The Hulk IS a cartoon, or more precisely, a comic book character. (Cartoons are essentially animated comics.) The original comics books WEREN'T interested in following the rules of gravity, acceleration, and momentum, or any of the other rules of physics, biology or simple reality either. Putting the Hulk on film, you have one of two options: ignore physics and stay true to the source comic books, or alter the story until it's semi-realisitic but no longer bears any resemblance to the original source. The movie chose the former path; the television show veered more towards the latter. (The television show was likely influenced as much by difficulties in filming as much as artistic concerns, however.)
I'm GLAD the movie stayed true to the comic books. I'd have absolutely hated a Hulk who was little more than an oddly colored version of a WWF wrestler.
Yes, website defacement and Linux security are two different issues. We're definitely comparing oranges to penguins here.
Most of the comments about Windows insecurity were in the context of viruses and worms, not direct attack from a [(cr)h]acker. A group of people attacking web sites has a limited effect on the rest of the web. Even taking down, say, Google, wouldn't have that much of an effect on the 'net as a whole. Sobig.F has severely hampered email for everyone, even those who do not use Windows.
It might be possible to write an effective worm that attacks Linux machines, but doing so is likely orders of magnitude more difficult than doing so for Windows. And web site vulnerabilities, while somewhat troubling in their own right, don't change that fact at all.
Couldn't agree more. Just sent the following email to intuitor (author of the Hulk article linked above):
You closed your recent Hulk article by saying "We went to see the fantasy of a likeable nerdy guy reluctantly turn into an 8 foot high science project and educate the mindless, heartless cool guys who had ignorantly messed with him. What we got was a cross between King Cong and Godzilla. Not only did the moviemakers give us wrong physics, they gave us the wrong movie."
You couldn't be more wrong. I can only assume you're basing your expectations on the syndicated television show staring Bill Bixby and Lou Ferrigno and that you're unfamiliar with the comic books themselves. I was profoundly disappointed in the movie. The plot was disjointed and weak. The dialog was inferior to that normally found in poorly dubbed martial arts movies. The only thing they got RIGHT was the size and strength (and color) of the character.
The Hulk is SUPPOSED to throw tanks around. He's SUPPOSED to leap thousands of feet through the air. He's SUPPOSED to have missiles bounce off his chest. Yes, the physics are all wrong. But like almost all comic books, The Hulk isn't science fiction. It's fantasy. And you might as well calculate the amount of energy it would take to turn a Hobbit invisible and complain that a tiny ring would be incapable of containing that much energy as complain about the strength or density of the Hulk.
Certainly, no system is foolproof. All software more complicated than "Hello world!" has bugs (and half the "Hello world!" programs do!) However, there's a reason that doors and windows are manufactured with locks. MS manufactured their software with no locks.
In this particular case, the problem isn't an unlocked door. SoBig.F really isn't MS's fault. But ILoveYou and similar are a direct result of the way MS designed their software. They deserve to shoulder a significant share of the blame.
The question isn't about firearm homicide. The question is, do firearms lead to more crime? Is it really any worse to be held up at gunpoint in the US rather than at knife point in the UK? Certainly, there is more gun-related crime in the US than in other countries where guns are less common. But when guns aren't available, people turn to alternate means. So banning guns isn't an effective solution to crime, and it hinders law abiding citizens in their ability to defend themselves.
As for the US incarceration levels, it's shameful but true. It can be attributed directly to our misguided war on drugs, not to higher levels of violent crime. (However, much of the violent crime, particularly gun homicides, are the result of the War on Drugs.)
Yes, the comment is in reference to desktops but it's in reference to desktops in a corporate environment. If you're a company deploying Linux in the US, you buy Red Hat. I'd bet that they have 90% or more of the corporate Linux market.
I don't know if SuSE is in the same position in Europe or not, so I don't know if the quote is accurate over there. It's accurate over here.
(And for what it's worth, I don't run either. I run Mandrake desktops and Debian servers on my LAN. But I'm not a corporate customer either.)
While I agree that users are more often at fault than tools, to say that they don't screw up is simply false. Software tools, at least, have bugs. They do things they aren't supposed to do, even when being used exactly as advertised.
