Slashdot Mirror

I hate to keep copying/pasting the same thing here, but this might actually help someone. Check out the following as it may help you:

I cured what I thought was "RSI" using this "mindbody" approach:
http://www.rsi.deas.harvard.edu/handout.doc
(Coincidental that Harvard is hosting this document, maybe the researchers should look at it themselves)

Here is the Google cache for those who don't want to open a .doc.

I suffered for 1.5 years (where I didn't work because I didn't think I could) before I found that my cure was a completely psychological approach. From my research of CTS (as well as what my doctor told me), it is completely unrelated to typing. And from my experience with "RSI" and understanding what it actually was, I no longer believe you can actually hurt yourself from typing too much.

I now type sometimes all day long without taking many breaks. I play guitar, bass, and drums. I don't worry about posture at all. Ergonomics are only a way for me to get comfortable, not to avoid injury. I have no pain at all, and don't worry about ever having "RSI" again. It's been 5 years since I cured myself.

Please read up on the approach I'm talking about here before you flame me. It actually makes sense once you put all the pieces together. You can also search for "sarno tms" to find more info.

Read the book "The Mindbody Prescription" by John E. Sarno if you can, its really the best source for an explanation of this.

Before you go for surgery, check out the following just in case it works for you:

I cured what I thought was "RSI" using this "mindbody" approach:
http://www.rsi.deas.harvard.edu/handout.doc
(Coincidental that Harvard is hosting this document, maybe the researchers should look at it themselves)

Here is the Google cache for those who don't want to open a .doc.

Read the book "The Mindbody Prescription" by John E. Sarno if you can.

The following might explain what RSI really is (which is different than CTS, which I don't think is caused by computer use or repetitive strain at all). I am pretty much copying and pasting what I wrote the last time there was a Harvard research article about this subject:

I cured what I thought was "RSI" using this "mindbody" approach:
http://www.rsi.deas.harvard.edu/handout.doc
(Coincidental that Harvard is hosting this document, maybe the researchers should look at it themselves)

Here is the Google cache for those who don't want to open a .doc.

I suffered for 1.5 years (where I didn't work because I didn't think I could) before I found that my cure was a completely psychological approach. From my research of CTS (as well as what my doctor told me), it is completely unrelated to typing. And from my experience with "RSI" and understanding what it actually was, I no longer believe you can actually hurt yourself from typing too much.

I now type sometimes all day long without taking many breaks. I play guitar, bass, and drums. I don't worry about posture at all. Ergonomics are only a way for me to get comfortable, not to avoid injury. I have no pain at all, and don't worry about ever having "RSI" again. It's been 3 years since I cured myself.

Please read up on the approach I'm talking about here before you flame me. It actually makes sense once you put all the pieces together. You can also search for "sarno tms" to find more info.

Read the book "The Mindbody Prescription" by John E. Sarno if you can.

I believe you :-)

Including a link for people who are not as 31337 as j00 and !.

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:_R74sLFjp0MJ: www.aboutthescene.com/releases/tags.html+http://ww w.aboutthescene.com/releases/tags.html&hl=en&ct=cl nk&cd=1&gl=us

Every business has enough IT talent to support an infinite number of MSWindows machines. All you need is this: http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:na76q-BJMYIJ: www.microsoft.com/Windows/zak/+microsoft+zero+admi n&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

Ha ha fscking ha! MS lies about every piece of shit they sell. They've been doing it for 30 years and some morons still believe them.

regarding Lynn Prince Singapore, i had trouble accessing the URL you mentioned. but i found enough here to 'be afraid, be very afraid'.

if you don't see her background described on the page (you won't), click on her name in the menu on the left. DoD people like to keep low profiles :-)

Read what BD+ really is:
http://www.cryptography.com/technology/spdc/bluray .html

This means that each Blu-Ray disc has a computer program compiled to execute within a proprietary, secure VM. What this means is that each disc has a program built into it whose purpose is to boot, validate that it is running on licensed hardware, enforce security policy, and if those checks are met, extract a key from its own memory and play the content.

What does this mean for people attempting to defeat the security?

