Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment At first, I assumed... (Score 1) 483

you were talking about Boston, but then I realized it was Middle east and not northeast.
I don't think anything can be done. Many people are horrible drivers. A certain percentage is very afraid of driving and clog up the road with their uncertainty. Another set believes that driving's just like a video game, and that signals, proper distance between cars, and basic courtesy are inconvenient and optional.
There is nothing that can be done, I'm afraid. Honestly, if they made drivers "qualify" for different types/sizes of vehicles, accidents would be reduced. But, everyone values their time over safety.

Comment Re:One, but I want more! MORE! (Score 1) 674

Actually, this isn't true. It is very much possible to become fluent without going to another country. What you _do_ need to do is listen to the language you want to learn for hundreds/thousands of hours and understand what you hear. Note that this is different from studying a language - it is not the conscious study that will get you there, but a subconscious process of assimilation. You just listen to interesting messages in your new language and your brain learns the rules for you!

Going to another country is great because it is easy to find interesting messages to listen to, but if you have the right tools and materials you can learn a language faster at home than than you could by going the immersion route. This is particularly true for beginners, because it's actually quite hard to find things that are easy enough for you to understand when you're surrounded by native speakers speaking very quickly. Plus, if you go the immersion route there can be more pressure for you to speak before you are ready, which can actually have the effect of fossilizing the wrong language structures in your brain, just because you said them so much. For those who are interested, see Stephen Krashen's website and read his free online book "Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning". (Leave this for when you have a spare hour or three - the book is 140 pages long.)

Comment Re:Great musicians have embraced new technology (Score 1) 319

Are you thinking of C.P.E. Bach? While J.S. did get to play on pianofortes, I don't think there is any indication he was ever planning on ditching the harpsichord or the organ.
C.P.E., however - he definitely took to the pianoforte. Still, it took a while for the harpsichord to die out.
If I remember correctly, Beethoven's Pathetique sonata (1798) was published with the indication that it could be performed on performed either on the pianoforte or the harpsichord. I've certainly never heard it played on the harpsichord.

Comment Re:Thanks for the insight, Ballmer (Score 1) 375

Yes, I do realize this. You do realize that Windows 2000 is a server operating system with a workstation version, that Windows 2003 is a server operating system, as is Windows 2008?

So, to say Windows XP was the direct successor to 2000 isn't 100% accurate. More likely, XP and 2003 were two separate branches that started with 2000. Now, if you were coming from NT4, Windows 2000 seemed like a great improvement, for the most part. I was definitely pleased, that's for sure.

Comment Re:Thanks for the insight, Ballmer (Score 2, Insightful) 375

I'm not sure I'd classify 2k as the beta for xp. 2000 was definitely the successor to NT 4, and the last version with a distinct workstation variant. I remember being delighted with 2000 server in comparison to NT 4.

Windows ME fills the XP beta position, though. Nearly everyone hated it. It was released after 2000... kind of like how 98 was released after NT 4, which was released after 95. The big difference I see, though, is that it was not NT based. Anyway, people complained about XP for quite a while, too. Not as badly as Vista or ME, though.

Comment Re:The Insecurity of OpenBSD (Score 4, Insightful) 143

Perhaps every Ubuntu release story should have a link to a site titled "The Unusability of Ubuntu." Seems fair, doesn't it? The article would necessarily have to be negative... title non-withstanding. Slashdot has turned seriously hostile to non-Linux open source operating systems. I'm not sure why. I've even heard people here use the classic, "nobody uses it, so it must be bad" argument - the same one Windows users make about Linux.

Slashdot Top Deals

Why did the Roman Empire collapse? What is the Latin for office automation?

Working...