Slashdot Mirror

Perhaps I wasn't clear, though I felt confident it would be difficult to mix up "military misadventure" with "bailout". I was referring to the military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan which cumulatively cost us about twice that per month.[1]

Since it seems every time Iraq and Afghanistan come up it has to be mentioned that it was voted for by Democrats as well, I feel obliged to make clear right away that I'm not really trying to make this a Republicans vs. Democrats thing. It's just that they're both ruinously expensive and badly-run and if it's okay to spend $12bn a month on that it doesn't seem unreasonable to budget $6 billion to expand telecoms infrastructure right here in the US. (That said, I don't trust any of the telecoms and feel confident our money will be wasted but if I thought it would be spent well I'd be all for it)

[1] http://theiraqinsider.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-much-does-iraq-war-cost-per-month.html

The US spends ~$146B plus $46.5B per year for 2 wars and DHS, but they can't even scrub an old flash drive?

Allowing that kind of data (if true) is an unconscionable crime. It is a treasonous act, even if in error.

Kudos to Chris Ogle for doing the right thing with this information.

It seems like I'm seeing a new article about a Windows guy trying Linux every couple days or so. I don't find this guy's article particularly stimulating, but I like the message. Windows guys are liking Linux enough to spread the word any way they can. Here's another Windows IT guy blogging as he tries Linux. I'm interested to see his final verdict: Vista Vitals

http://callmehussein.blogspot.com/ ?

MS was going to include PDF save capability in Office 2007, but Adobe threatened antitrust action so MS made the PDF and XPS save capability a separate installation.

http://my-tech-tips.blogspot.com/2006/11/adobe-threatens-microsoft-over-office.html

http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/06/05/216271/microsoft-drops-pdf-option-after-adobe-threat.htm

So blame Adobe for this lack of ability, its certainly not Microsofts fault...

Will it include race, gender, and job history information of recipients so we can be sure Secretary Reich's goal of keeping money out of the hands of skilled workers and white male construction workers is being met?

The Stimulus: How to Create Jobs Without Them All Going to Skilled Professionals and White Male Construction Workers

So will the site include race and job history information of money recipients so we can be sure Reich gets his agenda of not giving money to people with actual skills and / or white construction workers?

Robert Reich's Blog - The Stimulus: How to Create Jobs Without Them All Going to Skilled Professionals and White Male Construction Workers

You have to go back and read the legal documents, particularly the proposed counterclaims and defenses and the defendant's motions to amend and to add the RIAA and to amend his pleadings.

That? That's easy.

http://lbi.lostboys.nl/blog/artikelen/canvas-in-full-3d/
http://www.nihilogic.dk/labs/wolf/
http://www.nihilogic.dk/labs/canvas3dtexture_0.2/
http://blog.nihilogic.dk/2008/06/3d-javascript-chess-mouse-support.html
http://www.kaarellumi.com/asylum/html/dyn10.htm
http://acko.net/files/projective/index.html
http://wiioperasdk.com/

I have seen 3D experiments that do environment mapping like you showed, but I'm afraid I don't have them handy. Of course, I doubt either Papervision 3D or a Javascript 3D engine would work very well on the iPhone. If the Canvas3D spec gets finalized, then we might end up with direct access to the 3D hardware which *would* make it possible to run 3D on such devices. (I've been asking for that on the Wii for some time. Especially since the fill rate in the browser is awful.)

Don't let my little game fool you. I'm limited to the technical capabilities of a much less powerful machine than your average desktop. (i.e. The Nintendo Wii) Since I couldn't push as many pixels on that platform, I threw in a few cinematic effects to add some pizazz. I can and have made that game run so fast on the desktop so as to be unplayable. Thus what you see is intentional limiting to keep a game at a reasonable speed. Browsers are capable of a LOT more these days.

It's not so much about what you CAN do in Javascript/DHTML, but how much you have to invest to make certain things a reality. I've been coding in Flex for the last year and I cannot imagine how much work I'd have to go through to reproduce some of the applications I've built in Javascript/DHTML, much less to have it work consistently on a variety of operating systems.

