Amazingly enough, it's all scriptable. They will run when you're not using the machine and they will automatically apply updates. Installing is generally pretty damn fast too.
Yep, I might. On the other hand, when I'm trying to make a point about how tacking on extra costs for using Vista isn't exactly fair, how much I or anyone else chooses to donate isn't really pertinent. One might decide to donate cash to Debian, but we're still going to call the cost of using it $0.
Because the only decent places to harvest geothermal in the US are vacation spots. You go ahead and tell Wyoming that you're sorry about all the lost tourist revenue and degradation of the wilderness, but you need to start harvesting Yellowstone National Park. Otherwise you're stuck trying to transport electricity from Hawaii.
Hmm. How about the threat that there will be RFID tags that are designed to store data every time they're hit by a reader? That doesn't sound that bad, until you start seeing areas that are periodically flooded with reader signals. Now the tag is starting to build up a timestamped list of locations. Now someone brushes up against you on the sidewalk or in a subway, and your tag gives them all the information.
Huh, looks like they don't have to follow you around with a reader an inch away from your ass. Imagine that.
Clearly not all, but maybe we can get some evolutionary pressure to become smarter. If the average person isn't smart enough to handle day to day life, then the average person will need to become smarter.
The biggest impediment to justice is lawyers. Too often, even if you win, you lose, and the only real winners are the lawyers for both sides. As I remember it, Shakespeare's famous line "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" was praising the legal profession. The man speaking that line was trying to set himself up as a tyrant, and realized that a common set of rules and a set of people who held them up are the biggest threats a tyrannical government faces.
You say that the biggest impediment to justice is lawyers. I say (and so did Shakespeare) that lawyers are the bulwark keeping justice from being swept aside. Look at the state of things. The government has been forced to spend time creating such monstrosities as the USA-PATRIOT Act because without them lawyers would stand in their way. The fact that you and I can type our various opinions without fear of having our words erased and ourselves imprisoned without trial is because there would be a lawyer there to fight for us. If you think the US is plunging into fascism now, consider how much faster the decline would be if we did not have such stopgap measures in place.
Well, I saw $3.07 driving home today, and I'm going to fill my tank before the price goes up to reflect oil breaking $90/barrel again, so yeah, I'd much rather pay $3/gallon-equivalent.
I don't want anything more. That is where I draw the line, and I think further gun control laws would be an affront to our 2nd amendment rights. At the same time, I don't want that particular law repealed.
A quick check of wikipedia says that an assault rifle is defined as a selective fire gun with muzzle energies between that of a light machine gun and that of a submachine gun. Of course, that's not what the ban is. The ban is like making certain cars illegal depending on how many hood ornaments they have, which is a really stupid idea.
Don't patronize me. Home defense is about as bad a place for collateral damage as any I can think of. The military is a completely different situation, and safety is a considerably different issue there.
Sounds like carbosilicate amorph warfare to me...but then, who'dathunk that the Australians would go in for that schlock? Won't they be surprised when they find the blood nanites...
How about 'automatic firearm'? Anything where you can hold down the trigger to hose down an area with bullets goes against the rules of safe handling I was taught. Yes, this includes such things as machine pistols, which are not assault rifles by dint of not being rifles, but assault rifle is a stupid term anyway.
Geeks already think well of IBM, and will generally continue to do so regardless of what happens with OS/2. Now this is beyond the scope of my experience, but I can only imagine that it would take quite a few payable hours to sift through the code to see what can be released. There's probably some lawyer time involved too. There's little money to be gained from doing this, even when counted in such ephemeral ways as 'good will'.
Why should IBM open source anything? Keeping it closed is not going to lose them a lot of business, and it would take both money and time to find out what they could open source, and do it.
Ah, so this is about semantics. Fine, it is entirely possible for IBM to open source OS/2. Depending on what the various agreements, licenses, and contracts say, this could open them up to incredible amounts of abuse by some very big players in the industry. If there are royalties that need paid for each copy, open sourcing it would be nothing more than a money pit for IBM. So, while possible, open sourcing OS/2 is so damn impractical that there's no way it's going to happen.
It does have proper yes/no answers, but they don't cover every possibility, unless 'Have you ever beat your wife?' was an earlier question that filtered who gets 'Do you still beat your wife?'
They'll assume that you're a gold farmer, but not that you're a bot. And it makes sense when you don't reply to further questioning, because chatting is not what you do in gold farming sweatshops.
Easiest way to deal with that kind of Turing test is to make your bot extremely antisocial. Example: Someone chats to the bot, bot replies from list of responses including "STFU n00b!!!!!", "how i mine 4 fish???", and something in a fairly obscure foreign language. Being abusive enough to keep people from trying to chat with you is an easy way to avoid having to code any real conversation.
Slashdot Mirror
Rule 37: There is no overkill, there is only "open fire" and "I need to reload".
Everything except playing games, you mean. That's the only thing I use my XP computer for anyway, mostly I use my laptop for coding.
