Slashdot Mirror

When did Stephen King die?

This is a long-running joke/troll here on /. where people post that Stephen King died. I can't believe a non-ac posted the troll. I admire that. Googling stephen king died slashdot, I got this page. which is pretty funny.

There were around 72 million baby-boomers('45-'64 or so), who can expect a longer life than their forbears due to current medical technology. There were only around 18 million Gen-X's('60's-'70's) and there were about 60 million Gen-Y's ('79-'94 or so.) So that makes around 78 million people capable of caring for around 72 million people. Do you think we won't need technology to help? source: wordIQ

The notion of anonymity in one's reading habits reeks of someone who is too afraid of their peer group, and not the government.

The strange thing is that Windows XP is an indirect descendant of the OS that probably is running on those VAX systems with those giant swinging uptimes. The story goes that back in the day, the Windows NT team had a large number of VMS vetrans on board, and that there was more than a little bit of code in common between VMS and Windows NT. The story is actually kinda interesting; you can read about it here.

The urban legend is that Windows NT is so called because if you "add" one letter to each of VMS, you get WNT (like with HAL and IBM). And then if you're feeling snarky, you say something like "see, you had to know that the NT couldn't stand for new technology." But you probably shouldn't expect anyone to laugh.

Remember the Swedish rock group ABBA? How many instances of the substring ABBA occur in the following string [and what should your generic "find" function have as a return value]?

ABBABBA

PS: I learned just the other night that ABBA soloist Anni-Frid Lyngstad was the product of Nazi Aryan eugenics experiment [dubbed "the Lebensborn"].

I excrement you not:

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Nazi_children

If the computer considers the library of Emmanuel Lasker, then it could be "more interesting". He was (in)famous for making -ahem- startling moves for someone of his caliber. Traditional chess theory would call them blunders, but they would serve to complicate the board to a degree that his opponents could not as easily determine the best moves before he could. He would thus confuse, recover, and gain advantage before they could adequately respond. A chess program designed to confuse more rigid chess programs could serve to benefit in the same way Lasker did.

First link contains the original posted and that of Princeton which states 100p/GBP. Of course, the one after that contains more detailed info. http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Pound_Sterling

An advertiser should not use nor permit the use of the following bait scheme practices: refusing to show or demonstrate the advertised merchandise or service;

• disparaging the advertised merchandise or service, its warranty, availability, services and parts, credit terms, etc.;
• selling the advertised merchandise or service and thereafter "unselling" the customer to make a switch to other merchandise or service; refusing to take orders for the advertised merchandise or service or to deliver it within a reasonable time; demonstrating or showing a defective sample of the advertised merchandise; or, having a sales compensation plan designed to penalize salespersons who sell the advertised merchandise or service.

Other advertising practices, such as the use of loss leaders ... do not constitute a bait and switch as long as it is possible to purchase the original item.

>I was wondering if you care to support your outlandish claims that we support ecoterrorism?

Oh, please, don't make it so easy!

Tree spiking murders innocent workers.

A quote from Mr. Paul Watson (as a Greenpeace member, I'm certian you know of him, as he is a principal founder of your organization)

"I was the person who first thought up the tactic of tree-spiking and as such I feel obligated to defend this child of my imagination." (Link)

Care to make me find more examples?

>We do not and will not tolerate ecoterrorism.

That's why the principal founders of your organization devise murderous tactics, right?

It doesn't sound like a sane organization when it's founded by people like Paul Watson.

>Greenpeace is a very upright environmental organization.

Excellent. Tell me what happened to your boats in British Columbia on July 3, 1997. Find me a link to the info on the greenpeace website, if you're so upright.

Of course, we won't find one, because on that day the people of Victoria, BC fought back and blockaded YOUR boats.

>We have many worthwhile causes.

Many? Care to name 3 that aren't runing people's lives?

>You might not agree with protesting, but it's hardly any type of terrorism.

Hey, I agree with protesting. But protesting doesn't include blockades and property invasion. That crosses the line of protesting (which is marches in the streets, passing leaflets, general education of the public) and becomes sets of criminal acts, even in countries with the most liberal of free speech laws, such as the US. Criminals don't deserve to benefit from their work.

