@Lewis
This article runs completely counter to every other article he has ever written, so what have you done with the real Lewis Page?
1589 publicly visible posts • joined 12 Jun 2009
The article clearly states that they thought it was funny, so not sure where you get ANGRY MEN from, and since the first thing you do in baseball when you start running is to THROW AWAY your bat, I don't really think your point is valid.
On a similar note - if the cop had only had a firearm, would it have been appropriate to use that? If not, then it wasn't appropriate to discharge a semi-lethal weapon either.
Given that USB power (generally) comes from an already switched on power supply, exactly how much do you think it costs to charge via USB anyway?
The rule of thumb that most people seem to go by is that a continuous 1W for a year costs about £1 per year, so at a max rate of 500mA, you aren't looking at any more than 50p per year if this is connected 24/7 which it clearly won't be, and assuming that all of that extra power is actually an extra draw on the mains side, which it probably won't be.
Quite agree - this is nothing like the Apple app store situation. Apple's app store is an invitation-only situation, whereas Facebook is primarily publically available. As long as 'Power' are not abusing the HTTP protocol then they cannot be doing anything wrong - all they are doing is acting as a fancy proxy. Copyright violation might have been a valid avenue, but not hacking.
So, exactly how useful is it to pump electricity _into_ the grid when no-one needs it, and pull electricity _out_ when everyone else is doing the same?
I presume that everyone here is aware that there is only one method (pumped-storage) of effectively storing mains electricity, and that has VERY limited capacity.
"logging in and posting is seamless and combined, and you don't need to fire up yet another application."
No, No, No!
That is going completely the wrong way - the majority of users don't care about the OS itself - just give them a good browser and leave it at that. Probably the silliest thing you can do is take a web app and package it as a desktop download that is obsolete before you have even finished.
Google's ChromeOS is probably too far ahead of its time, but it isn't an intrinsically bad idea.
Actually, the reason why we all missed that point is because that _wasn't_ the point Mr. Nokia was making, partly because it is wrong. The most important factor in DSLR design is the lense. And that hasn't really changed much in the last century, so not much R&D spend required, unlike those trying to build tiny cameras, who are having to try and find ways to rewrite the laws of physics. Any real advancements that get made by the little guys are likely to benefit the DSLR boys as well, so no big crash.
Don't think anyone has mentioned Depth of Field yet? That's another one where the Physics is pretty clear - small lenses get you closer to being a pin-hole camera, where _everything_ is in focus automatically. By far the majority of great photos are great because they are able to isolate the subject from the background, something that requires _limited_ depth of field, which can only ever be delivered by a big lense.
Well done, you spotted that he can prove he is without doubt quite good at writing in Assembler.
That rather suggests that he _isn't_ going to be up to speed on modern coding standards and/or modern languages.
If, on the other hand, he is as much of a genius as some commentators suggest, then he should be able to ace the test in half the required time, and the failure to do so implies some character defect. Often it is not the test itself that people are interested in, it is how you approach it.
What resolution are you taking photos at? Might be worth dropping the res and/or quality to fit more stills into the available storage.
Other thing to look at is one of the cards that have a WiFi connection built in - some of these make the size of the card effectively infinite if you have a suitable storage target in range.
Blaming the ORG for not offering a sensible middle ground is rather unfair, considering that the current legislation on copyright is rather more draconian than they can support - I simply don't see where there was any compromise available. Quite the reverse, by compromising now, they simply allow the same thing to be brought up again and again - if they always settle on a half-way house, then eventually the law ends up where Big Media wanted it all along. The only way to sort this out is to get some 'friendly' politicians who are able to push legislation the other way.
Hardly a new theory, of course, but does this mean that they have given up on trying to get the BBC to pay for all the traffic it sends out? (or rather pay for it twice over, since they already have to pay for the connection to the internet at their end.)
Not sure how accurate any of the maths is, either, what are those prices based on?
I don't think the last post was intending to denigrate our armed forces, but the facts remain - it is a short-term career for all but the lucky few, that does almost nothing to prepare them for what you and I would call the real world. Yes, they deserve more pay, but so do our Nurses, Police and teachers, and as a country we cannot afford to give pay rises to them all. We can afford to make sure that as much as possible of the MOD budget is invested in UK and european jobs - we are already far too reliant on the US, we don't want to be tied to a country that appears to be about to take a nose-dive.
The point is not really whether or not this guy is correct, it is what is Google thinking?
Their argument is always that they are only showing things that are publically visible, yet they deliberately mount their camera about 9 feet up, which is rather taller than anyone I have ever met. This specifically defeats most peoples normal/reasonable attempts at privacy, ie 6 foot hedges/fences and allows the camera to see straight into peoples houses.