It's really not that hard once you get the hang of it. The big difference I think is that it's not a very mature market yet. But it is growing and FAST. I give it a year, maybe two before JS applications start displacing Flash.

Check these out:
http://blog.nihilogic.dk/2009/01/2008-year-of-awesome-javascript.html
http://www.pixastic.com/
http://ejohn.org/blog/processingjs/
http://jstween.blogspot.com/

Here is another cool knitting project: http://whywouldyouknitthat.blogspot.com/2008/09/awesomely-funny-and-adding-labels.html

Wrong on so many levels.

Windows by default (on 32-bit architectures) reserves 2GB of the virtual address space for the operating system and 2GB for user processes. This can be changed to 1GB of virtual address space for the OS and 3GB for user spaces. I have a post here that explains things better.

Just be careful when looking at the columns that refer to memory. Some of them are a bit misleading. I detail a few of them in an article I wrote a while ago (it was mainly for my own reference).

Oh you laugh now, but it appears that John C. Dvorak got caught on this one. The asshat.

On Not Getting It

Someone explain to me exactly how the riaa and their like are not the exact same thing as the mafia? And how have we not slapped them all in jail under the RICO laws yet? They sure seem like the exact same thing to me... About the only real diffrence i see at all is the real mafia has some sense of honor and respect. And thats really stretching it.

Well this writer on Dow Jones Market Watch agrees with you.

"It is the dull man who is always sure, and the sure man who is always dull." -- H.L. Mencken

"Doubt is not a pleasant mental state, but certainty is a ridiculous one." -- Voltaire

"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies." -- Friedrich Nietzsche

First they get the live online-coverage of one of these processes postponed. Now they try to legally blackmail the defense lawyer. What's next?

"That's an awfully nice courtroom you have here, your honor. Wouldn't it be terrible if something happened to it?"

Damn you, meister3r. What are you doing? Trying to give them ideas?

Actually they've already taken action against the judge, by filing their petition for "mandamus or prohibition". Mandamus and prohibition aren't like ordinary appeals, where the lawyer is saying the judge made a legal error and that the judgment or order should be reversed. They are "extraordinary" writs which would only be granted where the judge totally screwed up and acted totally beyond her authority, and you are asking the appeals court to order the judge to do something or stop doing something.

Google claims that they honor the attribute in all cases. Unless you've got evidence that suggests that they don't, I'm happy to take their word for it.

The difference is that I loved Babylon 5, which (to say the least) required you to trust JMS that the first season would pay off if you watched it. At the beginning of second season (end of first, really) you began to understand that these things that are happening, these people who are doing things, were related and that this was a story with direction.

Wow, and here I thought you meant 'fx channel babylon-5-esque' as a double indictment of Battlestar, but you meant it as if Battlestar doesn't live up to Bablyon 5 standards.

Babylon 5 is a terrible show. The writing is terrible, the acting terrible, the production terrible. The conflicts are contrived, the 'story arc' overblown, and the stereotypes transparent. Seriously, any hack author can write a 9000-page 'epic' of Babylon 5 caliber. For instance, see this rant.

What's interesting about Battlestar is that not only are there single episodes more thought-provoking than the entirety of Babylon 5, but it's also entertaining, with good acting, casting, and production.

The criticism that the writers didn't have a plan sound like sour grapes to me. It's like Mozart sitting down after one hearing and improvising a march vastly better than the court composer's hours of effort. Some people get upset when others can wing it and still come up with great works.

Did Downadup/conficker attack your network? I've created a batch file for system administrators to clean/patch/cure infected systems in their networks. check it out here: http://extremesecurity.blogspot.com/2009/01/beat-downadupconficker-like-pro-my.html

South Korea with windoze and especially active-hex (i know at least one Korean who related/recounted to me that may Korean passionately HATE ms' active x because it causes grief to many, and, iirc, grief to many Mac users), ms seems to be incredibly blindly stupid. As of (or at least around January 2007), Koreans in the south could for $5 get unlimited wireless access to any song in a catalog.