>or the illegal logging in the Amazon

Which you defend through such extreme violations of the law you become pirates yourselves, charged under laws intended for true pirates (such as yourselves -- it's shameful to take over other people's private property like that -- all the more reason the world will have to continue to arm itself against radicals such as yourselves). For some reason it's wrong to pirate logs, but just fine to pirate ships.

You can't be serious.

>I don't know of many other organizations that stand up for the thousands killed in Bophal

You have to go back 2 decades to find something decent Greenpeace did?

That's sad. But, sadder still, is the proof that your protesting really was worth nothing:

"Meanwhile, very little of the money from the settlement reached with Union Carbide went to the survivors, and people in the area feel betrayed not only by Union Carbide (and chairman Warren Anderson,) but also by their own politicians. On the anniversary of the tragedy, effigies of Anderson and politicians are burnt."

At least the US Government managed to squeeze some money out for them. I wonder, how much did Greenpeace give?

Now, for my final point, care to respond to this?

"IT'S OFFICIAL: GREENPEACE SERVES NO PUBLIC PURPOSE"

Revenue Canada, the tax-collecting arm of the government, has refused to recognize the new Greenpeace Environmental Foundation as a charity, saying its activities have "no public benefit" and that lobbying to shut down industries could send people "into poverty."

"But according to court records made public in June by John Duncan, the Reform MP from British Columbia, the federal charities division found the group's activities "have not complied with the law" on charitable organizations."

"The recent Greenpeace campaigns against PVC plasticisers and

Just a nit pick. America was never part of the UK since the UKs inception was in January 1801 while American indepence was declared in 1776.

A troll is somebody who posts irrelevant nonsense.

Sorry to disagree

My post was nothing of the sort - it was an interesting refutation of the movie.

You post didn't refute the movie, it gave a link to a site of so-called deceipts, many of which don't refute the movie itself, but merely give the author's opinion on Mike Moore.

Michael Moore is a "documentarian" in the same sense that Leni Riefenstahl was a "documentarian", and Fahrenheit 9/11 is a documentary in the same sense that Triumph of the Will was a documentary. (Both movies also won prominent French awards... coincidence?) Fahrenheit 9/11 makes Fox News seem like a bastion of journalistic integrity by comparison.

Michael Moore's arguments lack a logical flow or any direction whatsoever. He seems to just string together a sequence of often unrelated anti-Bush/Iraq War arguments (which have the depth of talking points) hoping to rile up his already anti-Bush/Iraq War audience.

Moore builds his whole argument upon omissions, discarding any and all facts which are not in accordance with his world view. The claim that there are no factual inaccuracies in the movie is partly true; however, this is no great feat, as the movie is filled with omissions, innuendos, and logical fallacies (post hoc ergo propter hoc, etc). For example, I could very easily convince someone with no knowledge of 20th century European History that Hitler was a great guy, simply through omissions and without making one factually inaccurate statement i.e. Hitler was a great connoisseur of art; his love of art lead to him amassing a great art collection, spanning art from all over Europe. Hitler also implemented economic policies which restored Germany's shattered economy and made Germany into one of the most powerful economic powers of its time. He was much loved by his people, and took great pride in his heritage, etc, etc, etc. I'm sure my point has become evident, and I no longer need to pursue this perverted example.

Moore is well known for his editing prowess, and I have no reason to believe that he does not continue using his "skills" in Fahrenheit 9/11. There are several well known instances of Moore's editing in Bowling For Columbine i.e. Heston's tie changing colours, the clip of Heston's speech not being the one he gave right after Columbine, but rather a different one altogether (1st Google Result on Query), etc. I'm sure there are many other examples in both movies.

