Slashdot Mirror

What should the drug be called?

I wrote that I wanted such a thing about a couple of years ago - I'm glad they were paying attention!

The problem with video game reviews, as I see it, is that they are subjective, by their very definition. There is no such thing as a definitively "good" game, nor is there any such thing as a definitively "bad" game. The same is true of movies, or books--when you read film reviews, you don't see a bunch of numerical scores ranking the film's "special effects" and "acting" and "sound technology" and the "tilt factor" on a (decimal) scale of one to ten. Instead, you just read some of the reviewer's genuine thoughts, and with those, you are free to determine whether or not you'd enjoy it. Game reviews, I think, need much the same thing. Far too many reviewers are focused on, "oh, this review must be under 1000 words," and "oh, I must split it up into sections for each component of the game," and "oh, I need to rate and rank everything and then use a calculator to get the result." No. Game reviews are subjective and should be treated as such.

I think it is the job of the review-writer to just convey a feeling about the game...to get the reader into his headspace, to explain the game, circumstances surrounding the reviewer's involvement with the game, that sort of thing, no numbers involved. It should be an introspective, organic process. For example, as an experiment with this sort of thing, I wrote this a few days ago--it is, sort of, a review of Doom 3. It was an experimental thing--yeah, I rambled a lot, I talked about some aspects of the game I liked, some I didn't like, and about some things that had zero bearing on the gameplay. In the end, I revealed that I had mixed feelings about the game--I didn't really like it much, but it was all right, I supposed.

Anyway, I took this review to the Doom 3 message board at GameFAQs, a web site which you will know, if you had been there, is absolutely frigging full of rabid fanboys. There are threads there with titles such as "I can't believe Gamespot gave Doom 3 only a 8.511111" and such. Anyway, yeah, I showed it to people there, and they enjoyed it--they said that my thoughts were, in general, interesting, and that they understood why I didn't like the game much. And these are rabid fanboys I'm talking about.

I guess this means that people tend to get more worked up about numbers--rankings, ratings, all that sort of stuff. Reviewers and readers tend to concentrate on that--on the mechanics, on the cut-and-dried aspects of things--rather than on the subjective things; a review shouldn't be "Whether or not a game is good," but rather it should be "How this particular reviewer felt playing the game." I think that's more interesting all around.

The price of crude oil has been above $40 for a long time now. Instead of taking oil out of the strategic reserve to reduce the price they are putting huge amounts of oil into it despite the high price. Clearly that oil will go to the military not industry or the consumer. Those two could use it now. The military needs it when war cuts the US off from foreign oil.

Sorry but the government doesn't have time to mess with SPAM control.

http://livejournal.com/community/peak_oil

Nah. They will merge. You see blog give a personal prospective. Now sum blog with creative common, http://creativecommons.org/, with wiki and with reblog http://www.reblog.org/, and what do you get?

A distributed wiki. Distributed across the whole wide web.

A person starts an article in his blog. It is copyrighted with creative common share alike, copyright. That is everybody can copy it in their own blog (reblog it) and modify it (since the license permits it). Through trackback and technoraty you canmove to the following versions, and through the beck link that every reblog entry has, you can go back to the previous one.

The only difference being that there would not be a central service that has to "pay" and control.

I wrote an article on my blog on this: http://www.livejournal.com/users/fool_in_spirit/31 5620.html

I never knew this, and apparently many others didn't either, but if you use hardware RAID the disks are tied to that card.

More info here, plus the ever-acidic jwz calling people dumbasses, dipshits, and more fun!

http://jwz.livejournal.com/368307.html
http://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/log/2004/07.htm l#28

Linux - How to Install Gentoo via Floppies and Network Only Using Fedora Floppies

Hope this eases some download woes for someone...

And I think it has many interesting points that are worth thinking about and/or taking to heart.

But, I have a critique of point 3 (All software should be free) and an observation about point 5 (Scratching the personal itch).

