But to be honest - most peoplewould not even spen the effort to do anything with them if you threw it out in the trash with some stinky chicken carcass and rotten milk. - Would you? People recover, or try to recover stuff from hard drives from companies, because there might be useful info on them. How much useful info can you get from some schmuck down the street, and would it be useful/worth your time? - Probably not. Are you kidding? You know how much pr0n the average home user has, compared to the average work machine?
This is only going to lead to millions of college students slipping a 50" cock into the professor's.... For those of us who's minds run at about 2.5 times their reading speed, 2.5 disgusting images filled our heads.
That's how they will get you to buy the 25 lumins model next year, when the technology will ripen. Why should they lose out on the money they could make selling immature technology?
> Yes, Ubuntu is easy (when it all works as it's supposed to, which is usually > does). Other flavors of Linux, not so much.
That might be true of hard-core distros such as slackware and gentoo, but Fedora, SUSE, and Debian all had rather painless installs. Even on pain in the ass equipment, such as this Dell Inspiron with ATI graphics (not the model that _comes_ with Ubuntu preinstalled).
> I was specifically referring to the general acceptance in the Linux crowd of > the need to jump through hoop after hoop. Regular users will not subject > themselves to such things.
Agreed on that point. It's the details now, like getting USB sticks to mount and such.
>Regular users also aren't interested in running their OS off of a flash drive.
You'd be surprised. That's why U3 is getting popular. One XP-to-Ubuntu switch that I made was specifically because she wanted to carry her OS with her. I even showed her how to pop the battery out of the university computer's motherboards, to reset the bios password, so that she could boot from the USB stick. Who needs a Mustang to impress women these days?
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why Linux will never take over the desktop. No, this is how to install Linux on a pen drive. Installing Linux (specifically Ubuntu) on a desktop is easier than installing Windows XP. I know, I've done them both tens of times. I can't talk about how easy Vista is to install, because I've never done that, but I'd like to see the instructions for installing any version of MS Windows on a pen drive. I doubt that it'd be simpler than what you see here.
Yippie, another slashdigg toplist! I fucking hate you!
In other news, last week I hacked a Nokia 6280 and Nokia 6288 to make a phone with the 6280's hardware (better buttons) with the 6288's software. It all went together almost perfectly, with just a bit of filing on one of the case covers. I have a lot of experience hacking shit together.
> You do sound like the kind of hair-trigger fightin' jerk who would get involved in this kind of
> altercation. I would say 'it takes all types' but actually it just takes one of several types of
> person for that sort of incident to happen.
How do I sound that way? I'm really not. I'd like to know what signs I'm leaving.
> Violence escalates because of the combination of people involved in an incident. An illustration
> of this is a 'victimless' Bus-card crime story I can tell.
Your friend was the one who initiated the violence, so it seems. I never initiated violence. However, I fight fire with fire. Note that I also fight flowers with flowers, and would have gladly settled the you-scratched-my-car incident another way.
> The struttin' dick people seem to always be the ones who get into incidents that escalate
> to extreme violence. I wonder why that is?
I don't wonder. Those who live by the sword, die by the sword. I don't live by the sword.
> I'm glad to know that I probably will never encounter you anywhere in real life.
So long as you are not violent, or a terrorist, you have nothing to worry about. Not from me, at least.
I did consider that, but there was no need as he was quickly subdued. I should mention that I am a soldier, and we always try to arrest terrorists alive rather than kill them. So naturally, the same policy was applied to a civilian attacking me. And no, I was not in uniform and he had no way of knowing who he was attacking (what he was getting himself into) when he opened my car door.
He opened the driver door to my car, punched me in the face, and climbed on top of me. What would you have done?
I pinned his hands to his side and punched his eye until he got off of me. I really don't give a shit that he had 20 stitches and two plastic surgeries. I hope it's the last time he attacks another driver. Oh, I should probably mention that he did this because, he says, I scratched his car while passing in traffic.
Key word: accused.
In 2004, I had a rifle pointed at me and complained to the police. Result: The offender claimed that _I_ threatened _him_ with my weapon. I was accused for a crime I did not commit. After a year-long trial, I was aquitted.
In January 2007, I was attacked in my own car. I beat the living shit out of the attacker and he thus claimed that _I_ attacked him. I had no physical damage worth reporting, so now _I_ face charges.
There is a big difference between being accused of a crime, and actually committing one.
This is slander of the highest degree. These are people _accused_ of crimes, not guilty criminals. The damage to one's reputation will be near-irrepairable. I cannot believe that they are seriously considering this system.
While these "smart grids" and "smart phones" and "smart appliances" are getting smarter, the idiot behind the wheel or at the keyboard is getting dumber and more pampered by the minute. We're getting so sheltered and pussywhipped that we won't be able to function as an independent species within a few decades. And no, I didn't read TFA, I'm too smart for that.
That's just my point. If the patient _has_ something, then the audio recording can prove that the doctor missed it. However, if the audio recording doesn't show anything unusual, the doctor _still_ should have performed other checks and not have relied upon the heartbeat alone.
The problem is, that heartbeats can be used to _find_ illnesses, but not to disprove them. So in no case will a heartbeat prove that a patient was healthy, yet, a heartbeat can prove that a patient was sick. To prove that a patient is healthy, a whole battery of other tests need to be made. Therefore, this could only be used as evidence _against_ the doctor.
Note: I am a medic, not a doctor, so if I'm wrong please correct me.
I can't see this going very far. What doctor will wrap that thing around his neck? Unless, of course, it also plays MP3 files.