Well it means that a full crack of BD+ will require crackers to implement a virtual machine which acts in exactly the same way as the hardware VM would act. This represents a what I will casually call a "larger challenge" than defeating CSS or AACS, in which you have to decrypt a key or a list of keys. In this case, you have to come up with something which can determine the full dynamic runtime execution path of a static binary - a currently unsolved problem in Computer Science, despite numerous attempts to do such a thing by some of the world's brightest minds.

Just putting the same source code through a randomizing compiler/packer/obfuscator of the types that game companies have been working on for a while makes the challenge immensely harder. Precedent? http://spa.jssst.or.jp/summer-2005/paper/05046.pdf
There's too much to talk about.

And who's deployed this type of technology already? Who has a secure virtual machine with secure bytecode doing challenge-response to determine hardware legitimacy? People Who Care: a lot.

The other major problem is that the challenge-response authentication made by the program contained in the disc against the embedded hardware will require a "real" cert to succeed. Yes this is the TPCA/Palladium "sky is falling" scenario come to pass. Either the implementors made a cryptography implementation mistake, or someone with a scanning, tunneling electron microscope figures out how to defeat the epoxy guards and actually read the private cert material off a chip, or someone with a previously unheralded supercomputer or mathematical technique breaks the key from a known subset of challenge/response pairs... - or, it will remain unbroken. It is strong, known algorithm public key cryptography.

What's really interesting about all this is if someone DOES find a way to break BD+, there is really strong incentive for them to use it to break & release movies rather than release code which performs the break. Why? Get yourself a windows VM and download all the latest in DVD-breaking binaries: ripit4me, dvd decryptor-last, dvdshrink-last, etc. Then set windbg to be your default debugger, and start trying to break very recent DVD releases. What you'll find is that the entertainment company is employing people to literally find security holes in the input to the cracking tools - the dvd image itself, and then embed "exploits" into their dvd images. There is data on those discs that has no other purpose than to crash certain binaries. It becomes obvious once you trap execution in a debugger and know a little bit about x86 asm. Don't get me wrong, they're not executing arbitrary code, just causing a DoS - but that's only because they know they can't. Some of the conditions they've found and abused are CERTAINLY exploitable. But they also know that putting shellcode in their DVDs defeats plausible deniability, which is a hell of an asset.

Now push this knowledge forward to BD+. If someone actually manages to set up a "shim VM" that executes BD+ language and acts as a proxy between secure hardware and the bytecode, and RELEASES that VM, then we know the entertainment companies are going to enter a reverse engineering arms race. They're

Oh no, my weed!

(Don't worry, the link is a google cache of lyrics to a song. The link is safe for work, home, men, women, children, small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri, etc.)

Full: http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:l2ZWLi31QdIJ: blogs.csoonline.com/node/218+http://blogs.csoonlin e.com/node/218&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=fir efox-a

Text only:
http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:l2ZWLi31QdIJ: blogs.csoonline.com/node/218+http://blogs.csoonlin e.com/node/218&hl=en&client=firefox-a&gl=us&strip= 1

Full: http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:l2ZWLi31QdIJ: blogs.csoonline.com/node/218+http://blogs.csoonlin e.com/node/218&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=fir efox-a

Text only:
http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:l2ZWLi31QdIJ: blogs.csoonline.com/node/218+http://blogs.csoonlin e.com/node/218&hl=en&client=firefox-a&gl=us&strip= 1

Affected processors include Core 2 Duo E4000/E6000, Core 2 Quad Q6600, Core 2 Xtreme X6800, XC6700, and XC6800.

So, I tried finding some biographical info and previous writing from "Lowell Wood." There's nothing on wikipedia. (Q: does that mean he's not a "noted physicist?") I did come across this on google:

THE REALLY BIG THREATS

This guy is a whacko. He may be smart, he may have worked on many Defence projects over the years, and he may have worked his worked his way into difference policy institutes -- but he comes off as one of those "clash of civilization" necon types.

And the idea of terraforming and colonizing Mars before 2100? Why not colonize Antarctica or the ocean floor, first? (or at least have self-sufficient mineral resource extraction, there, first?) Ya'now, the Mariana Trench is a lot closer.

...Scary to think that guys like this give testimony and hold sway over congress-people.