First, there is profitable Open Source software out there. The biggest example I can think of is LiveJournal. Sure, what LJ sells is premium features for their site, but they wouldn't have a thing to sell without their software, which they've wisely chosen to Open Source. LJ makes enough money to afford some pretty hefty server farms in back of it. There are many clone sites out there that use their software, and are free to make money in the same way, but none of them have come even close to putting LJ out of business yet. In fact, I think they've just strengthened LJs business.

So, software can be free, and still make money.

In point 5, Neil Gunton cogently observes in the last sentence "A commercial company, on the other hand, can afford to scratch the personal itches of its end-users, because the end-users are the ones paying the bills.". This very true, and I think it provides a useful illustration of a means by which an Open Source company can make money by directly selling software.

I think I ought to be able to go into a store and bu a copy of gimp. In fact, I think there are several Open Source packages which would lend themselves well to being sold seperately from distributions. This would do a lot to raise the visibility of these packages from a consumer perspective.

I just answered a question by someone where they were wondering about Open Source packages for doing various things. I gave them a list of them. But every single one of those packages usually comes with a distribution. This person was totally unaware of this.

These packages need marketing and distribution seperately from the OS. That marketing and distribution would raise their profiles, and provide a valuable way for end-users to get involved in how a package is produced. Their money would pay for support. They could be introduced to the concept of Open Source and how to effectively contribute constructive criticism and development money for their pet features to Open Source projects. The distribution company could provide a focal point for this, and a project could put things up on its homepage about how well it was being served by various distribution companies.

This would both generate revenue for Open Source projects, adressing point 1. And it would provide direct consumer involvement that could drive feature development, addressing point 5.

If I ever make consumer oriented Open Source software, I intend to sell it on my webpage, and not provide it for free download. I will tell them that if they can't afford the download, they should get a copy from their friends. I will provide source with the download. If someone wants to grab my source and try to compete with me in selling it under a different name, they're welcome to try, but I'm fairly confident that I can continue to add value to this software that I originally wrote better than anybody else, and they will eventually decide to rejoin my project anyway.

Here's what I posted a while back about this in my livejournal:

Finally, one of the (vocal minority of) whining lusers who complain about GNOME in every message board and mailing list in existence has decided to get off his ass and do something about it. The result is "

project GoneME", which hopes to eventually fork GNOME. Currently all that there is is a patch that reverses the button order, which the author calls "fixing" the button order.

While the decision to do something other than whining is a laudable one, I don't think much will come of this project because the author displays the same ignorance that characterizes all the other complainers. For instance, he thinks there's little difference between gconf and the windows registry, even though gnome devs have repeatedly explained why that's not the case in a manner even a 12 year old can understand. He also makes the moronic assertion that gconf XML files are "unreadable". They are in fact more readable than old-school plain text config files because they are in a standard format and because each key reports its type. The author doesn't seem to have an open-minded attitude towards programming either. "I for my own never ever used Python and I don't plan to learn or use Python in the future". I think the author believes in writing everything in C for speed. I wonder for how many more years such opinions will continue to persist?

Update: Since I posted this entry he has posted some more ideas on the site.

"Actually I do like GNOME because of the fact that it is written in C (and therefore fits in the UNIX world)".

That confirms what I surmised earlier. But I'm ROTFLMAO at the "fits the UNIX world" comment. Writing everything in C was the UNIX philosophy back in the 80s when the rest of the world was still stuck with assembly. For quite a long time now the UNIX philosophy has been to not write everything in C. The UNIX way is in fact to choose the most high level language that makes sense for the given task. See what ESR's The Art of Unix Programming has to say on the subject of programming languages.