I have no idea what happened to parent commenter's system, so you may very well be correct in this case that he improperly configured LILO. That's the case more often than not. But not always.
Yes, hand gun deaths are higher. That fact, while true, is also irrelevant. The statement was "...a much lower crime and murder rate...," not a lower handgun death rate. Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it?
And these countries have a much lower crime and murder rate than the USA.
Really? Then you wouldn't have much trouble proving that, would you? There should be plenty of hard stats on the 'net. I'll check back in a bit and see whay you found.
I just spent the last week and weekend moving a small (just under 100 work stations) LAN from aboard a US Navy carrier to our new offices. We actually have two independent LANs (one classified, one unclassified) with four servers, and all servers and work stations run NT.(I'm assigned to an Admiral's staff and we disembarked while the carrier is going into the shipyards.) Part of the reason we're still running NT is that we have Racore fiber optic NICs and there are no Win2K compatible drivers for them.
There are PLENTY of NT lans still out there, and there are plenty of hardware issues. This is real world stuff, not theoretical.
The slippery slope fallacy is NAMED for the real ones. It's a metaphor.
The literal meaning of "beg the question" isn't being used. (In fact, the literal meaning is a bit non-sensical.) It's being used as a phrase, and it's being used incorrectly.
The hue and cry of Christian's 'the number of the beast' references beg the question:
It does no such thing. To "beg the question" is a logical fallacy where one assumes the very point one is trying to make. Example: The bible must be true because it was written by men of God, and they wouldn't lie.
The hue and cry may very well raise the question, but it doesn't beg it. </pedant>
Re:Commander Keen cutting edge?
on
Masters of Doom
·
· Score: 1
Uh, the question is whether game speed is programmed in or merely dictated by the speed of the hardware. The issue is if the game will be too fast to be playable, not whether the hardware is capable of running the game.
Re:Not true about Commander Keen
on
Masters of Doom
·
· Score: 1
I still have the Gravis Gamepad stored in my junk section amongst a handful of 20 Meg hard drives, 486 motherboards and ISA video cards.
Re:One of the things I find annoying...
on
Masters of Doom
·
· Score: 1
Actaully, Wolfenstein was the second. The first was a Heretic like game. I'm thinking it was called Catacomb? Somebody help me out here.
Re:Pffft .... Commander Keen
on
Masters of Doom
·
· Score: 1
Says who? God knows I wasted enough hours playing them.
Principled indeed. A subject SCO is obviously completely ignorant on.
At SCO's next press conference, someone should ask them if they're willing to indemnify purchasers of OpenServer in the event that Samba is found to have copyright infringing code and someone else begins to ask for a licensing fee.
While there are some simularities (ie both depend upon gas changing states as you point out), there are significant differences. A refrigerator or AC is an active system - it uses a compressor to power the system. A heat pipe is a passive system. In essence, it's powered by the heat it's dissapating.
I'm convinced that no modifications will be necessary - I don't believe SCO will be able to prove it's case at all. However, in the remote chance that they do, you're right that the damage will quickly be coded around.
Even when it's against someone "evil", like Microsoft. Which I don't believe for a second. Evilness doesn't exist, only ignorance.
I'll agree that Evil doesn't exist, in the sense of a disembodied force or being. However, evil certainly does exist. Microsoft isn't ignorant. They are well aware of what they are doing - it's a deliberate strategy. Microsoft wants to rule the IT market, and could care less about the free market or fair trade. I call that "evil." I call it that because of it's effect. You can call it something else, if you like, but then we're merely arguing semantics.
Evil, (one of) thy name(s) is Microsoft. For the moment. In a past life, it was called IBM (now one of the good guys.) In the future, it'll be something else. But evil does exist.
Contrary to the popular belief, the SCO case never was and never will be about the GPL.
The original suit wasn't about the GPL. However, one of the specific points of of IBM's countersuit is that SCO distributed Linux under the GPL and thus removed any claim they may have otherwise have had to exclusive ownership of parts of the code in the Linux kernel. This IS a direct test of the GPL, and it will likely be one of the first issues decided since, if it stands, it makes all of the other issues in the suit irrelevant.