Moore makes several assertions in Fahrenheit 9/11 which not only make no logical sense, but also contradict with other statements he made in the movie. Moore mentions the well documented effort on Saddam's behalf to murder George H. W. Bush (probably intended as an argumentum ad hominem), then he refers to the sovereign nation of Iraq, which had never threatened or harmed a single American life. Ok, let's see, Moore himself admits that Saddam tried to kill H. W. Bush. Furthermore, Iraq invaded Kuwait, and constantly threatened Saudi Arabia and Israel. First of all, there are plenty of Americans in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Israel. Furthermore, plenty of American lives were lost in Desert Storm, which was clearly in response to a war of unilateral aggression on Saddam's behalf (then again, Moore may very well oppose Desert Storm, as well as England and France declaring war on Germany when they invaded Poland... who knows). After the end of Desert Storm, Americans remained in the region and constantly flew sorties to enforce the no-fly zones in the north and south of Iraq and make sure they minimized the number of Kurds and Shiites massacred by Saddam and his gang of (Sunni) thugs. Anyways, the Iraqis constantly attempted to shoot down the American planes that were merely enforcing the UN sanctioned No-fly Zones. (Seems like threatening American lives to me.)

Ok, moving on... Moore attempts to make it seem like there is no link between Saddam and international terrorism, where in reality Saddam offered USD $10000-20000 to the family members of Palestinian suicide bombers (what a great guy) (Google Link, scroll down)

Not only that, but the bundled applets are often designed by MS to tie the consumer to MS's retail environment, assuming they haven't bought the competitor outright. WMP9 vs. RealMedia Player, IE vs. Netscape, built-in file compression vs. WinZip. Further, the integration of MSN.com with IE, which you also get bumped to every time you log out of Hotmail. And MSN Search as the default in IE. MS makes a makes a bunch of free, bundled things that are just good enough to keep the general Windows-using public from being curious about alternatives.

For the unitiated, this business method is commonly known as "vertical integration".

True, the Soviets paid a high price in casualties to beat back the Nazis. However, a big reason for the high number of Soviet casualties was Hitler's invasion of the USSR (which Stalin, at least, wasn't expecting quite so soon) in violation of the 1939 Molotov/von Ribbentrop nonagression pact, at a time when the USSR wasn't fully prepared for war, partially because Stalin had just brutally purged the USSR in general and the Red Army in particular of those he feared were disloyal. One of the primary Soviet motivations for signing the pact with the Nazis, instead of joining an alliance against them with France and Britain, was the USSR's general unreadiness for war and Stalin's belief that he could build up his army while Hitler was busy in the west.

Thus, in the attempt to buy some time at the expense of France and Britain (and Poland, which Hitler and Stalin agreed to divide between themselves) to rebuild the army that he was responsible for decimating in the first place, Stalin made the mistake of trusting Hitler and got burned. So if you're trying to drum up some sympathy for the Soviets, you'll get precious little from me =)

Also, a slight nitpick: the phrase "the lion's share" means all of something, not just the majority of it. The reference is to one of Aesop's fables.

Not here it isn't. It's 20.03mm in diameter.

Unless, of course, it's been worn down in circulation.

Paul

And my social...
078-05-1120

Off topic, but since that number's the most misused ever maybe you should go with one of these instead.

Ok then

Ok then

PERLScript (why do people not spell it like an acronym any more?)

It never was an acronym. See an explanation of Perl's name for an explanation of the backronym.

Sure, but speed limits are set with regard to what is dangerous and what isn't dangerous. That's why we have 25mph in urban areas and 55+ on highways.

Dangerous is relative. 25mph in a 55mph zone can be dangerous if there's a lot of traffic or snow. 80mph in a 65mph is not dangerous if there's nobody on the road which was designed for speeds in excess of 90.

Why doesn't the same argument apply to other crimes? A burglar knows that there's only a small chance that they will get caught.

Because there is a greater chance the burglar will be caught and the punishment is meant to fit the crime. Felonies are typically investigated more fully than traffic violations and the punishment for a single burglary is not based on the assumption that he has committed other burglaries.

It might stop them speeding for a while once they get the letter. Points on their license work even better.

If you get caught speeding by a cop, he gives you a ticket, holds you up, and you most likely slow down. He stops you from speeding. Getting a ticket in the mail doesn't slow you down. It doesn't stop the dangerous activity, only punishes it.

I find this really hard to believe.

