Apple would be highly unlikely to help take potential Mac OS X seats away from themselves in such a way.
Apple makes a lot of money off of sales of their PowerPC-based hardware.
They don't make dick off of Mac OS, X or otherwise.
Very few people have as part of their PC-buying decision the mental exchange "should I use Linux or MacOS?" The markets don't overlap that much.
It would be in Apple's economic best interest to continue to support PowerPC Linux development, and to actively market their hardware to Linux users when they feel the OS is mature enough on their platform.
The only real change they need to make in the hardware to support this is the addition of another flippin' mouse button or two.
This code is of course the source that runs Slashdot, however 2.0 is far more advanced then the code you see here, to say nothing of utterly embarassing any other weblog software available for free, and written by us, and codenamed after a cartoon. Plans are already well underway to move Slashdot to the new code base soon enough.
And a hearty "STFU" to the folks who're always bitching that you don't release the current code fast enough.
1) The fact that you got moderated down to -1 as off-topic is a nice example of how you're wrong.
2) I would subjectively say that out of a typical month of meta-moderation, I have 27 days of at least 9 "fair", often all ten, and 3 days where about 8 are unfair, all of them up-mods of troll posts. I'd say meta-moderation is working pretty well.
If Linux is more common by that time, can we design something into it that is incompatible with the protection? (i.e. have the kernel fail to recognize the encryption handshake, meaning that in order to use Linux, you'll need an unencrypted display.)
The result of that would be fewer people using Linux. It would not necessarily translate into manufacturers making monitors for us.
But I tried to contact the people at Steve Jackson Games but hey still haven't gotten their shit back from Big Bro' who's analyzing it over 5 year old jelly donuts.
Maybe not, but they did get a six-figure settlement that turned them into a large ISP and sustained them through a dip in the gaming industry, allowing them to keep producing new material at a blistering pace while other companies were cutting back.
is for nobody to buy this shite. Then it will go away.
If every computer monitor manufacturer implements this, you will have two choices:
1) Buy this shite.
2) Don't buy anything.
If you choose the later, this shite won't go away; you will have gone away. I doubt the entire world is going to give up on computing, so your time would be better spent finding another way to fight this. Perhaps convincing a couple of manufacturers to continue to offer monitors that don't implement it, for instance.
What planet would that be? Certainly not ours, which is easily capable of sustaining a much larger population than currently exists.
People aren't starving because food can't be, or isn't being, grown for them; they're starving because of where they are in relation to the food.
The planet isn't overpopulated, some regions of it are. And there's no genetic modification to decrease infertility going on in those locations.
Did it ever occur to anyone that perhaps there's a REASON some people are infertile?
Yes; did it ever occur to you that those reasons can be fixed? It occurred to these doctors.
I might sound overly harsh, but if this continues, we'll have lots and lots of perfectly healthy, long-lived, incredibly weak and fragile human beings walking this planet.
The same argument could be, and has been, made about every medical advance from organ transplantation to doctors washing their hands before treating patients.
no, it's because companies are cheap, and don't see customers as people. rather, they are simply a number at the bottom of an excel spreadsheet somewhere. the quality of the service doesn't matter, it's how low you can bring the end user price to sucker them in.
But Jon's point was that other industries aren't like that, and this is in part because our industry is arrogant and elitist.
Don't you think that saying our companies don't see customers as people. rather, they are simply a number at the bottom of an excel spreadsheet somewhere. supports his argument? It's a rather arrogant, elitist attitude, wouldn't you agree?
I think it basically comes down to the fact that the cost of tech support is not factored into the cost of most products.
That's because we're arrogant enough to assume our products are usable without support, and elitist enough to not care whether the people who need support get it or not.
They're "lamerz" or "lusers", and should "RTFM" before they call support, right?
Jon has, as usual, hit it right square on the head for the exact reason that he's not a part of our industry.
Should the IT workers also make coffee for the taxpayers if their employers tell them to?
Absolutely. Those taxpayers pay your salary, and ultimately your job is to do what they think you should do.
If you don't like it, don't work for them. Choosing to work for the government carries a responsibility, because the government is of the people and for the people; the people are not for the government.
the customers can go elsewhere if they are unhappy with the service provided by his employer.
If you think people should leave their homes if they don't like the service they get from their government, you have bought into a very screwed up view of who works for whom in that relationship.
The US isn't about government on the people, to the people, and through the people, and taxpayers don't get to take their business elsewhere without leaving their homes. They're forced to pay for the service, literally at gunpoint (since if you don't pay your taxes, you'll wind up being forced to by the courts, and if you refuse, you'll be taken to jail by armed police officers.)
If the service is crappy, you can't just hang up the phone and dial a new company. Government IT employees who refuse to accept pages to fix after-hours problems are not just screwing their employers, they're screwing their friends, families, and neighbors.