See:

http://interaliainc.blogspot.com/2007_01_01_archive.html

Go to the sectin "Want an iPhone"

"IN the long view, Mr. Goldberg said he believes that today's copy-protection battles will prove short-lived. Eventually, perhaps in 5 or 10 years, he predicts, all portable players will have wireless broadband capability and will provide direct access, anytime, anywhere, to every song ever released for a low monthly subscription fee.

It's a prediction that has a high probability of realization because such a system is already found in South Korea, where three million subscribers enjoy direct, wireless access to a virtually limitless music catalog for only $5 a month. He noted, however, that music companies in South Korea did not agree to such a radically different business model until sales of physical CDs had collapsed.

Pointing to South Korea, where copy protection has disappeared, Mr. Goldberg invoked the pithy aphorism attributed to the author William Gibson: "The future is here; it's just not widely distributed yet." "

So, i'm gonna as a possibly inflammatory question: "Really, just what IS IT with ms? How mind-bogglingly STUPID can a collective of supposedly intelligent people be?"

Mini-Msft called it pretty well, as reported here and elsewhere before Christmas. I was ploughing through the comments on the first piece he posted on that on New Year's Day, the comments as the Zune leap-year brick bug kicked off were hilarious.

Personally I will neverhire an ex-Microsoftie; they don't have morals or ethics that are worth a damn, or they wouldn't have worked there in the first place. Fuck 'em, I say.

Obliquely related - what is shit? Existence. Science. Flavor. Manifestation. Shit. http://aalhadsaraf.blogspot.com/2008/08/existence-science-flavor-manifestation.html

Intel's new SSD's have MFT-style stuff on the controllers; they have very fast random writes.

In contrast, the Intel SSD does about 8,500 4kB random writes per second.

You DO know you are basically trying to goose me into proving a negative, correct? I mean, how do you know your Linux machines isn't pwned by an invisible virus that goes between the clock ticks? You don't. But once a year I do a "superscan" day, where I run no less than 5 scans (3 online, one network, and one based on the machine) and I don't use the standard task manager (I use process explorer which even shows what those SVCHost.DLLs are) and I have both a software and a hardware firewall, so I know of everything that goes into or out of my network.

And so far zip, nada, squat, zilch, zippo, nothing. So I think I can safely say to 99.999% certainty that this machine is clean. But it really isn't that hard. Hell I'm even running as admin. It just takes a tiny bit of common sense, which sadly seems to be in short supply these days. I don't download attachments, I don't go to topsites looking for "teh hot lesbos", and I don't let dumbasses on my machine. Pretty damned simple if you ask me. But that is why I think it is nuts to blame MSFT for stupid users.

Because MSFT can lock it down worse than any BOFH that has ever existed, and the malware writers will simply get the stupid people to happily bypass all their hard work to get the carrot dangling in front of their face. That is why we tech guys have PEBKAC and ID10T errors. There just isn't a way to fix stupid with tech. There just isn't. That is why education will NEVER work because they will happily ignore what you have taught them to get the carrot. All we can do is make as many hoops and roadblocks as we can and try to cut down on the damage they can cause.

And for all you Linux guys? Pray I tell you, PRAY to whatever God you may or may not believe in that the giant flock of stupid Windows users never EVER switch to Linux. Because they will turn your little secure haven into a malware infested swamp in a year, maybe less. Because all the tech in the world will never cause them to grow a brain. Just be happy you have a place to get away from their stupidity.

In relation to your post: http://listoftheday.blogspot.com/2009/01/9-reasons-to-keep-your-kids-away-from.html

You could check this out...
http://linuxlock.blogspot.com/2008/09/minds-meet-to-mull-linux-marketing.html

I believe Gapminder runs on the Trendanalyzer software, which was acquired by Google:

    http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/03/world-in-motion.html

If you use Publisher or Frontpage you should be fired and someone who uses proper tools should be hired instead of you. You can use Scribus instead of Publisher, and there are many, many better alternatives to Frontpage, including Notepad. Hell, Microsoft isn't even making any new versions of Frontpage (their last is 2003). What does that tell you?