-FL

-FL

-FL

I've been waiting more than 20 years for market forces to take hold and allow technology to evolve in a marketplace that encourages competition, i.e., one that diminishes the Microsoft effect.

If the BW article is correct about J Allard running the "new direction", the change you seek will not come from within M$. Allard is the worst of the old M$ and represents a promotion of the most predatory attitude. Even from a business perspective, he looks like poop. The market is going to get away from M$ because M$ is self destructing - that's about as close as they will get to actually competing.

First, let's look at where Allard comes from and what he's done:

Allard landed his first job at Microsoft in 1991, after scoring moxie points for showing up as the lone Caucasian at an MIT minority job fair. ... In January 1994, Allard, then 25, banged out a memo titled "Windows: The Next Killer Application on the Internet," in which he coined the infamous embrace and extend mantra.

Wow, how many radioactive words concepts can you fit into a single paragraph with a straight face? M$ holds a minority job fair and then hires the only white guy who shows up. It only took him three years to understand how the company worked and coin "Embrace, extend, extinguish." Microsoft has been on the same track forever. It's not how good they can be, it's how bad they can be to everone else.

The only nice thing is that it's not working. M$ has, thankfully, failed to conquer the internet. Xbox has yet to earn a profit and won't, thanks to being completely outclassed by the competition - three cores, ha ha how cute. Zune stands to be the biggest flop ever. Media center? bad joke. Vista .... going down. Microsoft has been floundering for five years and has produced stuff that's outclassed before it's available. That's what happens when you spend too much of your time screwing your competition instead of making your product better.

It's too late for them to find a heart. Their core product has been and will remain a bad attitude. Market failure does not change that, it only makes them worse. The sooner they are gone, the better off we will all be.

If they're taking a loss at $13 per DVD what's the real cost? If Wal-Mart buys 300,000 copies of something, do you mean to tell me they're paying more than $12.99 per movie?! I thought they were these great negotiators, cutthroat distributer killers. Or does that only work on toilet paper and tools made in China?

Wholesale cost of a new release DVD to a retailer like Wal-Mart is typically about $17.95. So yes, they're paying more than $12.99 per movie, that's what a loss leader is. The idea is that by selling it so low, and then advertising the crap out of it, people who want the movie will say to themselves, "Hrm, Pirates is way cheaper at Wal-Mart than anywhere else, let's go get it there." Then, while they're in the store, they also grab the toilet paper, food, and whatever else they need.

The DVD is there to get people into the store, with the knowledge that people who enter with the purpose of buying a DVD rarely leave with only the DVD in hand.

I upgraded my fathers computer to a new Core 2 system on the weekend and went through so much pain getting his system working; once I resolved the initial hardware issue and was able to actually boot an OS Windows XP decided to tell me it wasn't activated and prevented me from continuing until I activated it. I hadn't even had a chance to install the network drivers so I was forced to make a phone call to activate it.

Troll. From Microsoft's Product Activation FAQ

Yes, a user may use a product for a certain amount of time without activating it. ... For Windows, it is 30 days from first boot or upgrade (14 days for beta versions).

You are totally wrong. You didn't even bother to look it up. The statute of limitations for rape varies from state to state.
 
For instance, in Massachusetts, where a lot of the priest molestation frenzy is centered, the statute of limitations for rape is 15 years (although it might be different for other charges related to rape). The people coming out of the woodwork with accusations against priests are mostly filing civil lawsuits, making the Catholic church pay a lot of money, since that's all they're still able to do for older cases. There are a lot of major differences between civil law and criminal law. The legal contention over what they're trying to do in Ohio is pretty much about making a "civil registry" where the burden of proof would be "more likely than not," which seems to have the implications of criminal punishment, where the burden of proof is higher, "beyond a reasonable doubt".

• When dolphins go bad
• This guy's got a picture (though it's tough to tell who's attacking whom...)
• KILLER DOLPHIN

• When dolphins go bad
• This guy's got a picture (though it's tough to tell who's attacking whom...)
• KILLER DOLPHIN

3,673 records had been removed from the Terrorist Screening Database since its creation in June 2004 until this DOJ Inspector General report came out in May 2005. The page of the Inspector General report clarifies that when a possible misidentification of a suspect with Terrorist Screening Database records is found by the Terrorist Screening Center, the Quality Assurance team reviews the information with the agency (either the National Counterterrorism Center or a certain FBI unit) that nominated the record to be included in the database. Removal of the name from the Terrorism Screening Database is an option.

