God you're a jackass. Only on slashdot would it be modded interesting for someone to make some obscure bullshit connection to Microsoft.
3 days != 24 hours, and nobody was "expected to stay up for 24 hours straight and eat soda and junk food while coding", nor was the contest 'forced on students'.
Staying up for 24 hours is nothing compared to 3 days. To imply they are in any way comparable wreaks of stupidity.
In both cases it is the individuals responsibility. This guy that killed himself for gaming 3 days was stupid to the extreme.
Wow that's the biggest load of crap ever. I'm afraid they have it backwards. I block ads because I have never, and will never click on them. As a result, THEY are wasting MY money by wasting MY time on increased page load time, and indirectly through bandwidth usage. The way I see it, I'm saving them money by reducing bandwidth that would otherwise have been a 100% waste, and more importantly saving myself time. I'm doing them a favor. Sounds like they like to equate every ad blocker as lost revenue, just like the RIAA stupidly equates every downloaded copy what would have been a buyer. Sorry retards, that's not how it works. They own neither my computer, my bandwidth, my time, nor my attention, and I owe them none of it.
Forgive the rather emotional reply please, it sickens me to no end how pervasively advertising has invaded our way of life. Every damn commercial break is a hand full of bullshit car commercials, every web page wants to rape your eye sockets with their garbage, spam, web 'forms' that serve no purpose but to get you added to a spam list that ends up being sold around to all the ad agencies like a 2$ whore. Pathetic.
In the 1950's, Joe Kittenger, a high altitued ballon test pilot went up to over 102,000 feet where it's virutally space and it is very close to vacuum, his glove malfuntioned and lost pressure.. His hand swelled up a bit and he lost movement and function. But his hand did not explode. Once repressurized, everything was normal.
As I recall the Geneva Convention is a promise that your country will not engage in certain things, period, and isn't conditional on whether the other side also does. Am I wrong?
Whether that's 'fair' or not is another issue altogether. Personally I think as the 'better man' as a country we should stick to those rules on principle. It's unfortunate that the scum on the other side exploit our general unwillingness to break the rules.
If anyone is terrified at virtualization, it's Apple. They are the only OS that you can't run in a VM without resorting to 3rd party hacks that may or may not work with your hardware. I had been trying to install OSX in VMware off and on for several years now, to have a place to compile mac versions of some projects I'm working on. Unfortunately I haven't had much luck. The most recent attempt was able to boot up OSX and run it very well, but unfortunately completely missing network support and other such means of communicating back to the host OS, and creating and mounting ISO images of my source tree to compile stuff on it just isn't an option. Were apple to embrace such support, VMWare and similar programs could support it natively. They won't though, because they fear exactly what this article claims MS fears. If you can run Apple software on your non Apple hardware, you have no use for Apple. Only for MS, virtualization isn't as devastating to their business, because they are a software company, and can still sell software, while Apple needs to sell you artificially proprietary hardware, and even though their software is very good, they rely on having you locked in to their hardware.
What I said was what benefit would sending a human provide that unmanned missions can't do significantly better? I didn't say to abandon any study of mars or other planets. A group of humans spending however many months flying to mars for what would more than likely be a stupidly short stay, and then flying back, versus unmanned missions that, like the rovers, can feed us useful information for years. It seems like a no brainer that a human mission would only serve to introduce a new 'weak link' in the process, and add huge cost, and for what? So a human can see it with their own eyes?
I'm not sure I disagree with this idea that we shouldn't be blowing money with some goal of sending humans to mars. What exactly would we gain of it? I suppose the theory is that we could bring back samples of shit to study, but why couldn't the same be done on an unmanned mission? Seems to me there is little reason a human needs to go there, and doing so is more about proving that they can than getting anything useful out of it. On top of that I would imagine it complicates the mission immensely with additional systems and failure points(life support, how the astronauts stay sane through the trip, etc).
Yet the 'major retailers' that are cited as being extremely important to game sales(Walmart, Target, etc), will happily sell you Hostel and other such gory shit that is much more realistic than any game will ever be. Way to be a hypocrite you fuckers. The horror game genre is just as much of a niche as horror movies. "But they are interactive", is nothing but a bullshit fantasy that means nothing at all.
Real smart. Fight the symptom not the problem. Spammers should have to pay for all the time they waste of every single person they send their trash to, and all the bandwidth it consumes. It blows my mind that this shit isn't considered as big of a problem as it needs to be with lawmakers.
Why wouldn't google bookmarks or others be able to simply upload the new database file? Is it correct that it uses an sqlite database? It would be trivial for these shared bookmark extensions to upload that or to inject what they do upload and download back into the database. It's not a competition, google bookmarks is a supplemental feature afaik.
235 examples of the new 'obvious' changes to patent acceptance. I hope every one of them gets flushed down the toilet. Most companies probably have thousands of 'obvious' patents.