As for Access, put the data in a proper database, or just live with it. I know there are a ton of things where applications have been built "organically" on Access, but that's a reason to keep Access around, not MS Office, and only until you can get rid of Access. It's not a good thing, it's not stable, and causes more problems than it solves in pretty much every case I've run into it.

This person is actually the operator of a torrent site, not a peer. He's already received fines and prison time for the sharing others have done using his site. The RIAA/MPAA asked for restitution in addition, which is based on actual damages. (The typical sky-high figures are fines and statutory damages.)

Correct. And where this ruling becomes relevant to the statutory damages civil cases is that (a) the disproportion of the statutory damages being sought to the actual damages has been decried judicially and is the basis for a constitutional attack in several of the civil cases, such as Capitol Records v. Thomas, SONY BMG Music v. Tenenbaum, and others, and (b) the theories which the RIAA lawyers have used to justify the size of the statutory damages are the identical theories whose logic was just shot down by Judge Jones.

This person is actually the operator of a torrent site, not a peer. He's already received fines and prison time for the sharing others have done using his site. The RIAA/MPAA asked for restitution in addition, which is based on actual damages. (The typical sky-high figures are fines and statutory damages.)

Correct. And where this ruling becomes relevant to the statutory damages civil cases is that (a) the disproportion of the statutory damages being sought to the actual damages has been decried judicially and is the basis for a constitutional attack in several of the civil cases, such as Capitol Records v. Thomas, SONY BMG Music v. Tenenbaum, and others, and (b) the theories which the RIAA lawyers have used to justify the size of the statutory damages are the identical theories whose logic was just shot down by Judge Jones.

This person is actually the operator of a torrent site, not a peer. He's already received fines and prison time for the sharing others have done using his site. The RIAA/MPAA asked for restitution in addition, which is based on actual damages. (The typical sky-high figures are fines and statutory damages.)

Correct. And where this ruling becomes relevant to the statutory damages civil cases is that (a) the disproportion of the statutory damages being sought to the actual damages has been decried judicially and is the basis for a constitutional attack in several of the civil cases, such as Capitol Records v. Thomas, SONY BMG Music v. Tenenbaum, and others, and (b) the theories which the RIAA lawyers have used to justify the size of the statutory damages are the identical theories whose logic was just shot down by Judge Jones.

Okay.

Here ya go.

Quoting from the article, "You have to make a game of a certain size and certain type. It's got to be simple but also rewarding within the first 60 seconds." What's with this idea? I've written about the problem of conceptualizing "casual gaming" as being different from "hardcore" gaming before; I think that the medium of downloadable games lends itself well to properly executed game design, because you can't lean on graphics or massive worlds, but even so there's no reason to say that a small game has to pander to impatience.

my notes (Google notebook)

Well...that's one thing you don't have to worry about anymore!

The guys at Winh4x have generated a script that detects servers missing the MS08-067 update.

This is for the most part a very good book, at least for my rusty brain, but it definitely needs some kind of Objective-C accompaniment if you're not familiar with the language and want to do more than just follow instructions.

The co-author recommends Learn Objective-C on the Mac as just such an accompaniment.

Forbes was an idiot then, in a world of 6.5 billion people, there are at leas 6500 one-in-a-million geniuses out there, and ever since the banks fucked up and gave us a deflationary economy, demand for the products of people with ability has gone down 90%.

So no, ability has not only caught up with the demand, but has in fact passed it by at the speed of light.

Chapter 15, however, is useless without an actual phone, even though it's perhaps the most fun. In this chapter, the book goes through the accelerometer and all the interesting things you can do with it. There's even a small discussion on the physics (but just enough!). Both apps you create (Shake and Break and the Marble game) are quite fun for someone just starting out with all of this. It's a shame Apple couldn't figure out a way yet to include the accelerometer in the simulator.

