Link to Original Source
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
With Windows I can just point out the "Designed for Windows X" logo and my customers will get devices that work every. single. time.
Normally, I wouldn't nitpick to this degree, but you seemed to place great emphasis on this point. Are you saying that you've never encountered a Windows user complaining that their printer just "stopped working?" It seems to me that every nontechnical person I know has expressed this frustration to me at one time or another.
Why is it always assumed that--for instance--pharmaceutical patents, technological patents, and software patents all have to follow the same patent law?
Wouldn't it be best to tailor the law to what's practical in each particular field?
I wouldn't say we're better off for having GTK, or at last we're not better off having GTK be as popular as it is. Choice is good, but Linux would be much further toward acceptance on the Desktop with one main GUI toolkit.
We'd be better off had GTK completely killed off QT, or if it hadn't been created at all. We ended up with the worst possible outcome. I can't think of anything that could slow down Desktop Linux development more than two major competing DEs duplicating each other's efforts.
What makes you think that there wouldn't be two major competing DEs, both using the same toolkit? KDE and Gnome are different enough, philosophically, that we'd likely still have both.
If you followed the global mobile news you would know about mobile-review already. But most in the US don't know shit about anything except RIM, Apple and Motorola.
Truth be told, I don't follow them, either. The summary leads one to believe there's an interesting technology article somewhere in there, but there really isn't anything of the sort (which is probably why I don't find mobile phones very compelling in the first place--for such a potentially-important class of technologies to be hindered by some inexplicable need to be tied to a phone service does not make sense to me).
I hate to pop your balloon (pun intended) but 10,000 feet is not that high. In World War 2 the Germans had anti-aircraft guns that could easily get to much over 20,000 feet. Many cheap modern shoulder held anti-aircraft missiles can easily shoot this high and a blimp would be easy to hit. It might be safe from small arms fire but a few small holes wouldn't hurt it much. An anti-aircraft missile is another matter.
Blimpin' ain't easy.
That's still no reason to falsely accuse someone.
Some people might not be bright enough to distinguish from actual downloading
of some sort and streaming from some site like Hulu or Pandora. How does Pandora
or radio streams fit into this particular bit of government propaganda?
Both are blocked outright on DoD networks, along with all other mainstream music/video distribution sites, so no worries.
I tried to RTFA, but apparently the author assumes that I spend day and night reading his website and know the story behind all his half-alluded-to technologies. The only bit of coherent information I was able to garner from that pile of misspelled words, glued together with condescension, was how great the author thinks he is for being all "insider" and stuff.
A dental health network:
- The outlook for the UK dental market...is positive
- Current dental provision in the UK is low with only c. 50% of the population registered with dentists. There are also too few practices to meet the capacity needs.
Agreed! Also, the source code for the language (written in C) is very digestible, well-commented, and easy-to-read. A great second step.
The language is a pleasure to use. It just feels right.
That quote sums it up perfectly. There's just something about the language that "just works" for me, at least.
Recently tried OpenRPG. Was okay, but we've since moved to rptools (rptools.net), which is open-source, very actively developed, and fantastic.
But I pay £140 a year
Ok in all honesty where in your mind does £140 even begin to cover the literally thousands of hours of production? Do you think that covers even a SINGLE employee for a SINGLE episode? THIS people is the problem with the whole "I'm a noble pirate" bs that flies around on Slashdot. The mechanisms are in no way economically sustainable.
Apparently it does, since that's the price that was set by industry. I'm pretty sure the difference is made up by the fact that there are many more people paying that price than there are employees.
I searched for "ovation tangent 357 truss rod" and Google came out with only three possibly useful results at the top, followed by seven results from
I didn't care too much about it, so I went to the next results page, but there they were again. A whole page full of those useless
I also found out the URLs of the results (those in green, before the "Similar pages" link) contained invalid characters such as U+FF0E and U+FF43, which render as characteres identical to "." and "c", respectively, but not the standard "." (U+002E) and "c" (U+0063) characters. i.e.: d39[\uff0e]1xacb.[\uff43]n/ (visually, d39.1xacb.cn/).
Seems like all of those domains were registered early this month.
Yahoo and Altavista behave in a similar way with the same search keywords, but they give only three result pages. Microsoft Live Search does not show any of those
What could be the goal of spamming a search engine? To avoid the visitor to find what he/she looks for? Those are just randomly named domains and they don't sell or advertise anything."