Yeah but who is the "artist"? Not the lapdancer miming to the pitch-corrected vocals sung by unseen Fat Peggy who used Balding Harris's lyrics? If there's no art there can be no artist, and in the "top 40" you referred to there is definitely no art at all.
I can definitely hear a big difference between vinyl records recorded from analog audio tape, and digital recordings in digital formats such as 16-bit audio CD. There is a massive difference in the emotional content of the music. The 100% pure analog recordings do have a "noise floor", and there's probably also minor turntable rumble as well, but there is also a real presence in the music - as if it's being played right there. It's soft and pain-free. But CDs just sound crap. I won't even go near lossy compression formats. And many people are now saying that digital music is being mastered too loud (not a problem with analog because analog does not have 0dB "brick wall"). DO YOU HEAR? You probably don't because your (modern) stereo system is crap. But I do, because my amp and speakers were made in 1974, and they show up every little detail in the sound.
So yes, the guy has a point but as a consumer he needs to be more vocal about his preferred music distribution format. There are still many of us buying new and old vinyl.
1: Dual wide screen monitors at 1900x1200 resolutions
Why not? It only takes a bit of configuration of your GUI.
2: Play a popular game like World of Warcraft without first having to compile something or manually tweak a configuration file.
Why not? You should be able to set it up with Wine emulator.
3: Plugin a wireless network adapter and have it "just work"
Many of them will work out of the box without manual configuration. Look up the PRISM project. I know the DamnSmallLinux people report a lot of success with different wireless cards working out of the box. If it doesn't work out of the box, you can configure just about any wireless card using the Windows driver and Ndiswrapper (taking all of 3 seconds to set up, once).
.. by introducing principles in games like ZZT, for instance. ZZT came with ZZT-OOP (ZZT Object Oriented Programming Language) so that you could create your own rooms with puzzles involving monsters that interact with the player and other monsters (or other objects). Each monster could be programmed with its own set of instructions (where it's told to start or react to specific events). ZZT is a great teaching and learning tool.
I have 2 decades of programming experience (starting with BASIC on an 8-bit Amstrad), and the stuff I did as a child left the deepest impression (although it was, unfortunately, the BASIC language). So teach them when they're young.
Don't think twice - just go ahead and write the letter. If you don't do it you'll only think about writing it again, tomorrow and the day after, until you have your little revenge. Leave out the threats to kill though..
You don't agree this is how OOP works stevieboy? Objects send messages to each other. Read the article again, and think twice about this kind of stunt in the future, because I've got plenty on you and will drag you through the mud.
This is really good. You could use this technology to eliminate the need for the driver, and the car would drive itself safely to a selected destination, following the rules of the road and brakeing for pedestrians, etc. It's like the ZZT or Megazeux games.
I don't have a TV set, and I haven't had one for over a year. I am not any less informed or current than the next man - the internet is a better source for news. I am a a lot less "disinformed" though. For instance, at the moment in the UK most are going through a spell of carefully engineered confusion, where they consider whether "people traffickers" are as "bad" as slave drivers once were. Naturally, I'm not going to consider any such useless questions without the benefit of independent expert and documentary evidence. It's all just propaganda and you're better off without it. Why give the government (and it is just the government and its agencies) a seat in your living room to lecture at you? Chuck it away. Give it a good kicking so it can't harm anyone else.
I want to join in - I hope MS or Google contacts me soon to bribe me to astroturf for them here on Slashdot, as they appear to have paid nearly 400 others to do this already.
There is no way that I'm going to volunteer for any testing. I don't play games with my health - it's the most important thing I have. However, there are many people who will be willing subjects, for a reasonable fee. It's possible to hire the subjects from the same pool that the pharma industry uses.
No, I don't mean like Aspartame. How much Aspartame do you have to eat before it kills you? Probably much more than you put in your coffee 6 times a day.
Do you notice any nausea or loss of consciousness, immediately following the consumption of Aspartame? I think you probably don't. I don't dispute that it probably does harm your liver, but unless it does so in an immediate way with serious, obvious effects (of the type your general practitioner would notice and want to "treat" with conventional medical techniques such as drugs or surgery, not a research lab or toxicity expert), there is no political impetus from a grassroots level to take it off the shelves.
I personally am fully aware of the risks of Aspartame, and never consume it, but most people don't care and therefore neither do the legislators.