While I agree with elephantum and eightpixelshigh that this project will die, I think that won't happen very soon. My prognosis is as follows:

Everything is going to be hunky dory as long as it is a set of patches to GNOME. They'll revert the button order and remove spatial nautilus and generally undo whatever usability improvements have happened over the last two years. There are quite a few people who will greatly applaud these changes, who think of themselves as "advanced UNIX users" and whom I call "desktop masochists". They want their desktop to be a way to show off their geekiness, and nothing more. They live under the illusion that it makes them "more efficient". (I know a couple such guys in my lab. I will be recommending gomeME to them ;-)

The problem for GoneME will start when they actually decide to fork GNOME. Due to their doing everything in C and in general avoiding any technology invented within the last decade because it is "bloat", GNOME will pull far ahead of them the moment they no longer inherit GNOME code changes. But that'd be the least of their worries. They'll be big on "listening to their users", and everyone will want to do thi

Here's what I posted a while back about this in my livejournal:

Finally, one of the (vocal minority of) whining lusers who complain about GNOME in every message board and mailing list in existence has decided to get off his ass and do something about it. The result is "

project GoneME", which hopes to eventually fork GNOME. Currently all that there is is a patch that reverses the button order, which the author calls "fixing" the button order.

While the decision to do something other than whining is a laudable one, I don't think much will come of this project because the author displays the same ignorance that characterizes all the other complainers. For instance, he thinks there's little difference between gconf and the windows registry, even though gnome devs have repeatedly explained why that's not the case in a manner even a 12 year old can understand. He also makes the moronic assertion that gconf XML files are "unreadable". They are in fact more readable than old-school plain text config files because they are in a standard format and because each key reports its type. The author doesn't seem to have an open-minded attitude towards programming either. "I for my own never ever used Python and I don't plan to learn or use Python in the future". I think the author believes in writing everything in C for speed. I wonder for how many more years such opinions will continue to persist?

Update: Since I posted this entry he has posted some more ideas on the site.

"Actually I do like GNOME because of the fact that it is written in C (and therefore fits in the UNIX world)".

That confirms what I surmised earlier. But I'm ROTFLMAO at the "fits the UNIX world" comment. Writing everything in C was the UNIX philosophy back in the 80s when the rest of the world was still stuck with assembly. For quite a long time now the UNIX philosophy has been to not write everything in C. The UNIX way is in fact to choose the most high level language that makes sense for the given task. See what ESR's The Art of Unix Programming has to say on the subject of programming languages.

While I agree with elephantum and eightpixelshigh that this project will die, I think that won't happen very soon. My prognosis is as follows:

Everything is going to be hunky dory as long as it is a set of patches to GNOME. They'll revert the button order and remove spatial nautilus and generally undo whatever usability improvements have happened over the last two years. There are quite a few people who will greatly applaud these changes, who think of themselves as "advanced UNIX users" and whom I call "desktop masochists". They want their desktop to be a way to show off their geekiness, and nothing more. They live under the illusion that it makes them "more efficient". (I know a couple such guys in my lab. I will be recommending gomeME to them ;-)

The problem for GoneME will start when they actually decide to fork GNOME. Due to their doing everything in C and in general avoiding any technology invented within the last decade because it is "bloat", GNOME will pull far ahead of them the moment they no longer inherit GNOME code changes. But that'd be the least of their worries. They'll be big on "listening to their users", and everyone will want to do thi

Here's what I posted a while back about this in my livejournal:

Finally, one of the (vocal minority of) whining lusers who complain about GNOME in every message board and mailing list in existence has decided to get off his ass and do something about it. The result is "

project GoneME", which hopes to eventually fork GNOME. Currently all that there is is a patch that reverses the button order, which the author calls "fixing" the button order.

While the decision to do something other than whining is a laudable one, I don't think much will come of this project because the author displays the same ignorance that characterizes all the other complainers. For instance, he thinks there's little difference between gconf and the windows registry, even though gnome devs have repeatedly explained why that's not the case in a manner even a 12 year old can understand. He also makes the moronic assertion that gconf XML files are "unreadable". They are in fact more readable than old-school plain text config files because they are in a standard format and because each key reports its type. The author doesn't seem to have an open-minded attitude towards programming either. "I for my own never ever used Python and I don't plan to learn or use Python in the future". I think the author believes in writing everything in C for speed. I wonder for how many more years such opinions will continue to persist?