Previously, two databases were maintained, a Terrorist Threat Integration Center database that was classified, which would have information from files removed before being moved to an unclassified Terrorist Screening Database for use by law enforcement.

Local law enforcement centers, and certain international airports, would get a copy of the database, and if they saw a face and name that matched up with a file in their copy, they would call a phone number. The Terrorist Screening Center would advise them on what to do based on four handling codes, which were redacted by the FBI as sensitive information in Department of Justice Inspector General reports, but I have them right here. There was a computer malfunction that resulted in Handling Code 4's being tagged as "armed and dangerous" in the database due to an error in the programming language of a program that was supposed to automatically merge together a certain database into the larger one. I wonder if this resulted in any false arrests. The handling codes have been updated since they were first released.

Handling Code 1: WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. Arrest this individual. This individual is
associated with terrorism. Once this individual is arrested, immediately contact the Terrorist Screening
Center at (866) 872-9001 for additional information and direction. If you are a border patrol officer
immediately call the NTC [National Targeting Center]

Handling Code 2: WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. Please detain this individual for a
reasonable amount of time for questioning. This individual is of investigative interest to law enforcement
regarding association with terrorism. Immediately contact the Terrorist Screening Center at (866) 872-9001 for additional direction. (As appropriate, the TSC will facilitate an immediate response from an FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force [JTTF] or other appropriate law enforcement entity.) If you are a border patrol officer immediately call the NTC.

Handling Code 3: DO NOT ALERT THIS INDIVIDUAL TO THIS NOTICE. The person queried through
this search may be an individual identified by intelligence information as having possible ties with terrorism. Contact the Terrorism Screening Center at (866) 872-9001 for additional identifying information available to assist you in making this determination. DO NOT ARREST THIS INDIVIDUAL UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL STATUTES. Conduct a logical
investigation using techniques authorized in you jurisdiction and ask probing questions to determine if this individual is identical to the person of law enforcement interest. WARNING - APPROACH WITH CAUTION. If you are a border patrol officer immediately call the NTC.
Handling Code

4: DO NOT ALERT THIS INDIVIDUAL TO THIS NOTICE. The person queried through
this search may be an individual identified by intelligence information as having possible ties with terrorism. DO NOT ARREST THIS INDIVIDUAL UNLESS THERE IS EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF
FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL STATUTES. Attempt to obtain sufficient identification information to
positively identify this individual in a manner consistent with the techniques authorized in you jurisdiction. You may be contacte

Fast NAND Flash will read at over 100Mbps (write doesn't need to be fast). Toshiba has had that part in 1Gb for over 2 years, so it's cheap now, especially in lower densities. Cheap enough to embed in a RAM stick with an ASIC that blits from separate Flash chips to separate RAM chips in parallel at startup. Which should restore the startup image to RAM in a couple of seconds or less. Upgrading the image in Flash is infrequent and low-performance, so Flash's write limitations aren't a problem. GBps HDs are largely wasted in PCs, hogging all the buses and CPU.

You are correct that hibernate/HD is a cheap way right now. But that Toshiba part (and its peers) target mobile devices. Which is where most of our tech innovation is going. From where it will deploy to the smaller niches of workstations and servers. HDs are power hungry, noisy, heavy, failure-prone, fat, and better replaced by chips. Except in large network storage facilities, which will become even more popular as computing becomes even more mobile than the computers.

MRAM has been appealing since the 1960s as a single tech for all storage, including executable and even archival. If they pull this off, finally achieving 3D volumes of cheap, fast density, we'll drop a lot of the bottlenecks that specific electronic tech has brought with it. Even more interesting, especially in the long run, will be the widespread deployment of electromagnetoptical devices for engineering the interplay of those fundamental forces. Jumping through electronic hoops like hibernate/HD will be as obscure as magnetic core memories.