Amazingly enough, it's all scriptable. They will run when you're not using the machine and they will automatically apply updates. Installing is generally pretty damn fast too.
Yep, I might. On the other hand, when I'm trying to make a point about how tacking on extra costs for using Vista isn't exactly fair, how much I or anyone else chooses to donate isn't really pertinent. One might decide to donate cash to Debian, but we're still going to call the cost of using it $0.
3 years running AVG: $0
3 years running Ad-aware, Spybot, and CCleaner: $0
Now, I don't run Vista either, but saying it's cheaper to buy an iMac is a little disingenuous.
Because the only decent places to harvest geothermal in the US are vacation spots. You go ahead and tell Wyoming that you're sorry about all the lost tourist revenue and degradation of the wilderness, but you need to start harvesting Yellowstone National Park. Otherwise you're stuck trying to transport electricity from Hawaii.
Hmm. How about the threat that there will be RFID tags that are designed to store data every time they're hit by a reader? That doesn't sound that bad, until you start seeing areas that are periodically flooded with reader signals. Now the tag is starting to build up a timestamped list of locations. Now someone brushes up against you on the sidewalk or in a subway, and your tag gives them all the information.
Huh, looks like they don't have to follow you around with a reader an inch away from your ass. Imagine that.
Clearly not all, but maybe we can get some evolutionary pressure to become smarter. If the average person isn't smart enough to handle day to day life, then the average person will need to become smarter.
The biggest impediment to justice is lawyers. Too often, even if you win, you lose, and the only real winners are the lawyers for both sides. As I remember it, Shakespeare's famous line "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" was praising the legal profession. The man speaking that line was trying to set himself up as a tyrant, and realized that a common set of rules and a set of people who held them up are the biggest threats a tyrannical government faces.
You say that the biggest impediment to justice is lawyers. I say (and so did Shakespeare) that lawyers are the bulwark keeping justice from being swept aside. Look at the state of things. The government has been forced to spend time creating such monstrosities as the USA-PATRIOT Act because without them lawyers would stand in their way. The fact that you and I can type our various opinions without fear of having our words erased and ourselves imprisoned without trial is because there would be a lawyer there to fight for us. If you think the US is plunging into fascism now, consider how much faster the decline would be if we did not have such stopgap measures in place.
Hurt like hell != skin grafts.
She was dumb, sure, but the consequences of her being dumb were far above what would reasonably be expected.
Well, I saw $3.07 driving home today, and I'm going to fill my tank before the price goes up to reflect oil breaking $90/barrel again, so yeah, I'd much rather pay $3/gallon-equivalent.
I don't want anything more. That is where I draw the line, and I think further gun control laws would be an affront to our 2nd amendment rights. At the same time, I don't want that particular law repealed.
A quick check of wikipedia says that an assault rifle is defined as a selective fire gun with muzzle energies between that of a light machine gun and that of a submachine gun. Of course, that's not what the ban is. The ban is like making certain cars illegal depending on how many hood ornaments they have, which is a really stupid idea.
Don't patronize me. Home defense is about as bad a place for collateral damage as any I can think of. The military is a completely different situation, and safety is a considerably different issue there.
How about 'automatic firearm'? Anything where you can hold down the trigger to hose down an area with bullets goes against the rules of safe handling I was taught. Yes, this includes such things as machine pistols, which are not assault rifles by dint of not being rifles, but assault rifle is a stupid term anyway.
Pithy, brief, and redundant?
Geeks already think well of IBM, and will generally continue to do so regardless of what happens with OS/2. Now this is beyond the scope of my experience, but I can only imagine that it would take quite a few payable hours to sift through the code to see what can be released. There's probably some lawyer time involved too. There's little money to be gained from doing this, even when counted in such ephemeral ways as 'good will'.
Why should IBM open source anything? Keeping it closed is not going to lose them a lot of business, and it would take both money and time to find out what they could open source, and do it.
Ah, so this is about semantics. Fine, it is entirely possible for IBM to open source OS/2. Depending on what the various agreements, licenses, and contracts say, this could open them up to incredible amounts of abuse by some very big players in the industry. If there are royalties that need paid for each copy, open sourcing it would be nothing more than a money pit for IBM. So, while possible, open sourcing OS/2 is so damn impractical that there's no way it's going to happen.
Is that better?
It does have proper yes/no answers, but they don't cover every possibility, unless 'Have you ever beat your wife?' was an earlier question that filtered who gets 'Do you still beat your wife?'
Huh. Didn't know that.
That is being run by the thoughts of King Kong!
They'll assume that you're a gold farmer, but not that you're a bot. And it makes sense when you don't reply to further questioning, because chatting is not what you do in gold farming sweatshops.
Easiest way to deal with that kind of Turing test is to make your bot extremely antisocial. Example: Someone chats to the bot, bot replies from list of responses including "STFU n00b!!!!!", "how i mine 4 fish???", and something in a fairly obscure foreign language. Being abusive enough to keep people from trying to chat with you is an easy way to avoid having to code any real conversation.