I understand what you're saying but there's no way your gut can tell you whether the food you're eating has some GM ingredient in it (and if you're living in a Western country, it probably does). What I mean is, it tastes the same as non-GM maize, wheat, barley or whatever.
From those documents, it seems that there is "some toxicity" in rats, when they are fed with this particular GM product. It also appears that the company Monsanto has been deceptive in its presentations to German officials and in their publicly released research conclusions. It is particularly serious, that reports have allegedly been "retyped" in the light of evidence found by Greenpeace.
However, it is also apparent that no experiments have been carried out to investigate this product's effect on human subjects. The toxicity symptoms found in rats should have been a springboard for further investigation, but it seems it was not (unless this has been covered up).
Unfortunately these days corporate dishonesty is not seen as unusual or unacceptable in any way, so what we need is smoking gun evidence of toxicity in human beings, exceeding such toxicity as may be found naturally in other foodstuffs.
I agree. But I wouldn't want any revision of copyright laws to have any kind of global scope whatsoever. The problem is mostly the dodgy legal system in the USA, so the its partly contained for the time being.
I agree it does seem a bit too convenient that there are all these anonymous proxy servers out there. You don't know who's running them or why. I tend to assume that the next guy is not necessarily a total idiot - it could be a trap.
I use Google every day, but I wouldn't trust that company as far as I could throw a chair. Anyway, using my method of anonymous browsing, there's no trust involved whatsoever. It means that with your fake/borrowed IP, you could be anywhere.
The separation of powers is a nonsense. You can't make any meaningful distinction between the so-called "judiciary" and the executive. EVERY so-called human right is abrogable (the world isn't a perfect place as you'll be sure to remind us), and isn't that just the way you like it? How else would you deal with those ENEMIES OF FREEDOM who don't like you and your fellow far right extremists?
It's the executive that has the muscle and gets to point the baton. All it has to do is say: "we were fighting against anarchy/terrorism/ant-Patriot Act/HATE SPEECH so the Constitution/Human Rights Act does not apply" and there go your civil/human rights. Monopoly on violent force is the only real principle that remains.
So don't come up here with your lies about the "judiciary". Without the power to be a genuine check and balance against executive abuses and excesses, it's just a toy rubber stamp. We're not in the 18th century, so why should we be interested in Whiggish crap if the powers that be aren't either. Unless you're in the elite, they consider you as eligible for a good kicking as any commoner, so please check again whose side you think you're on.
OK, use a laptop. Connect to an open AP. Then log on to someone else's server with open telnet port. From there use a script with elinks/lynx/wget so that all requests for web content are made to Google's cache. I think this is reasonably safe.
I like NetBSD a lot, but to be fair it's had more than its fair share of problems politics-wise. It seems that however sincere or however long they've been involved, everyone is fair game for personal attacks at NetBSD. I would love to get involved with NetBSD, but it appears that recently the tone of the project changed, and these days they're less open to involvement of the type you described (i.e. code optimisations) than they once were.
I totally agree. I know exactly the kind of person you're talking about. In the end they drag the project down because the good guys leave. They're usually very good at sucking up to the project management though. So if you're a leader and you can spot these assholes, you're a top leader. I think you seem to know the runnings very well, and your works will be good.
I agree it is much better than having close legal scrutiny of individually crafted terms and conditions, but I wonder what would happen in the following situation.
Suppose I build someone else's GPL'd code without giving proper attribution (an abhorrent thing to do anyway) and make a broad statement such as "it's all my work" when selling the compiled, installed binary to a client. The client adduces from my statement that it's all legit, and hands me the cash. I go on my merry way and milk the reputation I've accrued with this deal, with more contracts of a similar nature with other parties. One day, an open source software dev Googles his own project to find out what the commercial sector is selling, in the same field as his open source software project. Looking a little deeper, he finds it striking just how many similarities exist between their shiny, glossy packages and the functionality provided by his own little interface or library or whatever. He obtains a copy of what they're selling, and runs it through a debugger, and finds that by an amazing coincidence, the exact names he has given to various objects, functions and procedures are found in the commercial packages.
