the same range of focal lengths on full frame cameras as they do on tiny sensor point and shoots (or cell phones) so thats why it seems like its easier to achieve the shallower depth of field with a bigger imager.
Serving coffee on aircraft causes turbulence.