The three chief virtues of a Perl programmer (indeed, of any programmer) are sometimes said to be laziness, impatience, and hubris. Although these may seem like undesirable qualities at first blush (just ask your SO), there's more to this than there appears to be.

Laziness is the quality that makes you take great efforts to reduce the overall amount of work that you have to do. Lazy programmers are apt to develop reusable and general solutions that can be used in more than one place, and are more apt to document what they do, so that they don't have to ever waste time or torture their brains figuring it out again.

Impatient programmers get angry whenever they have to do anything that the computer could be doing for them. Hence, they develop programs that anticipate their needs and solve problems for them, so that they can do less (there's that laziness again) while accomplishing more.

Finally, hubris is that quality which makes programmers write programs that they want other people to see (and be able to maintain). Hubris is also a quality that promotes innovation: if you think that you have a better way and you're not afraid to prove it, you're often right.

oh, and Perl is not an acroynm.

Actually, you are mostly wrong. this indicates that a computer can be programmed to control an aircraft via whatever flight surfaces or engines controls are available to it during an emergency.

This tech was born out of the Sioux City crash investigation.

The site is down, but of course Google still has a cache of it here:

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:7K18878iJ3gJ: www.illmob.org/+&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=f irefox-a

Some pics from google cache - limited time only.

Just for kicks, I just did a search on www.google.cn for "Falun Gong Chinese Revolution Tianamen Square Freedom of China Anti-Communism"
and the first result was a pdf (html here) called Internet Filtering in China 2004-2005: A Country Study

Similar searches just directed me to Wikipedia.

You tell me.

Heres the Google cache for one of your own pages.
Thousands of people can view the copyrighted content of your pages - even after you remove it from the web.

"BM shall be responsible for obtaining any patent or copyright licences necessary for the performance of a Purchase Order and of remaking all other arrangements required to indemnify the Purchaser from any liability for patent or copyright infringement in said countries."

Source: http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:fTIeNxwY2FYJ: boa.nc3a.nato.int/boa/8685/contract.htm
(This document is not for your eyes only, however as of now it is available in google's cache)

So. IBM involvement indicates that patents (that they do not hold) are very bad for their shareholder value since they must obtain any relevant patent that they don't have to fulfill their obligations to our de-facto world government military dictatorship.

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:BETUeXptEiwJ: lake.stark.k12.oh.us/hs/

slashdotted! :(

Google cache: http://216.239.51.104/search?hl=en&q=cache%3Aporta bleapps.com%2Fsuite+&btnG=Google+Search

Sorry about the 403, the site didn't handle a full Slashdotting as well as hoped (being on a shared web server, it was slamming the PHP resources). It's actually run on the Drupal open source content management system (Apache+mySQL+PHP). I'm working on having my host get it back up.

Until then, you can view the Google Cache of the older Portable OpenOffice release and get the new release from the SourceForge Portable OpenOffice.org project page

You know, there's a very simple test for this. Sequence the weed DNA and see if it does possess the roundup ready gene. It might take a while, since unlike animals which die rapidly if the chromosomes are not just right, many species of plants typically have many duplicate sets of chromosones in their cells, which is part of the reason this cross pollination you pooh-pooh is possible. (See http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:Pf3HRcsp82oJ: www.nslc.wustl.edu/courses/Bio343A/2005/wheat.pdf+ plants+multiple+chromosome+sets+corn+hexaploid&hl= en as a slightly broken up source converted from a pdf.)

the continued promotion of such foods not only to feed the poor

The vast majority of GM foods developed today do not produce more food, or even to cause food to be producible where it could otherwise not grow (as far as I can tell, nobody has created corn that can grow in broken asphalt, or rice that can grow in a desert). That vast majority exists to allow farmers to kill weeds easily by making the plants immune to very powerful herbicides, and I fail to see how that correlates to more food grown, unless old-school weed killing required the food plants to be spaced farther out or retarded plant growth causing the crop cycle to lengthen. Most of the remaining minority are novelty foods: purple carrots and square lettuce. I'm sure that someone, somewhere has worked on food crops that could be grown in drought conditions in Ethiopia, but their corporate sponsors discovered that making tomatoes grow in university colors had more income potential than bartering seeds for chicken eggs with poor farmers.