I don't have a link to the source offhand, but I remember seeing several studies that attributed the danger of cell phones while driving not to holding it, but to the mental attention that is used to maintain a conversation. Many peoples attention to things around them goes to shit when talking on a phone. The studies also mentioned conversation with passengers as not being the same, because unlike the person on the other end of the phone, passengers tend to be looking around at traffic as well, and instinctively stop talking and/or provide extra warning to the driver. Contrast that to the phone conversation where the other party happily keeps talking, which can maintain the distraction more easily.
Have you ever been driving with a passenger and they do the sigh and push their feet into the floorboard as if anticipating a collision if you come up behind a car too fast? That sort of thing.
I can admit to being guilty of this. In the rare case I talk to someone while driving, in addition to trying to be safe and making it a very short conversation, I have to try harder to give driving the attention it needs because in the past I've found myself slipping into the conversation too much and not realizing traffic was slowing down for example. I've never had an accident, and consider myself a good driver, with a 1 track mind apparently. Sometimes I have to ask the other party to repeat themselves due to my forced focus on the road.
For me at least, it's not natural. For many, they are oblivious to the danger they are posing, because they don't feel they are a danger. It's not common sense to them due to this. I'd wager that a small insignificant percentage of people can text message hands free, texting potentially poses more risk of taking your eyes off the road, even if its less attention grabbing that maintaining a conversation. For alot of people, texting is an extension of conversing, and they think they need to respond asap. I've known several people that think they have to reply to stuff right away.
Only if 'their offices' or the break room were located in a different building. Smokers stink to high hell. Walking through their clouds coming in the building is bad, but simply being in the vicinity of one when they come back in is not much different.
I think what he means is along the lines of most people wouldn't have a problem with seeing a bully get his ass kicked, even if its 'immoral' in general to kick someones ass. Morality has context. I haven't downloaded stuff in years, but the only infringement I personally take seriously is that which involves profit on the part of the pirates. The rest is in the same category as jaywalking as far as I'm concerned.
Slashdot Mirror
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wishful_thinking
God you're a jackass. Only on slashdot would it be modded interesting for someone to make some obscure bullshit connection to Microsoft.
3 days != 24 hours, and nobody was "expected to stay up for 24 hours straight and eat soda and junk food while coding", nor was the contest 'forced on students'.
Staying up for 24 hours is nothing compared to 3 days. To imply they are in any way comparable wreaks of stupidity.
In both cases it is the individuals responsibility. This guy that killed himself for gaming 3 days was stupid to the extreme.
It'll live or die from the software it supports. Maybe if they open it up to developers more it will pressure apple to as well.
Wow that's the biggest load of crap ever. I'm afraid they have it backwards. I block ads because I have never, and will never click on them. As a result, THEY are wasting MY money by wasting MY time on increased page load time, and indirectly through bandwidth usage. The way I see it, I'm saving them money by reducing bandwidth that would otherwise have been a 100% waste, and more importantly saving myself time. I'm doing them a favor. Sounds like they like to equate every ad blocker as lost revenue, just like the RIAA stupidly equates every downloaded copy what would have been a buyer. Sorry retards, that's not how it works. They own neither my computer, my bandwidth, my time, nor my attention, and I owe them none of it.
/rant over
Forgive the rather emotional reply please, it sickens me to no end how pervasively advertising has invaded our way of life. Every damn commercial break is a hand full of bullshit car commercials, every web page wants to rape your eye sockets with their garbage, spam, web 'forms' that serve no purpose but to get you added to a spam list that ends up being sold around to all the ad agencies like a 2$ whore. Pathetic.
Sure, if you ignore the most significant part of the equation(air resistance).
From this page: http://van.physics.uiuc.edu/qa/listing.php?id=1145
In the 1950's, Joe Kittenger, a high altitued ballon test pilot went up to over 102,000 feet where it's virutally space and it is very close to vacuum, his glove malfuntioned and lost pressure.. His hand swelled up a bit and he lost movement and function. But his hand did not explode. Once repressurized, everything was normal.
It can be considered cheating, which is what the article talks about, but virtual sex is not real sex, and it never can be.
Interesting, thanks. Learn something new every day.
To hell with the environment, I need more fps in my games.
As I recall the Geneva Convention is a promise that your country will not engage in certain things, period, and isn't conditional on whether the other side also does. Am I wrong?
Whether that's 'fair' or not is another issue altogether. Personally I think as the 'better man' as a country we should stick to those rules on principle. It's unfortunate that the scum on the other side exploit our general unwillingness to break the rules.
Wishful Thinking?
