Comment Press conference video? (Score 1) 465
So is there a video of the press conference anywhere? I've only seen clips, such as Mark Karpeles bowing and apologizing (in Japanese), and answering a few misc questions.
>literally be a bomb on wheels
No it is neither literally, nor figuratively a bomb on wheels. It will catch fire though, with plenty of warning and safety features, if punctured. As I understand if you were in the Tesla when it caught fire in the battery packs, you probably wouldn't burn to death.
But the comment you're replying to wasn't talking about the Tesla. It was talking about a hypothetical electric car powered by lithium polymer batteries, of the same chemistry that an iPhone uses. One of those may very well be a bomb on wheels.
Maybe he should behead his opponent and then shout, "Are you not entertained?"
For those who don't believe in reading TFA, it includes a relevant image
/. missed the Digg and then the Reddit train.
Doesn't surprise me, still has teh same shitty interface more or less from the late 90s. Won't even tell me if someone replied to one of my comments without me looking manually. Doesn't display correctly on tablet/phone, can't select post display setting on said devices.
This so called tech site sucks in a lot of ways.
Not sure how you expect to get notified of replies as AC... try logging in, and you'll have the option of various forms of notifications when someone replies to your comments. And a phone/tablet site was launched a few months ago: http://m.slashdot.org/
Myth? The link says: "Now, some of Spider's code (possibly all of it) was based on the TCP/IP stack in the BSD flavors of Unix. "
Yes, but the link also says that the only version of NT that used Spider's code is 3.1. The myth started when people ran strings on various commandline network utilities in Windows 2000, such as ftp.exe, and saw the UC Berkeley copyright message. Apparently, they confused the TCP/IP stack in the kernel with the usermode utilities or something. Bottom line is that NT doesn't use the BSD TCP/IP stack.
All three editions of the ISO C standard (1990, 1999, and 2011) permit main to have an implementation-defined type.
Even in a hosted environment? The C89 draft I found only lists "int main(void)" and "int main(int argc, char *argv[])" (2.1.2.2); it doesn't have the "or in some other implementation-defined manner." that C99 has.
That actually breaks the C standard, but I suppose control systems aren't much worried about portability.
The ANSI C standard defines two types of implementations: "hosted" and "freestanding". An embedded system would most likely be considered a freestanding implementation, in which case, the entry point function can be whatever the implementation defines it to be. It might not even be named "main" (but if it is, it could return void if that's what the implementation says). That said, C99 allows main() to return void, even in a hosted implementation: 5.1.2.2.1 gives "some other implementation-defined manner." as one of the options for main's definition. It notes in 5.1.2.2.3 that "If the return type is not compatible with int, the termination status returned to the host environment is unspecified."
Very few IT departments will let users install anything on "their" computers, which makes sense because otherwise you're going to have security problems.
It isn't my computer at work, it's my employer's. He pays me to use it.
What do you need to install? A keyboard with Dvorak keycaps? I thought if you touch-type, you don't look at the keycaps anyway, so you don't need to change out the QWERTY keyboard. Chances are the work computer uses Windows, which comes with support for Dvorak, so you don't need to install any software either. It's just a configuration change (which doesn't require administrator privileges... a regular user can add the Dvorak layout). Does your employer let you change the mouse speed or double-click time? If so, I don't see why they wouldn't also let you change your keyboard layout.
i thought android+google maps already does this... i think they call it "coarse-location" (due to it not being as accurate as "fine-location provided by gps)
They do. And if you RTFS, Mozilla is also doing it "... to compete with proprietary geolocation services like Google's."
It's "thou shalt not murder,"
It's actually Hebrew that Slashdot won't reproduce, and the translation is normally held to be "Thou shalt not kill" on the basis that is what the KJV translates it as. Other more modern translations use "kill" rather than "murder". Nice selective translation, though.
No, the translation is not "normally" held to be "... kill." Especially not because of the KJV. The modern English translations, including the most popular ones, translate the word as "murder". See, for example, the New International Version, the New American Standard, the Amplified Bible, even the New King James Version. Also, an old, but literal translation, the aptly-named Young's Literal Translation, translates it as "Thou dost not murder." Take a look at the other translations on that site and note how the vast majority translate the word as "murder." Pretty much the only modern, widely-used, translation that uses "kill" is the New Jerusalem Bible.
And FYI, the "Hebrew that Slashdot won't reproduce" can be romanized as "rasah", a term that while hard to pin down the exact meaning of, scholars generally agree means more than simply "kill". This site has some discussion of it.
It's also notable that the Bible explicitly mentions the death penalty as acceptable: "Anyone who kills a person is to be put to death as a murderer only on the testimony of witnesses. But no one is to be put to death on the testimony of only one witness." -- Numbers 35:30. So perhaps that will refresh the memory of the AC a few posts up who "[didn't] recall any exceptions for "Oh but if the other guy killed someone else that's O.K, you know?"
Bollocks! The cable is HDMI 1.4, so refresh rate is limited to 24/30 Hz...
So in other words, the refresh rate for 4K content is 24 to 30Hz, just as jddeluxe said? Got it.
In part, Ethernet uses 4 balanced pairs to get 10 Gbit/s, so only 2.5 Gbit/s per pair; USB3 gets 4 Gbit/s over one balanced pair so is achieving more data per pair
To get 4Gbps in USB3, you need to use SuperSpeed USB, which requires a different cable and connector--it doesn't work with the single D+/D- pair in USB 2.0 and earlier. The SuperSpeed connector has more pins to support the two balanced pairs that SuperSpeed requires.
THEGODDESSOFTHENETHASTWISTINGFINGERSANDHERVOICEISLIKEAJAVELININTHENIGHTDUDE