Slashdot Mirror
The Hulk IS a cartoon, or more precisely, a comic book character. (Cartoons are essentially animated comics.) The original comics books WEREN'T interested in following the rules of gravity, acceleration, and momentum, or any of the other rules of physics, biology or simple reality either. Putting the Hulk on film, you have one of two options: ignore physics and stay true to the source comic books, or alter the story until it's semi-realisitic but no longer bears any resemblance to the original source. The movie chose the former path; the television show veered more towards the latter. (The television show was likely influenced as much by difficulties in filming as much as artistic concerns, however.)
I'm GLAD the movie stayed true to the comic books. I'd have absolutely hated a Hulk who was little more than an oddly colored version of a WWF wrestler.
Yes, website defacement and Linux security are two different issues. We're definitely comparing oranges to penguins here.
Most of the comments about Windows insecurity were in the context of viruses and worms, not direct attack from a [(cr)h]acker. A group of people attacking web sites has a limited effect on the rest of the web. Even taking down, say, Google, wouldn't have that much of an effect on the 'net as a whole. Sobig.F has severely hampered email for everyone, even those who do not use Windows.
It might be possible to write an effective worm that attacks Linux machines, but doing so is likely orders of magnitude more difficult than doing so for Windows. And web site vulnerabilities, while somewhat troubling in their own right, don't change that fact at all.
Couldn't agree more. Just sent the following email to intuitor (author of the Hulk article linked above):
You closed your recent Hulk article by saying "We went to see the fantasy of a likeable nerdy guy reluctantly turn into an 8 foot high science project and educate the mindless, heartless cool guys who had ignorantly messed with him. What we got was a cross between King Cong and Godzilla. Not only did the moviemakers give us wrong physics, they gave us the wrong movie."
You couldn't be more wrong. I can only assume you're basing your expectations on the syndicated television show staring Bill Bixby and Lou Ferrigno and that you're unfamiliar with the comic books themselves. I was profoundly disappointed in the movie. The plot was disjointed and weak. The dialog was inferior to that normally found in poorly dubbed martial arts movies. The only thing they got RIGHT was the size and strength (and color) of the character.
The Hulk is SUPPOSED to throw tanks around. He's SUPPOSED to leap thousands of feet through the air. He's SUPPOSED to have missiles bounce off his chest. Yes, the physics are all wrong. But like almost all comic books, The Hulk isn't science fiction. It's fantasy. And you might as well calculate the amount of energy it would take to turn a Hobbit invisible and complain that a tiny ring would be incapable of containing that much energy as complain about the strength or density of the Hulk.
Certainly, no system is foolproof. All software more complicated than "Hello world!" has bugs (and half the "Hello world!" programs do!) However, there's a reason that doors and windows are manufactured with locks. MS manufactured their software with no locks.
In this particular case, the problem isn't an unlocked door. SoBig.F really isn't MS's fault. But ILoveYou and similar are a direct result of the way MS designed their software. They deserve to shoulder a significant share of the blame.
The question isn't about firearm homicide. The question is, do firearms lead to more crime? Is it really any worse to be held up at gunpoint in the US rather than at knife point in the UK? Certainly, there is more gun-related crime in the US than in other countries where guns are less common. But when guns aren't available, people turn to alternate means. So banning guns isn't an effective solution to crime, and it hinders law abiding citizens in their ability to defend themselves.
As for the US incarceration levels, it's shameful but true. It can be attributed directly to our misguided war on drugs, not to higher levels of violent crime. (However, much of the violent crime, particularly gun homicides, are the result of the War on Drugs.)
Yes. They just touched a lot more than most people.
Yes, the comment is in reference to desktops but it's in reference to desktops in a corporate environment. If you're a company deploying Linux in the US, you buy Red Hat. I'd bet that they have 90% or more of the corporate Linux market.
I don't know if SuSE is in the same position in Europe or not, so I don't know if the quote is accurate over there. It's accurate over here.
(And for what it's worth, I don't run either. I run Mandrake desktops and Debian servers on my LAN. But I'm not a corporate customer either.)
While I agree that users are more often at fault than tools, to say that they don't screw up is simply false. Software tools, at least, have bugs. They do things they aren't supposed to do, even when being used exactly as advertised.