It's possible to link up an iPhone's accelerometer to the simulator, and it's also possible to link up the accelerometer in a MacBook to the simulator as well. More details here. Honestly, though, it's probably easier to just jailbreak your iPhone.

Check out the HeliOS Project.

For an example of a keyboard for a non-Latin alphabet, look at the alternate symbols on this Japanese keyboard:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MacBookProJISKeyboard-1.jpg

Japanese is an interesting example. Oversimplifying in order to get to the point:
- 5 vowels and 10 consonants.
- Each character is a consonant+vowel combination.

Phonetic Japanese thus fits extremely neatly into a matrix:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_4_lsVEmWxjA/RZeAdoEkVqI/AAAAAAAAAF8/Vic6glIK4PM/s1600-h/katakana.bmp

The ultimate solution for this particular language seems to be a keyboard where the left hand selects the vowel while the right selects the consonant. However, Japanese use QWERTY.

Mobile phones keyboards do consider the fundamentals of the language and Japanese writing is very efficient. You have 1 key per consonant then push 1-5 times to cycle the vowels. An average of 2,5 button presses per syllable. (Again, this is a slight oversimplification, and slightly irrelevant without considering dictionary technology for both languages)

GP has a problem with terminology.
I hadn't seen 47 processes phoning home reported before. but...
Auto-degraded content:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6319845.stm
http://www.designnine.com/news/node/900
http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/08/13/0249222.shtml
I really thought everyone already knew about this.

I don't think the GP meant that the Military is controlling the OS; I think the intent was to say "in a military fashion". could be wrong.
Vista "spying" on you:
http://securology.blogspot.com/2008/01/windows-vista-phones-home.html
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/02/139251&from=rss
Once again, thought everyone already knew about this.

really, anyone who says Vista is anything but pure, unadulterated Evil AND knows anything about technology is highly suspect in my book; you have to ignore or be oblivious to a lot of crap to defend it.

All Ponzi schemes eventually crash. I'm not the only one who thinks that.

I have the same apprehensions regarding online-DRM (e.g. Steam.)

People have tried to assuage my fears by saying that Steam's a huge company, and that they won't be going out of business any time soon, and that really, they have no reason to annoy their customers.

I point to closures like Circuit City and DRM fiascos like Wal-Mart (who did eventually cave to consumer pressure), Microsoft (who killed off one DRM scheme to implement another), and Google (who, due to a PR nightmare, gave people store credit for their digital purchases.)

No one is immune to economic pressures forcing closure. I still go back and play old games from companies who have gone out of business. Others do, too. A little over a year ago, for example, http://bloggingultima.blogspot.com/ was started by a guy who loves the Ultima series of games. Origin Systems closed up shop in 2004. If their games had required online activation, they likely would be unplayable today.

I've bought very few games like this, and it's always for a minimal amount of money. The most I've spent, I think, was on Mega Man 9, which cost $10.

You can still use it! See http://googlenotebookblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/stopping-development-on-google-notebook.html "Starting next week, we plan to stop active development on Google Notebook. This means we'll no longer be adding features or offer Notebook for new users. But don't fret, we'll continue to maintain service for those of you who've already signed up."

If you're in California, then support Proposition 13. It's only fair, and very Discordian.