If you look at the whole picture, evolution is unprovable and ID is unprovable, which means that to whichever wing you choose, you choose so on a BELIEF. ID vs Evolution is not about proving the origin of man anyway, its about TRYING to prove that there is or is not a God.

You urge us to go to the website of Kent Hovind, a tax evading Young Earth Creationist who's favorite arguments are so weak that even other creationists say he makes "mistakes in facts and logic which do the creationist cause no good". Hovind is a professional debater who depends primarily on one tactic; he throws out questions (most of which are irrelevant) so quickly that his opponents cannot answer all of the within the alloted time. He This tactic would fail in a written debate where the opposition had time to answer all his questions. That's probably why hovind dislikes standard debate formats and refuses to participate in online debates.

• Hovind's fake challenge
• Tax evasion and fake PhD's
• Hovind debates at UTK

If you look at the whole picture, evolution is unprovable and ID is unprovable, which means that to whichever wing you choose, you choose so on a BELIEF. ID vs Evolution is not about proving the origin of man anyway, its about TRYING to prove that there is or is not a God.

You urge us to go to the website of Kent Hovind, a tax evading Young Earth Creationist who's favorite arguments are so weak that even other creationists say he makes "mistakes in facts and logic which do the creationist cause no good". Hovind is a professional debater who depends primarily on one tactic; he throws out questions (most of which are irrelevant) so quickly that his opponents cannot answer all of the within the alloted time. He This tactic would fail in a written debate where the opposition had time to answer all his questions. That's probably why hovind dislikes standard debate formats and refuses to participate in online debates.

• Hovind's fake challenge
• Tax evasion and fake PhD's
• Hovind debates at UTK

I cured what I thought was "RSI" using this "mindbody" approach:
http://www.rsi.deas.harvard.edu/handout.doc
(Coincidental that Harvard is hosting this document, maybe the researchers should look at it themselves)

Here is the Google cache for those who don't want to open a .doc.

I suffered for 1.5 years (where I didn't work because I didn't think I could) before I found that my cure was a completely psychological approach. From my research of CTS (as well as what my doctor told me), it is completely unrelated to typing. And from my experience with "RSI" and understanding what it actually was, I no longer believe you can actually hurt yourself from typing too much.

I now type sometimes all day long without taking many breaks. I play guitar, bass, and drums. I don't worry about posture at all. Ergonomics are only a way for me to get comfortable, not to avoid injury. I have no pain at all, and don't worry about ever having "RSI" again. It's been 3 years since I cured myself.

Please read up on the approach I'm talking about here before you flame me. It actually makes sense once you put all the pieces together. You can also search for "sarno tms" to find more info.

Does anyone have a copy of version 0.9.7 (I think that was the latest one, before it was taken down.) of http://www.ashotoforangejuice.com/jsrisk.js
I tried looking for it on http://web.archive.org/web/*/ashotoforangejuice.co m/* , but obviously had no luck. Is there any chance that Google might be caching it? They certianly have the HTML (which is pretty much worthless) here http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:RrdLpS5Pm5IJ: ashotoforangejuice.com/gmrisk.html+site:ashotofora ngejuice.com&hl=en&client=firefox-a , but I don't know whether Google caches javascript files.

By the way, I have 0.9.5 if anyone wants it.

After I have made my last payment, when will I receive my title?
If there is no outstanding balance on your account, the title will be mailed upon receipt of your final payment.

When you borrow money to buy a car, the lender generally holds the title to the car until the debt is paid in full.

I'm not sure if I should mod you + funny, or if you are really serious.

Technical articles in papers have consistent factual flaws. War articles consistently focus thru the soda-straw lens of Vietnam (isn't it time to Move On, already? sheesh!) and ignore any progress in order to focus on the latest body count.

Walter Cronkite may have gotten away with that back when Ted Kennedy was learning how to walk away from drowning victims, but nowdays people can go directly to the source to get information. Abandoning any pretense of objectivity, Wally actually came on the TV news and told us he opposed Vietnam and that we were doomed (that helped us win, huh?)

