Not to mention having to hold it up a bit, but angled down while taking a dump... so it doesn't droop in the water... ...to say nothing of plopping down on a chair and accidentally sitting on the family jewels.
You know, Women get to show off their external reproductive organs... Most jeans & pants don't accommodate male genitalia well. I mean, women's clothes are made to fit their bosoms, but men's seem to be made as if their organ doesn't exist at all. A spandex pouch or cup should be sewn in to the crotch, or at least a bit more material should be present so it has somewhere to go when one sits down... stuffing it down a pants leg can be problematic & quite embarrassing: "Oh, did you hurt your leg? It looks quite swollen." Uhm, thanks for your concern, but no I didn't; That's just my manhood. Many people assume inappropriate arousal too.
... was it good for you? Yeah, but I was a little scared by it at first.
Oh, you're just experiencing "X-com 2". ...?...
You know, "Terror from the deep."
If you don't like using their "cloud", GTFO. -The Internet
P.S. If you don't have the snap to figure out that it's YOUR BROWSER that's displaying their content, and that you can control YOUR BROWSER such that it can be customize the pages it displays however you like: Well then, I don't have the patience to teach you how to do it... You'll just have to "Bing" userscripts yourself, (ugh...).
P.P.S. My local grocer changed his store layout to make it easier for their stockers, thus saving them money and providing me better services. Fortunately I'm a human not a statically programmed state machine, and I adapted quite easily. I find it humorous that you should complain about minor changes to anything. Adapt or become extinct -- It's a law of nature you know?
0. Dynamic Scripting Engine 1. Efficient Operating System
Choose ONE
Compiled VM Bytecode can be transformed into static machine code for a given platform, ala modern VM's: Java, Davlik, etc. JIT compilation tries to do the same thing, for dynamic language platforms (like JS) but it's still got to have an interpretor abstraction layer to support the dynamic changes. JavaScript is a prototype based system, which means I can replace the.toString() function at any time during runtime, and even generate new code to execute on the fly. It's a clusterfsk if speed and/or security is your concern.
iOS runs on the metal. WebOS has multiple layers of indirection between the "program logic" and the metal. Hell even, LuaJIT would be a FAR better choice. It's not like we don't have choices folks. I make extensive use 8-10 languages on a regular basis (two of my own design), JS being one of them; I'm talking about embedding them and working with the under-the hood stuff as well as development in the languages themselves. IMHO, JavaScript is a night-mare that was designed without any thought given to the implementation's performance or speed whatsoever -- It should be considered harmful.
JavaScript isn't a good choice for the Web. We all just use it because it's available, not because it's any better than anything else... IT'S NOT. Here's a hint: I haven't written anything useful in BASIC in 20 years, and I don't miss it one bit.
Compare the latter to the same search on Wordnik: Wordnik
Bonus: Those Google links are wrapped in TLS, so no one sees the query terms or results in transit. https://www.wordnik.com/ takes you to their developer site...
So, wait... If my "scam" website uses referrer headers to target iOS instead of Android browsers, then all of a sudden Android is the secure one right? Oh, by the way, my AntiVirus detector for $YOUR_OS shows that $YOUR_OS is infected with { random(100) + 20 } Viruses! I'll post the instructions for how to remove them all. But, to make it worth my while, post your credit card number, expiration date and security code (on the back), and I'll just take $25.00 out... or we can do this securely via pay-palls.com...
(Oh Noes! Now AntiVirus Scams have spread to Slashdot too! -- Unless, if I get your gist, you're browsing with iOS, then you won't see the above?)
Also, Apple's App Store has had Trojans slip thru their "screening process". My favorite one was when some teenager made a "Torch" app that also enabled teathering. Apple pulled the app after they found out about the extra trojan feature. By your logic: This was a good thing for them to do?
Walled Gardens are the TSA Security Theater of the mobile space (coming soon to a PC near you!) I prefer my gardens (software distribution channels) to be gated and have keys that I control.
Also: You can't make idiot proof security, the Universe will create smarter idiots. "Those who trade convenience for security deserve neither, and will have none." -Benjamin Franklin
So I found myself wondering... why do some people love it so much? Is there some specific aspect of the show that they consider well made or what?
Nah, we just really want to have a new show to rally around and identify with (like "Star Trek" once was). Its merits or lack thereof are irrelevant; It's just that is was there, not totally crap, and on prime-time TV...
Obviously, I'd suppose you still needed a few lexicographers to come up with the system.
And to maintain it, right?