/flamebait :)
If anyone is terrified at virtualization, it's Apple. They are the only OS that you can't run in a VM without resorting to 3rd party hacks that may or may not work with your hardware. I had been trying to install OSX in VMware off and on for several years now, to have a place to compile mac versions of some projects I'm working on. Unfortunately I haven't had much luck. The most recent attempt was able to boot up OSX and run it very well, but unfortunately completely missing network support and other such means of communicating back to the host OS, and creating and mounting ISO images of my source tree to compile stuff on it just isn't an option. Were apple to embrace such support, VMWare and similar programs could support it natively. They won't though, because they fear exactly what this article claims MS fears. If you can run Apple software on your non Apple hardware, you have no use for Apple. Only for MS, virtualization isn't as devastating to their business, because they are a software company, and can still sell software, while Apple needs to sell you artificially proprietary hardware, and even though their software is very good, they rely on having you locked in to their hardware.
What I said was what benefit would sending a human provide that unmanned missions can't do significantly better? I didn't say to abandon any study of mars or other planets. A group of humans spending however many months flying to mars for what would more than likely be a stupidly short stay, and then flying back, versus unmanned missions that, like the rovers, can feed us useful information for years. It seems like a no brainer that a human mission would only serve to introduce a new 'weak link' in the process, and add huge cost, and for what? So a human can see it with their own eyes?
I'm not sure I disagree with this idea that we shouldn't be blowing money with some goal of sending humans to mars. What exactly would we gain of it? I suppose the theory is that we could bring back samples of shit to study, but why couldn't the same be done on an unmanned mission? Seems to me there is little reason a human needs to go there, and doing so is more about proving that they can than getting anything useful out of it. On top of that I would imagine it complicates the mission immensely with additional systems and failure points(life support, how the astronauts stay sane through the trip, etc).
Really, what is the point?
Yet the 'major retailers' that are cited as being extremely important to game sales(Walmart, Target, etc), will happily sell you Hostel and other such gory shit that is much more realistic than any game will ever be. Way to be a hypocrite you fuckers. The horror game genre is just as much of a niche as horror movies. "But they are interactive", is nothing but a bullshit fantasy that means nothing at all.
Real smart. Fight the symptom not the problem. Spammers should have to pay for all the time they waste of every single person they send their trash to, and all the bandwidth it consumes. It blows my mind that this shit isn't considered as big of a problem as it needs to be with lawmakers.
Why wouldn't google bookmarks or others be able to simply upload the new database file? Is it correct that it uses an sqlite database? It would be trivial for these shared bookmark extensions to upload that or to inject what they do upload and download back into the database. It's not a competition, google bookmarks is a supplemental feature afaik.
Reminds me of the old Lemmings game. It's too bad they don't have a self destruct button.
4 point font saves bandwidth! Think of the tubes!
235 examples of the new 'obvious' changes to patent acceptance. I hope every one of them gets flushed down the toilet. Most companies probably have thousands of 'obvious' patents.
I don't have a link to the source offhand, but I remember seeing several studies that attributed the danger of cell phones while driving not to holding it, but to the mental attention that is used to maintain a conversation. Many peoples attention to things around them goes to shit when talking on a phone. The studies also mentioned conversation with passengers as not being the same, because unlike the person on the other end of the phone, passengers tend to be looking around at traffic as well, and instinctively stop talking and/or provide extra warning to the driver. Contrast that to the phone conversation where the other party happily keeps talking, which can maintain the distraction more easily. Have you ever been driving with a passenger and they do the sigh and push their feet into the floorboard as if anticipating a collision if you come up behind a car too fast? That sort of thing. I can admit to being guilty of this. In the rare case I talk to someone while driving, in addition to trying to be safe and making it a very short conversation, I have to try harder to give driving the attention it needs because in the past I've found myself slipping into the conversation too much and not realizing traffic was slowing down for example. I've never had an accident, and consider myself a good driver, with a 1 track mind apparently. Sometimes I have to ask the other party to repeat themselves due to my forced focus on the road. For me at least, it's not natural. For many, they are oblivious to the danger they are posing, because they don't feel they are a danger. It's not common sense to them due to this. I'd wager that a small insignificant percentage of people can text message hands free, texting potentially poses more risk of taking your eyes off the road, even if its less attention grabbing that maintaining a conversation. For alot of people, texting is an extension of conversing, and they think they need to respond asap. I've known several people that think they have to reply to stuff right away.
Dear Congress, MPAA, RIAA, Go fuck yourself. Sincerely, University of x.
Only if 'their offices' or the break room were located in a different building. Smokers stink to high hell. Walking through their clouds coming in the building is bad, but simply being in the vicinity of one when they come back in is not much different.
I think what he means is along the lines of most people wouldn't have a problem with seeing a bully get his ass kicked, even if its 'immoral' in general to kick someones ass. Morality has context. I haven't downloaded stuff in years, but the only infringement I personally take seriously is that which involves profit on the part of the pirates. The rest is in the same category as jaywalking as far as I'm concerned.
So perhaps the internet will indeed become a series of tubes?