So who does he seek out for compensation? The self-employed obscure contractor who nobody knows, and who's based in God-knows-where or the up and coming household name (i.e. the small-to-medium-sized firm)? How does he even know that the local big boy hired the contractor who sold his own code to them under false pretences? He doesn't know, so he writes to everyone: the retailer, the wholesaler, the software company - everyone. They all write back to him saying we're terribly sorry we didn't know. We hired a guy who said the work was his. So will you take $5000 and be cool? Of course the open source guy is reasonable and he agrees. But because money doesn't grow on trees and they have to justify every penny, the companies then seek out that Joe Bloggs who sold them the software. They want the cash they paid him for the software, and to recover all the compensation they had to pay out. Of course he can't pay, so they are forced to write off the debt..
Wouldn't it have been better to look for a proper dev in the first place, than to advertise for solutions? The best place to look would be open source, in case someone talented has already produced what you need for your company.
Slashdot Mirror
The Illuminati freakshow has already done this.
Yeah but who is the "artist"? Not the lapdancer miming to the pitch-corrected vocals sung by unseen Fat Peggy who used Balding Harris's lyrics? If there's no art there can be no artist, and in the "top 40" you referred to there is definitely no art at all.
So yes, the guy has a point but as a consumer he needs to be more vocal about his preferred music distribution format. There are still many of us buying new and old vinyl.
Why not? It only takes a bit of configuration of your GUI.
2: Play a popular game like World of Warcraft without first having to compile something or manually tweak a configuration file.
Why not? You should be able to set it up with Wine emulator.
3: Plugin a wireless network adapter and have it "just work"
Many of them will work out of the box without manual configuration. Look up the PRISM project. I know the DamnSmallLinux people report a lot of success with different wireless cards working out of the box. If it doesn't work out of the box, you can configure just about any wireless card using the Windows driver and Ndiswrapper (taking all of 3 seconds to set up, once).
.. by introducing principles in games like ZZT, for instance. ZZT came with ZZT-OOP (ZZT Object Oriented Programming Language) so that you could create your own rooms with puzzles involving monsters that interact with the player and other monsters (or other objects). Each monster could be programmed with its own set of instructions (where it's told to start or react to specific events). ZZT is a great teaching and learning tool. I have 2 decades of programming experience (starting with BASIC on an 8-bit Amstrad), and the stuff I did as a child left the deepest impression (although it was, unfortunately, the BASIC language). So teach them when they're young.
Poison pen is never a problem for me.
You don't agree this is how OOP works stevieboy? Objects send messages to each other. Read the article again, and think twice about this kind of stunt in the future, because I've got plenty on you and will drag you through the mud.
This is really good. You could use this technology to eliminate the need for the driver, and the car would drive itself safely to a selected destination, following the rules of the road and brakeing for pedestrians, etc. It's like the ZZT or Megazeux games.
I don't have a TV set, and I haven't had one for over a year. I am not any less informed or current than the next man - the internet is a better source for news. I am a a lot less "disinformed" though. For instance, at the moment in the UK most are going through a spell of carefully engineered confusion, where they consider whether "people traffickers" are as "bad" as slave drivers once were. Naturally, I'm not going to consider any such useless questions without the benefit of independent expert and documentary evidence. It's all just propaganda and you're better off without it. Why give the government (and it is just the government and its agencies) a seat in your living room to lecture at you? Chuck it away. Give it a good kicking so it can't harm anyone else.
I want to join in - I hope MS or Google contacts me soon to bribe me to astroturf for them here on Slashdot, as they appear to have paid nearly 400 others to do this already.
There is no way that I'm going to volunteer for any testing. I don't play games with my health - it's the most important thing I have. However, there are many people who will be willing subjects, for a reasonable fee. It's possible to hire the subjects from the same pool that the pharma industry uses.
Do you notice any nausea or loss of consciousness, immediately following the consumption of Aspartame? I think you probably don't. I don't dispute that it probably does harm your liver, but unless it does so in an immediate way with serious, obvious effects (of the type your general practitioner would notice and want to "treat" with conventional medical techniques such as drugs or surgery, not a research lab or toxicity expert), there is no political impetus from a grassroots level to take it off the shelves.
I personally am fully aware of the risks of Aspartame, and never consume it, but most people don't care and therefore neither do the legislators.
I understand what you're saying but there's no way your gut can tell you whether the food you're eating has some GM ingredient in it (and if you're living in a Western country, it probably does). What I mean is, it tastes the same as non-GM maize, wheat, barley or whatever.
However, it is also apparent that no experiments have been carried out to investigate this product's effect on human subjects. The toxicity symptoms found in rats should have been a springboard for further investigation, but it seems it was not (unless this has been covered up).