I have no idea what happened to parent commenter's system, so you may very well be correct in this case that he improperly configured LILO. That's the case more often than not. But not always.
Yes, hand gun deaths are higher. That fact, while true, is also irrelevant. The statement was "...a much lower crime and murder rate...," not a lower handgun death rate. Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it?
And these countries have a much lower crime and murder rate than the USA.
Really? Then you wouldn't have much trouble proving that, would you? There should be plenty of hard stats on the 'net. I'll check back in a bit and see whay you found.
I just spent the last week and weekend moving a small (just under 100 work stations) LAN from aboard a US Navy carrier to our new offices. We actually have two independent LANs (one classified, one unclassified) with four servers, and all servers and work stations run NT.(I'm assigned to an Admiral's staff and we disembarked while the carrier is going into the shipyards.) Part of the reason we're still running NT is that we have Racore fiber optic NICs and there are no Win2K compatible drivers for them.
There are PLENTY of NT lans still out there, and there are plenty of hardware issues. This is real world stuff, not theoretical.
The slippery slope fallacy is NAMED for the real ones. It's a metaphor.
The literal meaning of "beg the question" isn't being used. (In fact, the literal meaning is a bit non-sensical.) It's being used as a phrase, and it's being used incorrectly.
The hue and cry of Christian's 'the number of the beast' references beg the question:
It does no such thing. To "beg the question" is a logical fallacy where one assumes the very point one is trying to make. Example: The bible must be true because it was written by men of God, and they wouldn't lie.
The hue and cry may very well raise the question, but it doesn't beg it.
</pedant>
Uh, the question is whether game speed is programmed in or merely dictated by the speed of the hardware. The issue is if the game will be too fast to be playable, not whether the hardware is capable of running the game.
I still have the Gravis Gamepad stored in my junk section amongst a handful of 20 Meg hard drives, 486 motherboards and ISA video cards.
Actaully, Wolfenstein was the second. The first was a Heretic like game. I'm thinking it was called Catacomb? Somebody help me out here.
Says who? God knows I wasted enough hours playing them.
Principled indeed. A subject SCO is obviously completely ignorant on.
At SCO's next press conference, someone should ask them if they're willing to indemnify purchasers of OpenServer in the event that Samba is found to have copyright infringing code and someone else begins to ask for a licensing fee.
How about: //Verify sane business model.
ASSERT(Corporatism != FreeMarket);
While there are some simularities (ie both depend upon gas changing states as you point out), there are significant differences. A refrigerator or AC is an active system - it uses a compressor to power the system. A heat pipe is a passive system. In essence, it's powered by the heat it's dissapating.
Well, it could also be parsed as
Corporatism = !FreeMarket;
although that should most likely be a statement of equality, not assignment:
Corporatism == !FreeMarket;
Yes, I'm aware of how the original quote goes. I prefer this version.
I'm convinced that no modifications will be necessary - I don't believe SCO will be able to prove it's case at all. However, in the remote chance that they do, you're right that the damage will quickly be coded around.
Even when it's against someone "evil", like Microsoft. Which I don't believe for a second. Evilness doesn't exist, only ignorance.
I'll agree that Evil doesn't exist, in the sense of a disembodied force or being. However, evil certainly does exist. Microsoft isn't ignorant. They are well aware of what they are doing - it's a deliberate strategy. Microsoft wants to rule the IT market, and could care less about the free market or fair trade. I call that "evil." I call it that because of it's effect. You can call it something else, if you like, but then we're merely arguing semantics.
Evil, (one of) thy name(s) is Microsoft. For the moment. In a past life, it was called IBM (now one of the good guys.) In the future, it'll be something else. But evil does exist.
Contrary to the popular belief, the SCO case never was and never will be about the GPL.
The original suit wasn't about the GPL. However, one of the specific points of of IBM's countersuit is that SCO distributed Linux under the GPL and thus removed any claim they may have otherwise have had to exclusive ownership of parts of the code in the Linux kernel. This IS a direct test of the GPL, and it will likely be one of the first issues decided since, if it stands, it makes all of the other issues in the suit irrelevant.