That doesn't make it false. It's already being done with Red Light Cameras. They're being placed where they will generate the most money, not where they will decrease accidents.

Tell that to someone who has had a relative killed in a car crash where the other driver was speeding/acting recklessly or inattentively.

This is an Appeal to Emotion, and you accuse me of using bogus arguments. Yes, it happens, and it's a tragedy. But it does not prove that speeding is always dangerous or that the person wouldn't have been killed if the other driver wasn't speeding. As for acting recklessly or inattentively, both can be done without speeding.

How many times does burglary lead to someone dying? Not very often. Speeding is much more likely to lead to injury and death.

How often does burglary lead to loss of property? Every single time, by definition. And the loss of property is the primary reason it is punished, not the risk of injury or death. Speeding does not always lead to injury or death.

Why is it that motorists believe that laws regarding cars (speeding, parking restrictions, environmental considerations) are merely designed to inconvenience them and not to serve some greater social good?

Would you like to point out where I said that? I never said speeding shouldn't be against the law.

How many deaths have there been from terrorism in the last ten years? How many due to cars?

Are you seriously trying to imply that a terrorist attack is less dangerous than someone exceeding the speed limit? There are so many flaws in this argument it's hard to pick a place to start.

1) not every car related death was due to speeding.
2) billions of people drive every day. A lot will exceed the speed limit at some time. Very few comparatively will kill someone.
3) The primary purpose of a terrorist attack is to kill people.
4) The number of terrorist attacks is miniscule compared to the number of times people have exceeded the speed limit.

Check out some of these sites:

Nano Dot Article
Tech Review
A neat simulation
WordIQ

These all do a good deal to help explain / show you some interesting things. Give them a look-see.

And you seem to not do your research.

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Fujitsu

The company was established in 1935 under the name Fuji Tsshinki Seiz, a spinoff of the Fuji Electric company, this in turn being a joint venture between the Furukawa mining company and German conglomerate Siemens.

Or how about more obviously....

http://pr.fujitsu.com/en/profile/profile.html

Fujitsu is a leading provider of customer-focused information technology and communications solutions for the global marketplace. Since Fujitsu's establishment in 1935, we have maintained a commitment to cutting-edge technological innovation and uncompromising product quality.

So only 50 years out there old chap. :)

Commodity:
In the original and simplified sense, commodities were things of value, of uniform quality, that were produced in large quantities by many different producers; the items from each different producer are considered equivalent.

When did the term "X-Windows" come into play?

It didn't. It's referred to as the X Window System or X11 or just X. There's no X-related trademark that includes the plural that I'm aware of.

X does use windows as a concept, obviously, but I'm not entirely clear when the distinction between a Window and a Drawable came about.

c.

Wow - that old?

You had ample opportunity to sample the pleasures of this game in a form called a "text adventure" at a much younger age. Soft Porn, the game Leisure Suit Larry was based on, came out WAAAY back in 1981 (you can also find references to it on Al Lowe's site, but this one had history).

Unfortunately for me, the only thing available at that age was Custer's Revenge, and my mom wouldn't let me rent it, so I got a late start on sexual discovery. Fortunately for me, a friend down the street was adept at stealing his dad's Playboys - if it weren't for that, I woulda been just like the bible thumping white suburbanites that create these inane rules.

Joe doesn't know any local linux geeks that'll come fix something for a 6 pack of Duff

Maybe if he tried offering Gunniess instead, he would get a better reception?

Oh come on, it's not like you haven't sat down with $RELATIVE_FROM_USA to fix $COMPUTER_PROBLEM and been offered something like crudwiser. Ick.

Refined tastes on technology need not imply a favoritism to non-domestic American beverages. But this is an important facet of software that people leave out: culture.

I view that whole problem with software is not about the number of machines installed. The problem is about people, attitudes and perceptions.

I feel that addressing the difference of community will be the single most challenging task facing popular adoption of tools like Linux. The OS installed on a user's computer is a choice of that user. It is up to you to change that user's attitude. They will put up with horrid quality when they don't know of a better alternative.