The next morning when the DMV computers are down during the day because they weren't fixed the night before, it'll be their third grade gym teacher out there standing in line an extra two hours, or their high school sweetheart, or their dear old grandmother.
When you say "yeah, stick it to the man!", the man you're sticking it to is you; your tax dollars are paying for that, too. Ironically, so are the tax dollars of the Union stooges doing the malingering.
So now, thanks to the Union, those employees formerly "on-call" have taken to leaving their pagers at work. And if their managers raise havock about that, the employees can point to the contract and say, "You can't force me to take this home with me," and be right.
And so, the taxpayers of that community get crappy service from their employees. But that doesn't bother you, because you're Union.
The cigarette company executives, the marketting and public relations types and the scientists that aided the companies in the full knowledge that cigarette smoking was harmful should face trial for mass murder and crimes against humanity.
If you're going to prosecute everybody who knew smoking was harmful, you'll have a few million posthumous suicide convictions to hand out, too.
If anybody is reading this and wants some advice on how to deal with Anne Marie, here're my tips:
1) Remember, if you reply, you can't moderate.
2) "overrated" lowers the post, but doesn't lower your karma in pro-troll metamoderation.
3) "overrated" also doesn't change the "category" of the moderation, so if you can catch it when it's on "funny" you can get "-1 funny" with enough moderations.
Also, I shouldn't have to say this, but evidently I do; Anne Marie is a troll. "she" probably isn't even a she, and "she" probably surfs porn in between these diatribes. "she" is trying to get you to post lengthy replies, and laughing when you do. Stop taking "her" seriously and "she"'ll go away.
Slashdot Mirror
No, wait, Geocities gives you 7 MB of space, or is it 7.5 MB???
:-)
15 megs.
BTW, that took me 15 seconds to find out. Research, man, research!
Apple would be highly unlikely to help take potential Mac OS X seats away from themselves in such a way.
Apple makes a lot of money off of sales of their PowerPC-based hardware.
They don't make dick off of Mac OS, X or otherwise.
Very few people have as part of their PC-buying decision the mental exchange "should I use Linux or MacOS?" The markets don't overlap that much.
It would be in Apple's economic best interest to continue to support PowerPC Linux development, and to actively market their hardware to Linux users when they feel the OS is mature enough on their platform.
The only real change they need to make in the hardware to support this is the addition of another flippin' mouse button or two.
Of course, qmail and djbdns have no holes. Guaranteed.
You realize that good security practice dictates that we can now never accept anything you ever say on the subject of security again, right?
This code is of course the source that runs Slashdot, however 2.0 is far more advanced then the code you see here, to say nothing of utterly embarassing any other weblog software available for free, and written by us, and codenamed after a cartoon. Plans are already well underway to move Slashdot to the new code base soon enough.
And a hearty "STFU" to the folks who're always bitching that you don't release the current code fast enough.
Good job, Taco.
and if this whole crash is NT related like the article suggests, why hasnt anyone pointed out that you CANNOT run NT on a 386
For the same reason they haven't pointed out that you can't run NT on a 486; because it's not true.
-
Two thoughts:
1) The fact that you got moderated down to -1 as off-topic is a nice example of how you're wrong.
2) I would subjectively say that out of a typical month of meta-moderation, I have 27 days of at least 9 "fair", often all ten, and 3 days where about 8 are unfair, all of them up-mods of troll posts. I'd say meta-moderation is working pretty well.
-
Not only has this already been asked, but Cliff posted the story.
Nothing important has changed since that story was posted. Use the search feature at the bottom of the page.
If Linux is more common by that time, can we design something into it that is incompatible with the protection? (i.e. have the kernel fail to recognize the encryption handshake, meaning that in order to use Linux, you'll need an unencrypted display.)
The result of that would be fewer people using Linux. It would not necessarily translate into manufacturers making monitors for us.
-
But I tried to contact the people at Steve Jackson Games but hey still haven't gotten their shit back from Big Bro' who's analyzing it over 5 year old jelly donuts.
:-)
Maybe not, but they did get a six-figure settlement that turned them into a large ISP and sustained them through a dip in the gaming industry, allowing them to keep producing new material at a blistering pace while other companies were cutting back.
All in all, Uncle Sam did 'em a favor.
Email me, BH.
is for nobody to buy this shite. Then it will go away.
If every computer monitor manufacturer implements this, you will have two choices:
1) Buy this shite.
2) Don't buy anything.
If you choose the later, this shite won't go away; you will have gone away. I doubt the entire world is going to give up on computing, so your time would be better spent finding another way to fight this. Perhaps convincing a couple of manufacturers to continue to offer monitors that don't implement it, for instance.
-
Why do so many environmentalists hate people so much?
They think if all the people are killed off, they can buy their land really cheap.
Unfortunately, they don't realize the property values have to drop in order for this to happen. Once that gets out, it'll all blow over.