Update: Since I posted this entry he has posted some more ideas on the site.

"Actually I do like GNOME because of the fact that it is written in C (and therefore fits in the UNIX world)".

That confirms what I surmised earlier. But I'm ROTFLMAO at the "fits the UNIX world" comment. Writing everything in C was the UNIX philosophy back in the 80s when the rest of the world was still stuck with assembly. For quite a long time now the UNIX philosophy has been to not write everything in C. The UNIX way is in fact to choose the most high level language that makes sense for the given task. See what ESR's The Art of Unix Programming has to say on the subject of programming languages.

While I agree with elephantum and eightpixelshigh that this project will die, I think that won't happen very soon. My prognosis is as follows:

Everything is going to be hunky dory as long as it is a set of patches to GNOME. They'll revert the button order and remove spatial nautilus and generally undo whatever usability improvements have happened over the last two years. There are quite a few people who will greatly applaud these changes, who think of themselves as "advanced UNIX users" and whom I call "desktop masochists". They want their desktop to be a way to show off their geekiness, and nothing more. They live under the illusion that it makes them "more efficient". (I know a couple such guys in my lab. I will be recommending gomeME to them ;-)

The problem for GoneME will start when they actually decide to fork GNOME. Due to their doing everything in C and in general avoiding any technology invented within the last decade because it is "bloat", GNOME will pull far ahead of them the moment they no longer inherit GNOME code changes. But that'd be the least of their worries. They'll be big on "listening to their users", and everyone will want to do thi

Here's what I posted a while back about this in my livejournal:

Finally, one of the (vocal minority of) whining lusers who complain about GNOME in every message board and mailing list in existence has decided to get off his ass and do something about it. The result is "

project GoneME", which hopes to eventually fork GNOME. Currently all that there is is a patch that reverses the button order, which the author calls "fixing" the button order.

While the decision to do something other than whining is a laudable one, I don't think much will come of this project because the author displays the same ignorance that characterizes all the other complainers. For instance, he thinks there's little difference between gconf and the windows registry, even though gnome devs have repeatedly explained why that's not the case in a manner even a 12 year old can understand. He also makes the moronic assertion that gconf XML files are "unreadable". They are in fact more readable than old-school plain text config files because they are in a standard format and because each key reports its type. The author doesn't seem to have an open-minded attitude towards programming either. "I for my own never ever used Python and I don't plan to learn or use Python in the future". I think the author believes in writing everything in C for speed. I wonder for how many more years such opinions will continue to persist?

Update: Since I posted this entry he has posted some more ideas on the site.

"Actually I do like GNOME because of the fact that it is written in C (and therefore fits in the UNIX world)".

That confirms what I surmised earlier. But I'm ROTFLMAO at the "fits the UNIX world" comment. Writing everything in C was the UNIX philosophy back in the 80s when the rest of the world was still stuck with assembly. For quite a long time now the UNIX philosophy has been to not write everything in C. The UNIX way is in fact to choose the most high level language that makes sense for the given task. See what ESR's The Art of Unix Programming has to say on the subject of programming languages.