There may be, however, a solution looking for a problem in the fact that the audio can be recorded for playback later. However, I can see a situation where a doctor is sued for malpractice, and the audio is used against him rather than for him in the case. I'd be rather wary of using this machine, based on those grounds alone.
Slashdot Mirror
Not exactly what you're after, but MS wound up paying an estimated $24 million to Lindows after suing them for the name.
There ARE bugs in the test. Hopefully, when they are finished with it, there won't be.
Sounds a lot like paypal.
At least that won't get her pregnant.
That's how they will get you to buy the 25 lumins model next year, when the technology will ripen. Why should they lose out on the money they could make selling immature technology?
> Yes, Ubuntu is easy (when it all works as it's supposed to, which is usually
> does). Other flavors of Linux, not so much.
That might be true of hard-core distros such as slackware and gentoo, but Fedora, SUSE, and Debian all had rather painless installs. Even on pain in the ass equipment, such as this Dell Inspiron with ATI graphics (not the model that _comes_ with Ubuntu preinstalled).
> I was specifically referring to the general acceptance in the Linux crowd of
> the need to jump through hoop after hoop. Regular users will not subject
> themselves to such things.
Agreed on that point. It's the details now, like getting USB sticks to mount and such.
>Regular users also aren't interested in running their OS off of a flash drive.
You'd be surprised. That's why U3 is getting popular. One XP-to-Ubuntu switch that I made was specifically because she wanted to carry her OS with her. I even showed her how to pop the battery out of the university computer's motherboards, to reset the bios password, so that she could boot from the USB stick. Who needs a Mustang to impress women these days?
Nice, but will it run Pen Drive Linux?
nope
Yippie, another slashdigg toplist! I fucking hate you!
In other news, last week I hacked a Nokia 6280 and Nokia 6288 to make a phone with the 6280's hardware (better buttons) with the 6288's software. It all went together almost perfectly, with just a bit of filing on one of the case covers. I have a lot of experience hacking shit together.
> You do sound like the kind of hair-trigger fightin' jerk who would get involved in this kind of > altercation. I would say 'it takes all types' but actually it just takes one of several types of > person for that sort of incident to happen. How do I sound that way? I'm really not. I'd like to know what signs I'm leaving. > Violence escalates because of the combination of people involved in an incident. An illustration > of this is a 'victimless' Bus-card crime story I can tell. Your friend was the one who initiated the violence, so it seems. I never initiated violence. However, I fight fire with fire. Note that I also fight flowers with flowers, and would have gladly settled the you-scratched-my-car incident another way. > The struttin' dick people seem to always be the ones who get into incidents that escalate > to extreme violence. I wonder why that is? I don't wonder. Those who live by the sword, die by the sword. I don't live by the sword. > I'm glad to know that I probably will never encounter you anywhere in real life. So long as you are not violent, or a terrorist, you have nothing to worry about. Not from me, at least.
I was. THAT was my mistake.
I did consider that, but there was no need as he was quickly subdued. I should mention that I am a soldier, and we always try to arrest terrorists alive rather than kill them. So naturally, the same policy was applied to a civilian attacking me. And no, I was not in uniform and he had no way of knowing who he was attacking (what he was getting himself into) when he opened my car door.
He opened the driver door to my car, punched me in the face, and climbed on top of me. What would you have done? I pinned his hands to his side and punched his eye until he got off of me. I really don't give a shit that he had 20 stitches and two plastic surgeries. I hope it's the last time he attacks another driver. Oh, I should probably mention that he did this because, he says, I scratched his car while passing in traffic.
Key word: accused. In 2004, I had a rifle pointed at me and complained to the police. Result: The offender claimed that _I_ threatened _him_ with my weapon. I was accused for a crime I did not commit. After a year-long trial, I was aquitted. In January 2007, I was attacked in my own car. I beat the living shit out of the attacker and he thus claimed that _I_ attacked him. I had no physical damage worth reporting, so now _I_ face charges. There is a big difference between being accused of a crime, and actually committing one.
This is slander of the highest degree. These are people _accused_ of crimes, not guilty criminals. The damage to one's reputation will be near-irrepairable. I cannot believe that they are seriously considering this system.
(972)54-788-1700 You've obviously been reading my Facebook profile.
And then I would get my pron exactly how?
Careful, he might sue you for that.
While these "smart grids" and "smart phones" and "smart appliances" are getting smarter, the idiot behind the wheel or at the keyboard is getting dumber and more pampered by the minute. We're getting so sheltered and pussywhipped that we won't be able to function as an independent species within a few decades. And no, I didn't read TFA, I'm too smart for that.
That's just my point. If the patient _has_ something, then the audio recording can prove that the doctor missed it. However, if the audio recording doesn't show anything unusual, the doctor _still_ should have performed other checks and not have relied upon the heartbeat alone.
The problem is, that heartbeats can be used to _find_ illnesses, but not to disprove them. So in no case will a heartbeat prove that a patient was healthy, yet, a heartbeat can prove that a patient was sick. To prove that a patient is healthy, a whole battery of other tests need to be made. Therefore, this could only be used as evidence _against_ the doctor.
Note: I am a medic, not a doctor, so if I'm wrong please correct me.
I can't see this going very far. What doctor will wrap that thing around his neck? Unless, of course, it also plays MP3 files.
There may be, however, a solution looking for a problem in the fact that the audio can be recorded for playback later. However, I can see a situation where a doctor is sued for malpractice, and the audio is used against him rather than for him in the case. I'd be rather wary of using this machine, based on those grounds alone.