Mal-2

As NYCL points out, you cannot appeal NONFINAL rulings of the trial court. Otherwise, people would be appealing EVERYTHING that happens in the trial courts, and the trial process would turn into an endless Dickensian jumble. A person has to wait until everything is over in the trial court before he or she can appeal. The RIAA didn't do that, so this "appeal" is doomed. Right now, the RIAA's lawyers are looking stupid (even to themselves) and may be worried that their clients will be pissed at them for making such a silly procedural blunder. They'll seek to convert their appeal into an attempt at interlocutory review. The problem with interlocutory review is that it is EXTREMELY difficult to get (for the same reasons stated in the first paragraph). Very generally speaking, a person can only get interlocutory review if they can demonstrate that the trial court's decision was soooo bad that its consequence would screw up everything afterward. The appeals courts will bend over backward to uphold the trial court's use of its discretion. A motion for interlocutory review is a really bad in this case because it has virtually no chance of success. This presents the really interesting question: Why is the RIAA acting so stupid? This appeal is a loser motion that will cost real money (and maybe elicit monetary sanctions) and will hurt the music company's public relations. Are the lawyers (not the client) making the decisions here? Is the client asleep at the wheel? Is the lawyer keeping the client in the loop so that the client can make informed decisions? Is the decisionmaker-client not any one person? Who is making the calls for the music company here? Often rich ligitants seek to financially exhaust poor litigants by making tons of motions. That strategy doesn't make sense in this case, because Nesson's team is like the Borg. They'll eat that stuff up. Generally, the strategic decisions are made by the clients and the tactical decisions are made by the lawyers. Maybe the lawyers reckoned that this is a tactical call that the lawyers get to make . . . This is a high-order blunder by the RIAA. I'm just wondering why . . . . The RIAA is, among other things, a joint venture formed by a bunch of music companies. The mandate of the RIAA, insofar as it is clearly expressed or understood, must be the product of negotiation and compromise and inertia.

What they've done is abandon the "appeal" and file a writ of "mandamus or prohibition". (I.e. they couldn't make up their mind whether it was a writ of mandamus or a writ of prohibition, so they say "or". PS It looks to me like an application for a writ of prohibition.)

For example, back while she was blogging, an ever-popular blog for writers was that of Miss Snark, a pseudonym of a NYC literary agent. She talked several times about the way agents and authors try to game their reviews and ratings. For example:

"Nonetheless I find it fascinating that buyers have cottoned on to the "five star friend" phenom. Miss Snark is as guilty as the next agent of both writing reviews (hey I DO like this book...I didn't exactly buy it though) and soliciting friends, relatives and passersby on the street to do the same. Time for a new strategy I guess....finding books from your cross town rivals and writing 1 star scathing reviews."

It's not just getting everyone you can to rate your book well -- it's also things like "front loading" (having your family, friends, agent, dog, whoever) buy as many copies as they can to boost the sales figures and attract more attention / make potential customers less hesitant to purchase it.

Hey, it's sales... In the words of Miss Snark:

Adding insult to injury, you tell me the book was "warmly received by reviewers". What you mean is that Amazon has good reviews, so I know you're not playing on my side of the street.

Here's some help: "reviewers" at Amazon are not reviewers. They're reader comments. Generally anonymous.

In case anyone else hasn't mentioned this to you yet, Amazon reviews don't meet criteria of an objective review. (Miss Snark loves snarky reviews of course). You'd be better off to tell me your mom liked it.

For example, back while she was blogging, an ever-popular blog for writers was that of Miss Snark, a pseudonym of a NYC literary agent. She talked several times about the way agents and authors try to game their reviews and ratings. For example:

"Nonetheless I find it fascinating that buyers have cottoned on to the "five star friend" phenom. Miss Snark is as guilty as the next agent of both writing reviews (hey I DO like this book...I didn't exactly buy it though) and soliciting friends, relatives and passersby on the street to do the same. Time for a new strategy I guess....finding books from your cross town rivals and writing 1 star scathing reviews."

It's not just getting everyone you can to rate your book well -- it's also things like "front loading" (having your family, friends, agent, dog, whoever) buy as many copies as they can to boost the sales figures and attract more attention / make potential customers less hesitant to purchase it.

Hey, it's sales... In the words of Miss Snark:

Adding insult to injury, you tell me the book was "warmly received by reviewers". What you mean is that Amazon has good reviews, so I know you're not playing on my side of the street.

Here's some help: "reviewers" at Amazon are not reviewers. They're reader comments. Generally anonymous.

