Cavil, is that you?
This is why we need a "-1: Woosh" mod...
Turn your phone on airplane mode and then place it on top of some computer speakers. The speakers should pick up the interference if it transmits.
I can't guarantee that will work, but it's pretty cheap and easy.
Ironically, in many instance a single-track line with modern signals can actually be more efficient than double-track with older block-style signals. During the rail rationalization period in the 60's and 70's, many railroad companies actually tore out their second mains and invested in new signal systems. This reduced their maintenance and tax burden, while allowing just as many if not more trains than before.
I'm not saying that every line in the country should be single track. There are many situations where the traffic calls for more, but dismissing single track as not modern or being akin to the third world is incorrect. Single track with modern signals is more modern.
The passenger rail system in this country is atrocious, but the United States has the world's most efficient freight railroad system. Do not confuse the two.
Releasing the code isn't a bad way to get other people to start working, and as we've seen that actually worked out well, significantly multiplying the number of contributors to the project.
Exactly. "Release early, release often." Isn't that the open-source way?
That was my point. There's not, contrary to the original comment.
Wouldn't it stand to reason that the most popular Linux distro would have the highest amount of complaints and the highest amount of compliments?
In my completely unscientific survey, I just ran a Googlefight between "Ubuntu is awesome" and "Fedora is awesome" where Ubuntu had twice as many hits. I don't really think your comparison is valid.
From what I understand the buttons were moved to the left so that notifications will no longer cover the buttons. At least that's the most reasonable explanation I've heard.
They will rename themselves to Tyrell Corporation.
Why does this have a ominous tone? I know they are a business trying to diversify, etc.. but all that they are doing has the bad 'feel' to it.
I feel the exact opposite way. Every time Google enters a market, I get excited because they're the only company I know of that I don't feel are trying to screw me. Plus they force everyone else to step up.
Remember the days before gmail when webmail meant 10mb of storage and they'd delete all your mail if you didn't log on in the past 30 days? Everybody else now offers more storage space than you can do with it. And IMAP access. If you don't go the Google route, the competition they bring makes everyone's service better.
In fact, they both provide a decrease in quality thanks to restrictive DRM (would I rather view this for years at 480p or view it for a couple years at 1080p until the disc is damaged beyond repair? )
What does DRM or the resolution of the content have to do with the life of the disc? Secondly, DVD has more than its fair share of quality problems. You can find numerous reports of badly replicated discs and numerous issues of discs coming apart due to poor pressing and adhesives.
I don't know about you but I wouldn't find "Accountancy: The Game" much fun.
Not a fan of Eve or SimCity then?
Cutting print circulation to that extent results in each printed copy of the paper costing $12,134.1
Compare the cost of a full page ad in the NYT with the cost of a banner ad on a web page. That might be a hint as to why they'd rather not cannibalize their printed subscription base.
* The result of extensive economic calculations, or made up?
by the way, you can import the "bulky" IE COM ojbect and use it without a gui and without security-warning pop ups because, you know, the malware author didn't decide to put the gui and security warnings in his code. oh and the IE COM object (a) makes it harder to detect since it could just be a legitimate user using IE, (b) IE is tried and tested, a malware's http stack could be buggy, leave identifying footprints, (c) saves the malware author time from reinventing the wheel.
in security it is *ALSO* about the lowest common denominator. great woohoo, you can stop malware that doesn't follow the rules of your network. you cannot ignore malicious software that does follow the rules of the network. you're fooling only yourself if you believe malware can't evolve (did we not realize this the first time when a virtualized rootkit was as powerful as the first offerings of vm software?)