While I agree with elephantum and eightpixelshigh that this project will die, I think that won't happen very soon. My prognosis is as follows:

Everything is going to be hunky dory as long as it is a set of patches to GNOME. They'll revert the button order and remove spatial nautilus and generally undo whatever usability improvements have happened over the last two years. There are quite a few people who will greatly applaud these changes, who think of themselves as "advanced UNIX users" and whom I call "desktop masochists". They want their desktop to be a way to show off their geekiness, and nothing more. They live under the illusion that it makes them "more efficient". (I know a couple such guys in my lab. I will be recommending gomeME to them ;-)

The problem for GoneME will start when they actually decide to fork GNOME. Due to their doing everything in C and in general avoiding any technology invented within the last decade because it is "bloat", GNOME will pull far ahead of them the moment they no longer inherit GNOME code changes. But that'd be the least of their worries. They'll be big on "listening to their users", and everyone will want to do thi

Here's what I posted a while back about this in my livejournal:

Finally, one of the (vocal minority of) whining lusers who complain about GNOME in every message board and mailing list in existence has decided to get off his ass and do something about it. The result is "

project GoneME", which hopes to eventually fork GNOME. Currently all that there is is a patch that reverses the button order, which the author calls "fixing" the button order.

While the decision to do something other than whining is a laudable one, I don't think much will come of this project because the author displays the same ignorance that characterizes all the other complainers. For instance, he thinks there's little difference between gconf and the windows registry, even though gnome devs have repeatedly explained why that's not the case in a manner even a 12 year old can understand. He also makes the moronic assertion that gconf XML files are "unreadable". They are in fact more readable than old-school plain text config files because they are in a standard format and because each key reports its type. The author doesn't seem to have an open-minded attitude towards programming either. "I for my own never ever used Python and I don't plan to learn or use Python in the future". I think the author believes in writing everything in C for speed. I wonder for how many more years such opinions will continue to persist?

Update: Since I posted this entry he has posted some more ideas on the site.

"Actually I do like GNOME because of the fact that it is written in C (and therefore fits in the UNIX world)".

That confirms what I surmised earlier. But I'm ROTFLMAO at the "fits the UNIX world" comment. Writing everything in C was the UNIX philosophy back in the 80s when the rest of the world was still stuck with assembly. For quite a long time now the UNIX philosophy has been to not write everything in C. The UNIX way is in fact to choose the most high level language that makes sense for the given task. See what ESR's The Art of Unix Programming has to say on the subject of programming languages.

While I agree with elephantum and eightpixelshigh that this project will die, I think that won't happen very soon. My prognosis is as follows:

Everything is going to be hunky dory as long as it is a set of patches to GNOME. They'll revert the button order and remove spatial nautilus and generally undo whatever usability improvements have happened over the last two years. There are quite a few people who will greatly applaud these changes, who think of themselves as "advanced UNIX users" and whom I call "desktop masochists". They want their desktop to be a way to show off their geekiness, and nothing more. They live under the illusion that it makes them "more efficient". (I know a couple such guys in my lab. I will be recommending gomeME to them ;-)

The problem for GoneME will start when they actually decide to fork GNOME. Due to their doing everything in C and in general avoiding any technology invented within the last decade because it is "bloat", GNOME will pull far ahead of them the moment they no longer inherit GNOME code changes. But that'd be the least of their worries. They'll be big on "listening to their users", and everyone will want to do thi

<fark> jwz surrenders </fark>

Also included is the coordinates of a particular black hole; when each species gets bored of kicking around with no one to talk to, it departs for a near-event horizon orbit around the black hole, where it waits, along with the other early races, for the galaxy to fill up with interesting people.

This is actually a pretty choice piece of real-estate. If you're close enough to the hole, you can draw power from either the microwave background or (later) the hole, until an incredibly distant time in the future (long after all other sources of power have been exhausted).

I'm going to have to look up that David Brin anthology :).

I gave it a shot last week in my livejournal. Hope this helps.

There are also some general guidelines to follow for writing interoperable webpages.