That, or they'll all die out, while the genetically-engineered supermen continue to evolve.
-
On an overpopulated planet.
What planet would that be? Certainly not ours, which is easily capable of sustaining a much larger population than currently exists.
People aren't starving because food can't be, or isn't being, grown for them; they're starving because of where they are in relation to the food.
The planet isn't overpopulated, some regions of it are. And there's no genetic modification to decrease infertility going on in those locations.
Did it ever occur to anyone that perhaps there's a REASON some people are infertile?
Yes; did it ever occur to you that those reasons can be fixed? It occurred to these doctors.
I might sound overly harsh, but if this continues, we'll have lots and lots of perfectly healthy, long-lived, incredibly weak and fragile human beings walking this planet.
The same argument could be, and has been, made about every medical advance from organ transplantation to doctors washing their hands before treating patients.
-
So what exactly is the use or point of a book addressing these copiously documented and discussed topics in the particular context of the internet?
To feed the obsession of people who compulsively read books on pop psychology, natch.
-
no, it's because companies are cheap, and don't see customers as people. rather, they are simply a number at the bottom of an excel spreadsheet somewhere. the quality of the service doesn't matter, it's how low you can bring the end user price to sucker them in.
But Jon's point was that other industries aren't like that, and this is in part because our industry is arrogant and elitist.
Don't you think that saying our companies don't see customers as people. rather, they are simply a number at the bottom of an excel spreadsheet somewhere. supports his argument? It's a rather arrogant, elitist attitude, wouldn't you agree?
-
I think it basically comes down to the fact that the cost of tech support is not factored into the cost of most products.
That's because we're arrogant enough to assume our products are usable without support, and elitist enough to not care whether the people who need support get it or not.
They're "lamerz" or "lusers", and should "RTFM" before they call support, right?
Jon has, as usual, hit it right square on the head for the exact reason that he's not a part of our industry.
You can't see the forest because you're a tree.
-
Should the IT workers also make coffee for the taxpayers if their employers tell them to?
Absolutely. Those taxpayers pay your salary, and ultimately your job is to do what they think you should do.
If you don't like it, don't work for them. Choosing to work for the government carries a responsibility, because the government is of the people and for the people; the people are not for the government.
-
the customers can go elsewhere if they are unhappy with the service provided by his employer.
If you think people should leave their homes if they don't like the service they get from their government, you have bought into a very screwed up view of who works for whom in that relationship.
The US isn't about government on the people, to the people, and through the people, and taxpayers don't get to take their business elsewhere without leaving their homes. They're forced to pay for the service, literally at gunpoint (since if you don't pay your taxes, you'll wind up being forced to by the courts, and if you refuse, you'll be taken to jail by armed police officers.)
If the service is crappy, you can't just hang up the phone and dial a new company. Government IT employees who refuse to accept pages to fix after-hours problems are not just screwing their employers, they're screwing their friends, families, and neighbors.
The next morning when the DMV computers are down during the day because they weren't fixed the night before, it'll be their third grade gym teacher out there standing in line an extra two hours, or their high school sweetheart, or their dear old grandmother.
When you say "yeah, stick it to the man!", the man you're sticking it to is you; your tax dollars are paying for that, too. Ironically, so are the tax dollars of the Union stooges doing the malingering.
-
That's not his problem. It's his employer's.
No, it's the customers' problem.
-
Oh, OK, thanks, I was wondering.
-
So now, thanks to the Union, those employees formerly "on-call" have taken to leaving their pagers at work. And if their managers raise havock about that, the employees can point to the contract and say, "You can't force me to take this home with me," and be right.
And so, the taxpayers of that community get crappy service from their employees. But that doesn't bother you, because you're Union.
-
The cigarette company executives, the marketting and public relations types and the scientists that aided the companies in the full knowledge that cigarette smoking was harmful should face trial for mass murder and crimes against humanity.
If you're going to prosecute everybody who knew smoking was harmful, you'll have a few million posthumous suicide convictions to hand out, too.
-
If you choose to use a newsreader that requires you to wait for message headers to sync before posting, you have only yourself to blame.
-
If anybody is reading this and wants some advice on how to deal with Anne Marie, here're my tips:
1) Remember, if you reply, you can't moderate.
2) "overrated" lowers the post, but doesn't lower your karma in pro-troll metamoderation.
3) "overrated" also doesn't change the "category" of the moderation, so if you can catch it when it's on "funny" you can get "-1 funny" with enough moderations.
Also, I shouldn't have to say this, but evidently I do; Anne Marie is a troll. "she" probably isn't even a she, and "she" probably surfs porn in between these diatribes. "she" is trying to get you to post lengthy replies, and laughing when you do. Stop taking "her" seriously and "she"'ll go away.
-
Yeah, I noticed two things right away:
:-)
1) I was really stupid in 1995.
2) I found myself wanting to reply further to some of these discussions. It was really hard not to.
-