In my opinion culture clash between 'Joe Sixpack Windows-User' and everybody else is dramatic. Both the Apple and $FREE_OS communities like to view themselves as fringe or special groups. They celebrate their difference from the mainstream. Pure and unadulterated Windows users form a different community than the users of Apple or $FREE_OS products. They belive the tools they have work and work adequately. The common users are people who are sufficiently content with their pre-packaged choice to not look outside the beige box. Due to bad practices by Microsoft, they also form the largest community of individual personal computer users.

It has been said that the I.Q. of a group is the lowest I.Q. of the members of the group divided by the number of members of that group (think communication overhead when talking with slow people.) Fortunately for the 'Aunt Tillies' of the world, individual users can have quite a solid grasp of basic computer skills. Unfortunately, confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance imply a lot of ineria.

While 'Aunt Tillie, CTO/CFO' grasps software quality, their grasp may be of the level of the average car buyer. This is a person who only needs to know about various cars during the rare purchase of a car. In the M$ dominated media of software boxes at your local $MEGA_MART, communicating the benefits of something like Linux or Apple over Microsoft products will require overcoming the established noise level of $ billions in marketing

This is why Microsoft is 50% marketing. This is why commercial Linux distributions are a Good Thing. This is why Apple is still here. The best hackers of the world have been excellent social engineers before anything else. It's time to put that 'social' part to a very good use.

Social engineering of the common man to want quality in software, rather than just settling for third best is possible. After helping run a student organization for Linux users for a few years, I have seen remarkable progress in the quality of various distributions. However, problems with GUI's, driver availability and application compatibility are but small technical hurdles that can be solved with adequate coding.

If you care about software quality then talk to you neighbor. Show off your computers. Maybe even offer them a Guinness while you watch DVDs on your PC with those neighbors. Get the word out.

The term "communist" isn't actually as cut and dried as you make it out to be.

Marxists defined communism as the dissolution of the state, elimination of private property, and the leveling of all class barriers. That idealized goal was not achieved during the Soviet era, obviously, but the term was hijacked by the Communist Party, which for obvious political reasons presented its society as the realization of the communist dream.

The West saw little reason to quibble over terminology, and so bought into this misrepresentation by using the term communism rather than another, more accurate term (such as totalitarian socialism).

So yes, our history books call it communism, but history books simplify presentation of complicated historical material for reasons of clarity, ideology, and so on. Check out Lies My Teacher Told Me to get a glimpse at these simplifications in effect.

For more info about communism, check out this detailed explanation.

I think the 2 terms can be used interchangeably, since one is a subset of another, except that the natural monopoly is forced by the govt in this case.

I think the 2 terms can be used interchangeably, since one is a subset of another, except that the natural monopoly is forced by the govt in this case.

All of these names are incorrect by chemical standards.

Alcohols and ethers are organic molecules by definition. If you take a look at that link you will notice that the formula for an alcohol is generally R-OH and an ether is R-O-R'. The "R" in those formulas stands for at least one carbon atom, and possibly an entire structure of carbon chains and branches. Since HOH doesn't have any carbon atoms it is almost definitely excluded from being called an alcohol or an ether.

Hydroxic acid is sort of a misnomer. While H2O would be considered an acid according to the Lewis definition and the Bronsted-Lowry definition of an acid, it is not considered an acid by the Arrhenius definition of an acid. So it all depends on how you look at it. One major thing that holds chemists back from calling water an acid is that generally something is considered to be an acid if it is in an aqueous solution. For water that's a bit of a circular definition and so it's not really used.

Is there any other kind?

Of course. The mass of a black hole is only the mass of the original, collapsed matter, and any additional in-fallen matter. So, a stellar-sized black hole is typically in the 4-15 solar masses range. Contrast this to a supermassive black hole which is in the range of 10's to 100's of billions of solar masses. There is also evidence for more intermediate-sized black holes, but nothing concrete as of yet.

Anyway, see here for more detailed info.

rather than providing a laughably simplistic "i don't agree with you, therefore you are wrong" post as an AC, why not try to cite an economics text yourself?

oh, wait. how about this?

any better now? I'd do more, but it's simply not my job to teach you everything.