Someone recently commented in my livejournal that my layout needed some work and she'd do a new one for me. I agreed, but I said that if she were to do a new one...

i don't want my frontpage changed. actually, i'd love for my other pages to kinda match it, both in theme and in ascetics.
also, the HTML better be layed out nicely (i.e. readable in a text editor), better comply with W3C standards, and not be designed for any specific browser, resolution, platform, graphics capabilities, or fonts.
of course, if you use proper CSS, you can still encourage the browser to display things in certain styles of fonts (with keywords like serif, sans-serif, monospaced, emphasized, slanted) etc., and you can put low-importance tags to give a prioritized list of specific typefaces to use.
also, HTML must use CSS dynamic placement and not tables or frames for layout (and if iframes are used, they must be used in such a way that browsers that don't support iframes can still access all the content)
and CSS has to be organized with identifiers, classes, and such used as appropriately
oooohh and the pages better be split up using HTML structure codes (H1,H2,H3,P,HR, etc.) which have appropriate anchors and references.
also, all images must have ALT tags and must look respectable in a web-safe palette... no GIFs (PNGs and/or MNGs only)
no browser-specific features, javascript, DHTML, ActiveX, Shockwave, or Java
and all pages must properly use META tags. no EMBED tags, and all MIME types must be correct.

for an example of a page that follows all these guidelines, see the page i'm designing for my sister's harping career at BlueHarpDiva.com

still interested? ;)

yes, i know, i'm an ultra-anal bitch.

But PEP works (apparently).

I did a review of EkkoBSD right after its latest release, and was a bit disappointed because their main project goal, "to make it easy to install," was completly not met... but I forgave it a little because it was a beta. But now that's moot.

Oh well...

Don't be jealous, buddy ;)

Kim Jong Il has a weblog.

i have always far and away preferred his blog.http://www.livejournal.com/users/kim_jong_il_ _/

One of the best thing about Stargate is that haven't had to resort to over sexual themes to achieve this success!

Whaddya mean, "sexual themes"? It's not like any other science fiction franchise has had to resort to coed back rubs, nubile aliens in skintight uniforms, lesbian kisses, sex with androids or women dressed in tinfoil to keep an audience....

Oh.. wait. Never mind...

In the same vein, I use LiveJournal as my RSS/Atom reader.

::Colz Grigor

Don't have Korean installed. North or South?

North Korean Translation: "Your great robotic creation of the people will defeat the running capitalist dogs of war! All rise and sing the praises of our great leader, Kim Jung-Il!"

they're right - if anybody could properly exploit this technology, it would be burning man people. much better than the high-tech iteration of the guy who stands on the street corner waving a big arrow pointing toward the pizza joint or the apartments for rent.

if they sell them as individual units that you can affix to fabric, I'd buy a bunch and make a shirt covered with them. with cameras in every haphazard direction.

two things I would not do is use it to display pacman. nor would I make my outfit a star trek tng get up.

they're right - if anybody could properly exploit this technology, it would be burning man people. much better than the high-tech iteration of the guy who stands on the street corner waving a big arrow pointing toward the pizza joint or the apartments for rent.

if they sell them as individual units that you can affix to fabric, I'd buy a bunch and make a shirt covered with them. with cameras in every haphazard direction.

two things I would not do is use it to display pacman. nor would I make my outfit a star trek tng get up.

I used those filters for a while, but I found them too far-reaching. For example, using those filters, some of the content from The Onion and LiveJournal get blocked.

Remember, it's those customers who buy things on sale that make your bucks.

Recently calculated the number of days I've spent in the past year in traffic (i.e. day's counted as 12 hours of awake time and 12 hours of leisure time). If it weren't for commuting I could've worked an extra ONE AND A HALF months in a year! That is pretty ridiculous. I'm sure most people spend at least an hour or two driving!

I wish I could just work from home

"I drove a coworker/good friend home tonight. On the way back, I got to thinking about all the times I've been called a dork. On every single occasion, I had done something really funny, usually embarrasing. "I'm proud to be a dork!" I thought to myself. I had a pretty good drum solo going on against my steering wheel. I stopped at the light and there was a car next to me. From the angle, I could see a little bit of the driver's face. Not a lot. But it got me thinking "I wonder if I can tell she's cute just from this little patch of face." All the sudden HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONK.