People can only be made to believe bullshit when they have no competing source of information. Those days are coming to an end, fortunately, and the partisan lies and manipulation of MSM are now too obvious to miss.

Here is a really ugly link giving an example.

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:h-9Rckh2DTYJ: sirhumphreys.blogspot.com/2005/10/bbc-uses-propaga nda-video-to-claim.html++BBC+uses+propaganda+video +to+claim+rebels+have+taken+control+of+several+wes tern+Iraqi+towns&hl=en

IVR (Phone hell) bypass list aka "how to speak to a human"

This is not the first time that tit-for-tat has failed to win an iterated prisoner's dilemma competition. (Cannot find a good link to past results of similar competitions, but here's a link to results of one simulation.)

The cooperation strategy used by the Southhampton programs is interesting. At first it may seem unrealistic and not very informative about human behavior, especially in the context of life and death decisions. In other words, what incentive do I have to cooperate with a "brother" to my detriment, when at the end of the day, he lives and I die? But you can think of rationales for such a strategy (e.g., familial ties, idealistic reasons). These rationales may not be rational, strictly speaking -- If I die, what do I really care what happens after I'm gone? I cannot know or benefit from the beyond. (Or can I?) -- but being able to identify, account for and respond to them rationally would be beneficial.

Here is Google's cache of the PDF file (in HTML format). Really, it wasn't hard to find. First hit, in fact. You can doubt it if you want, but a 5-second Google search turns up well over 800 hits (though "only" 200 in English).

another link

Marc Okrand, the linguist behind the Klingon language, was a fan of Native American languages. Some claim that the Klingon language shares much structure with the language of at least one Native American nation. Compare.

You obviously did not read the article past the first couple paragraphs. You can look up the original paper, which is about 20 pages long, in which they explain everything about how they came up with the numbers.

Yes, they did sample everything from 1990 to 2003 using house.gov as their source. Since they used a website, they were able to use a crawler to search for the think tanks they were interested in. They probably did the same with the periodical sources. Besides, they were grad students... if there is anything grad students have, it's lots of free time.

They chose the house because it has the largest sampling of members, probably. The house was NOT republican before 1994, therefore that point is moot. The number they came up with was 39, stating that of all members of the house tend to be more conservative than liberal.

Now the comparison is still apt, where 39 being the "moderate" because looking for the same think tanks, if all media outlets were all "moderate" their average score would hover around 39. If they were less than 39, they would be more conservative and if they were higher, more liberal. The two numbers are comparable if using the same equation to determine the number.

Anyway, for the "actual study" from google cache, take a look at this page...

That tells me a lot. When was the last time you heard NPR discuss the improved economic condition in Iraq?

I can't find the link right now, but there was discusion during on episode of morning edition last week.

Where is the NPR leading story on the propaganda piece Moore just put out with a list of all the factual errors Moore made?

Where are the factual errors? Name one!

That said, I listened to a half a dozen reviews from various NPR contributers last week, and several of them had a negative tone to them.

How about a study that shows that people who watch cable news (not just fox, but fox far worse than others) for their primary news source were far more likely to harbor misconseptions about facts pertaining to the war in Iraq? NPR listeners did much better...

here it is. And here is the original pdf

digital-law-online google cache

Scroll down to where "renting movies" is highlighted on this page on copyright law, and you will see this paragraph:

"There are two significant exceptions to the first-sale doctrine given in Section 109. You may not rent either a sound recording or a computer program unless that computer program is part of a machine that is being rented or the computer program is to be used with a video game console. There is no similar prohibition against renting movies on videotape or videodisc."

This is the important bit:

"You may not rent [...] a computer program unless that computer program is part of a machine that is being rented or the computer program"

Cyber Cafes rent the MACHINE, not the GAME. Therefore what they are doing with Half Life and other PC games is LEGAL under copyright law as FAIR USE.

It would ONLY be illegal if they rented the game CD itself out.

Anyone care to argue againt my interpretation of this, or have any other pages on copyright law which contradict this? Because as far as I can see, Valve doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.

the main site took about 3 minutes to load for me, blah blah blah im a karma whore whatever blah blah blah... link

Is that like multi-modal reflection sorting? (link)