Unfortunately these days corporate dishonesty is not seen as unusual or unacceptable in any way, so what we need is smoking gun evidence of toxicity in human beings, exceeding such toxicity as may be found naturally in other foodstuffs.
I agree. But I wouldn't want any revision of copyright laws to have any kind of global scope whatsoever. The problem is mostly the dodgy legal system in the USA, so the its partly contained for the time being.
.. and that's not going to happen.
Mission accomplished, in terms of writing a PhD proposal that wouldn't seem dull.
I agree it does seem a bit too convenient that there are all these anonymous proxy servers out there. You don't know who's running them or why. I tend to assume that the next guy is not necessarily a total idiot - it could be a trap.
I use Google every day, but I wouldn't trust that company as far as I could throw a chair. Anyway, using my method of anonymous browsing, there's no trust involved whatsoever. It means that with your fake/borrowed IP, you could be anywhere.
It's the executive that has the muscle and gets to point the baton. All it has to do is say: "we were fighting against anarchy/terrorism/ant-Patriot Act/HATE SPEECH so the Constitution/Human Rights Act does not apply" and there go your civil/human rights. Monopoly on violent force is the only real principle that remains.
So don't come up here with your lies about the "judiciary". Without the power to be a genuine check and balance against executive abuses and excesses, it's just a toy rubber stamp. We're not in the 18th century, so why should we be interested in Whiggish crap if the powers that be aren't either. Unless you're in the elite, they consider you as eligible for a good kicking as any commoner, so please check again whose side you think you're on.
OK, use a laptop. Connect to an open AP. Then log on to someone else's server with open telnet port. From there use a script with elinks/lynx/wget so that all requests for web content are made to Google's cache. I think this is reasonably safe.
Oh yeah? Well who gets to decide whether it's hate speech and whether they're eligible for a good kicking? You?
I like NetBSD a lot, but to be fair it's had more than its fair share of problems politics-wise. It seems that however sincere or however long they've been involved, everyone is fair game for personal attacks at NetBSD. I would love to get involved with NetBSD, but it appears that recently the tone of the project changed, and these days they're less open to involvement of the type you described (i.e. code optimisations) than they once were.
I totally agree. I know exactly the kind of person you're talking about. In the end they drag the project down because the good guys leave. They're usually very good at sucking up to the project management though. So if you're a leader and you can spot these assholes, you're a top leader. I think you seem to know the runnings very well, and your works will be good.
I agree it is much better than having close legal scrutiny of individually crafted terms and conditions, but I wonder what would happen in the following situation. Suppose I build someone else's GPL'd code without giving proper attribution (an abhorrent thing to do anyway) and make a broad statement such as "it's all my work" when selling the compiled, installed binary to a client. The client adduces from my statement that it's all legit, and hands me the cash. I go on my merry way and milk the reputation I've accrued with this deal, with more contracts of a similar nature with other parties. One day, an open source software dev Googles his own project to find out what the commercial sector is selling, in the same field as his open source software project. Looking a little deeper, he finds it striking just how many similarities exist between their shiny, glossy packages and the functionality provided by his own little interface or library or whatever. He obtains a copy of what they're selling, and runs it through a debugger, and finds that by an amazing coincidence, the exact names he has given to various objects, functions and procedures are found in the commercial packages. So who does he seek out for compensation? The self-employed obscure contractor who nobody knows, and who's based in God-knows-where or the up and coming household name (i.e. the small-to-medium-sized firm)? How does he even know that the local big boy hired the contractor who sold his own code to them under false pretences? He doesn't know, so he writes to everyone: the retailer, the wholesaler, the software company - everyone. They all write back to him saying we're terribly sorry we didn't know. We hired a guy who said the work was his. So will you take $5000 and be cool? Of course the open source guy is reasonable and he agrees. But because money doesn't grow on trees and they have to justify every penny, the companies then seek out that Joe Bloggs who sold them the software. They want the cash they paid him for the software, and to recover all the compensation they had to pay out. Of course he can't pay, so they are forced to write off the debt.. Wouldn't it have been better to look for a proper dev in the first place, than to advertise for solutions? The best place to look would be open source, in case someone talented has already produced what you need for your company.
A saucepan is electrically conductive too, but that doesn't mean it applies an electrical current to cook your food.