Shit. That came from my car! My drum solo had put me into an awkward position. I got her attention. She looked right at me! I looked back at her with like Ó_Ò eyes. I just sank in my seat shaking my head. On the last glance, she was laughin. Yep, I'm proud to be a dork.

She was cute too. Oops."

There is a report that says the MS spider is NOT honoring robots.txt files according to spec. This guy had a backup server, but all we all so lucky?

Just the latest example of brand necrophilia.

I think the internet's broken. That first link, heise online, it's in a whole other language.

I've already tried resetting the defaults on IE...

Can anyone help?

--

I uhm... write stuff, but not well, and not often

That if I want to show my dick to interested parties, I can't, because I'm then somehow 'less than human', despite the fact that I chose to show my cock?

The best rebuttal to this movie that I have read is by a devout liberal, Christpher Hitchens. He's the writer from Slate who wrote Not Even a Hedgehog - The stupidity of Ronald Reagan and Ahmad and Me - Defending Chalabi.

You can read the article here: Unfairenheit 9/11

--
http://www.livejournal.com/users/gymbrall/

good deal, yeah that's where I tried to start it originally.. heh

See: this transcript.

Thanks to: This site for the link.

After the bit, Will Ferrell (sp?) came out and ate a (the?) banana that was used...

Yes. It is crucial to Microsoft's strategy that they not do that. See here for example.

It's actually
Dear Japanese people:
Please stop exploring your sexuality. It really freaks us out.
Love, American People.

Record adaware scan: forty thousand plus.

...to help a team beat Michael Schumacher. The guy is ridiculously good, and he's paired with a great car. F1 basically is a contest to see who will finish 2nd.

If you use LiveJournal, there is a command-line based client called Charm and one of its features is the ability to archive old posts.

If you're worried about losing all your old posts, go ahead and back them up yourself. You never know..

Be realistic. You have exactly twelve posts in your LJ. (k4_pacific, right?)

I have one thousand three hundred and fifty six. Are you *still serious*? Besides, the save-as would include all the layout / navigation guff as well as the entry content.

Anyway, there's a better option. There now exists a real livejournal backup tool. (And, it allows you to search the entire contents of your LJ. When your LJ spans several years, that's rather useful.)

It's supposed to grab the comments too, but I'm not one hundred perecent sure about that feature's relability.

also, many of the clients that interface with the LJ servers can pull all the posts, comments, and other data.

we think we may have the very first blog worm this past weekend as well. after reports of a potential security exploit in LiveJournal, a small team went to work to create a "proof of concept" self-replicating javascript code designed specifically to post itself in a viewers journal.

More information can be found here

a basic example of self-generating javascript code can be found here

we think we may have the very first blog worm this past weekend as well. after reports of a potential security exploit in LiveJournal, a small team went to work to create a "proof of concept" self-replicating javascript code designed specifically to post itself in a viewers journal.

More information can be found here

a basic example of self-generating javascript code can be found here

You rule. We need more front page stories about psychedelics.

Unlike traditional media, blogs aren't a one-sided conversation. Blogs are dialogue. They are simultaneously public and personal. In that sense, they're no different from USENET or the old dial-up bulletin boards. But they're even more diverse, because they're more accessible to the masses.

Some blogging sites provide mechanisms to connect with other bloggers. I blog on Live Journal, which lets me search for other LJ bloggers in my home town, or with similar interests. I can put interesting blogs on my "friends list", and post entries that only designated friends can read. I can also browse my friends' friends lists and find more interesting people. It's a new kind of social interaction. And it's not limited to the Internet. I've met several of my LJ friends, and attended local events I wouldn't otherwise been aware of.

You should have zero problems copy/pasting my code into POV-Ray and saving as whatever.pov and hitting the render button.

Also, I love doing lego stuff in POV-Ray.

Check out my renders here.

http://www.livejournal.com/users/povrayman/