Probably 16 or 17. I've been using Fedora since FC3 and its quality went up until things stopped working during installation. For instance, I used to be able to switch to command prompt during installation, set up my drives in any RAID format I wanted, with ANY parameters I wanted, and have the graphical installation recognize my setup and install away. Even wireless worked off the bat on the notebooks I installed on.
Come the new installation process and it looks like everything is dummied down, which I don't mind, as long as the advanced functions don't get taken away. But it looks like they have.
I actually downloaded 24 this morning and tried the live boot on an Acer notebook. To my surprise, it actually recognized the wireless and I was able to get on, but I couldn't fire up any programs (including terminal). All I'd get was a spinning cursor. Granted this was just on one notebook, and I'm going to install 24 on the notebook as soon as I put an SSD in it, but it seems like the installation quality has gone down significantly. I actually liked being able to select my packages during install.
Incidentally, when did systemd make its way into Fedora?
A lab can actually measure the length light travels in that amount of time and thus reproduce the canonical meter.
I hope they all use the same excellent pump to create a vacuum as closely equal to the outer space as possible, otherwise their measurements will vary significantly
Costs money to equip a classroom with appliances and supply it with raw materials used in cooking - money that can be "put to better use" increasing test scores and such, because increasing test scores increases funding in the NCLB model - teaching people practical life skills is not rewarded.
You know what costs a lot more than equipping a single classroom with appliances (which are usually donated anyway)? Turf on the fucking football field. And get off the test score bandwagon. Test scores don't mean shit and shouldn't translate to dollars. We need to change all that mentality, specially when teachers teach to the test and only on how to get a better test score. We just need better teachers.
How so? I do not believe audiophiles who spend extra money on an ethernet cable necessarily feel bad about doing so. I would actually suspect that they feel good about it.
In addition, my response was to the argument about data transmission correcting for error due to a bad cable, and that the argument still stands regarding possible noise inserted after the DAC. Like I said before, I believe that's highly unlikely, since noise after the DAC means that there's noise on the MB and there are plenty of more sensitive circuits on the MB susceptible to noise, but to summarily dismiss that theory (or via test results from 20 subjects who were primed anyways) is just wrong.
Even the most rabid speaker cable true-believer audiophiles will admit that digital is digital—at this point, almost everyone has accepted that the bits will arrive, or they won’t. However, the audiophile contention is that some amount of electromagnetic interference or noise is transmitted up unshielded Ethernet cables, through the Ethernet port, and into the computer’s DAC (the digital-to-analog converter), which then makes itself apparent to the listener by coloring the sound in some way.
So, the contention is not that these cables will differ in a "DATA" setting, but that the cheaper cable may introduce unwanted noise into the circuit after the DAC. Now we can argue whether that does or does not happen (I believe it to be highly unlikely), but the argument is not about digital noise.
As in certain cults it is possible to kill a process if you know its true name. -- Ken Thompson and Dennis M. Ritchie