In case anyone else hasn't mentioned this to you yet, Amazon reviews don't meet criteria of an objective review. (Miss Snark loves snarky reviews of course). You'd be better off to tell me your mom liked it.

For example, back while she was blogging, an ever-popular blog for writers was that of Miss Snark, a pseudonym of a NYC literary agent. She talked several times about the way agents and authors try to game their reviews and ratings. For example:

"Nonetheless I find it fascinating that buyers have cottoned on to the "five star friend" phenom. Miss Snark is as guilty as the next agent of both writing reviews (hey I DO like this book...I didn't exactly buy it though) and soliciting friends, relatives and passersby on the street to do the same. Time for a new strategy I guess....finding books from your cross town rivals and writing 1 star scathing reviews."

It's not just getting everyone you can to rate your book well -- it's also things like "front loading" (having your family, friends, agent, dog, whoever) buy as many copies as they can to boost the sales figures and attract more attention / make potential customers less hesitant to purchase it.

Hey, it's sales... In the words of Miss Snark:

Adding insult to injury, you tell me the book was "warmly received by reviewers". What you mean is that Amazon has good reviews, so I know you're not playing on my side of the street.

Here's some help: "reviewers" at Amazon are not reviewers. They're reader comments. Generally anonymous.

In case anyone else hasn't mentioned this to you yet, Amazon reviews don't meet criteria of an objective review. (Miss Snark loves snarky reviews of course). You'd be better off to tell me your mom liked it.

I feed trolls when I'm bored... Here's a quick rebuttal, since you've obviously pasted this from somewhere.

But, I'd like to tear it apart myself, because I'm bored...

If it can be demonstrated how to properly falsify evolution, regardless if evolution is true or not, only then can evolution ever be proven or disproved.

No, then it could be disproved. No theory can ever be "proved", only disproved.

That is the essence of falsification; if it can be shown that something is not false, it must therefore be true.

Except that to show that something is not false is as impossible as to show it is true.

No, all you can show is that a given method does not suffice to falsify something. Depending on how good the method is, you may gain considerable evidence for a theory in this way, but it doesn't "prove" anything.

If evolution be not true, the only explanation for the appearance of varied life on the planet is intelligent design.

That is a false dichotomy. It could have appeared purely randomly. It could have been the natural result of an equation we do not understand. It could be something else we haven't thought of.

Furthermore, this troll only attempts to disprove Darwinian evolution, which is not the only kind of evolution, any more than Christian Creationism is the only kind of Intelligent Design.

If evolution theory is true, the word kind is a superficial label that does not exist, because beyond our classifications, there would be no clear identifiable division among animals or plants, since all plants and animals would therefore share a common ancestor.

"Common ancestor" is one kind of Evolution theory. And it certainly does not imply that there are no identifiable divisions -- for example, while many believe that life began in the ocean, and later evolved to survive on land, there is a clear distinction between a creature with gills and a creature with lungs, or even a creature with both.

If no such common ancestor can be found and confirmed without bias, and this test is performed between two or more of any plant or animal life without ever finding anything to the contrary, we can confirm with certainty evolution did not happen

Aren't Creationists always the ones claiming that just because you can't see a god, doesn't mean he's not there?

Well, just because we haven't found a common ancestor, doesn't mean there is no common ancestor. Unless you can demonstrate that no such common ancestor ever could have existed, there is no certainty there.

should any two animals or plants within a family (a palm tree and a coconut tree) be proven to not share a common ancestor, or if no provable increase of traits can be demonstrated to be in its beginnings or actively present in the animals and plants living today over their provable ancestry,

Should that be correct, it's possible you've found some problems with evolutionary theory. You haven't done that much.

Even should that be correct, all you've provided is absence of evidence. You've provided no evidence for your own hypothesis of creationism.

Now, there are significant problems with the Bible. There are profound inconsistencies, even in Genesis. There are mistranslations from the original Greek, and between that and the original Hebrew. Even if you can prove Intelligent Design, surely you have more evidence for your own origin story than I do for the Flying Spaghetti Monster?