In my opinion Google is providing a useful service, but is being reckless in the way that it is doing it, and needs to be told to change.
"The company has developed a highly valuable asset in webOS. "
Presumably what that really means is: "Palm have spent shed loads of money on this new OS, and need to recoup it somehow. No-one wants to buy any hardware, but maybe we can still sell the software?"
I used to love the older Palm models, but once they tried to get into the smart-phone market they totally failed to impress, and their death is now almost inevitable.
Actually, I think you will find that there is _joint_ responsibility: electronic devices must not cause damaging interference, and must also accept interference without a major malfunction (I'm paraphrasing slightly), but neither of these have anything to do with the frequency in use, purely the quality of equipment.
"Microsoft's decision to surrender on HTML5 and tear down its browser walled garden"
Sorry, but could you give some kind of reference for that line? There was never any doubt that MS would _pretend_ to support HTML5 eventually, and I see no evidence of any tearing-down at the moment - all of the 'good parts' will surely remain for ever and ever, as with IE8 that is effectively three or four different browsers all wrapped up in a single package.
"**Jet engines lose thrust when sucking hotter air."
I know that a degree of mixing will occur, but most engines have a problem when forced to suck their own exhaust - lack of oxygen tends to make them a tad less efficient., and as for heat, it is actually the density of the air that matters most, which actually brings me back to point (a) lack of oxygen to mix with the fuel.
Anyone who is a regular reader of the PanGloss blog will already know that Lilian Edwards is never hysterical. As a qualified lawyer, she knows very well how far a law can and will be abused, and occasionally has to act as devils advocate, despite being generally one of the more centered commentators.
I think El Reg owes her an apology.
If you are talking about the use of a square plate, then that is used by motorbikes amongst others.
If you are talking about the black/white lettering then that is used on older vehicles as standard.
If you are talking about the 2 letters/2 digits/ 2letters format then that is a very close match to certain Northern Ireland plates.
So, what's non-standard about Army plates? The only thing I am aware of is trailers legitimately having their own reg plate, unlike civvy trailers that have to wear the plate of the towing vehicle.
"First, we've got to get to break even. And then we're got to get to profitability. And then we've got to grow share. That's how I do my math."
That says a lot.
In most situations, you need to grow your share of the market in order to increase revenue, not after.
Then, breaking even lives right slap-bang alongside profitability - if you get to break even, but never turn a profit then there is something extremely unusual happening; getting from one position to the other shouldn't take any great effort.
Firstly, the numbers already bandied about are very unclear - I don't think there is quite such a clear divide in England, but in Scotland around 95% of the population live on only 5% of the land, ie approx 90% live in the two biggest cities. On that basis, talking about "one third of the country" may mean 33% of the people, or it may mean about 3% of the people - which is it?
The Government seems to want to have it both ways as usual - the tax won't cost much (for now) which quite clearly means that it will barely raise enough money to cover the cost of administering the new tax, leaving nothing significant to actually spend on infrastructure.
No-one seems to be raising the issue of obligation: the post office are obliged to provide the same service to everyone, regardless of location, and I believe that BT are obliged to provide a landline phone service in much the same way, so why not internet access over much the same infrastructure?
"many tech writers wet their pants over Gears, but in essence it was Google's lacklustre attempt to take on Microsoft."
Gears was only one single part of Google's attempt to take on Microsoft. The whole game has yet to play out, so it seems a little premature to call it lacklustre - I think everyone knows that Microsoft _will_ die, this questions are: when, and who will deliver the killer blow. My bet is that (like IE6) it will be a long lingering death, and that it will be MS itself who will eventually pull the trigger. In other words, it will be the combined strength of all other parties, not just a single clever idea.
Oh, and OGG may be good (it isn't) but as long as H264 is preferred by the content creators it could be 100 times better without having a chance of becoming the 'one and only' codec.
@Sean Timarco Baggaley
As with Closed-source, FOSS comes in many flavours, and projects range from one-man hobby projects to huge _commercial_ projects like MySQL and Mozilla - neither of those two would have a chance if it the majority of the code came from amateurs, however gifted - nothing to do with publicity, just about paying the bills. To my mind, it is the ability to run a large organisation that matters most, not the source of the money. I also think that the question of "too many licences" is a red-herring. It is largely a response to the different funding models in use, and also to the threat of software-patents in different legal jurisdictions. The number of different FOSS licences is nothing compared to the number of different commercial licences, which no-one bothers to read - for the vast majority of consumers, the particular flavour of licence is going to be pretty immaterial too.