The problem seems to be when you've put 95% of lexicographers out of a job, who's going to train the next bunch, and will it be cost-effective at a university level to have a graduate program in such for 1 or 2 individuals?
Syntax error on line(s): 1 thru 1
Ambiguous contraction in "I'd".
Syntax error on line(s): 1 thru 1
Mixed tense in "still needed".
Note: Root word "need" satisfies the expression.
Syntax error on line(s): 3 thru 3
Incomplete sentence.
Syntax error on line(s): 5 thru 5
Expected colon after "be" in "to be when".
Syntax error on line(s): 5 thru 5
Expected capitalization of "when" in "to be when".
Syntax error on line(s): 5 thru 5
Extraneous comma. Note: This message is generated only once for multiple errors.
For this you may need a public works engineer. I could recommend my moat-guy, but I heard he was injured on the job -- Alligators. Turns out he wasn't certified for Animal Control.
Just because today's customer is more sophisticated...
Just because today's customer THINKS they are more sophisticated because multiple devices can be easily connected to a home network as a result of standards and effective design created by hardworking engineers.
Just because today's customer NEEDS to be more sophisticated because hardware and software engineers don't follow the standards exactly, add in useless vendor lock-in bells and whistles such as "WIFI Speed Boost", and don't release the driver software so that we can actually USE the hardware on OSs (like Linux or Windows7) out of the box, because of the slave drivers the engineers work for don't get bonuses if they don't meet bogus deadlines the hardworking engineers thought were ridiculous in the first place.
Them: Hello my name is $OBVIOUSLY_FAKE_NAME
Me: $OBVIOUSLY_FAKE_NAME, is it? I know you have a script and all, but please save us both some time and just escalate me to a higher support tier, the info I need isn't on your script. (If they refuse, then I say: "Sorry about this, I know calls are recorded... so, I'm right pissed off and I'd like to talk to your manager!")
Once I've got the next higher up support personnel on the phone I can usually say things like: "I need the IP list for my name servers, my IP is: xx.xx.xx.xx", or "Your cable-tech guy forgot to give me the admin password for the modem, what's the standard PW or reset procedure & web-based config?" and I'm off the phone in mere moments.
IMHO, there's no need to ever mention what OS you're using. If they ask I tell them it's none of their business, they sell network service, not software.
This is bad. There is no "sandbox". Not really. Get it through your heads people. Without hardware supported Virtualization, there is actually no "sandbox", the whole OS is there on the beach right next to my code, and I will figure out a way to interact with it in ways that you do not like.
For what it's worth: At least this isn't another JIT SNAFU. When you compile JS to a "limited" set of machine code instructions, then flag that DATA as CODE, and run it, it just takes one buffer overflow for me to get my "unlimited" machine code running on the metal. One more Kernel level exploit from there gives me Root... JavaScript is SLOW because it's so damn dynamic that it's hard to make fast... This means more complex compiler code to make it run faster, this means larger attack surface for exploits.
IMHO, Lua or other interpreted languages could probably be called sandboxed (so long as all the inputs to native functions are checked for sanity), but even then, it's not a hardware VM, it's not really a sandbox. Once you've allowed external code to run on the bare metal, ALL BETS ARE OFF.
"90 years" is a limited time. So are "592 years," "1098 years," and "17 million years."
The Federalist party held the belief that it was the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law that should be upheld. Unfortunately they wanted broader rights to be granted to government by looser interpretations. It's too bad the Democratic-Republican party won out and the Federalists were extinguished (yes Democrats & Republicans really were once are ONE PARTY, and still largely act as such to this day).
As with anything in nature, either extreme is would be bad; However, now all we have are "letter of the law" folk.
It's up to the Judical systems to apply the old legal sentiment to the changing world... The US's founding fathers knew that they could not foresee everything. If you're going to use the Constitution's words to say that "Limited Time" can mean "592 years" I would put it to you that the words "limited time" were added to the Constitution in a time where Common Sense was actually still common.
Intent is of major import in criminal law (see: premeditation), why should intent be ignored in civil law? Clearly the founding fathers did not intend for "limited time" to mean "592 years"; No, in fact they recommended the limit to be 10 to 14 years. Thus, "592 years" is clearly not a Limited Time, in fact it is beyond the lifetime of a human, or even America itself.
That you posted it here without one puts it in the public domain.
No it doesn't. Copyright is by default.
If you include the Copyright marking...
Copyright $YEAR_LIST $AUTHOR_LIST
Otherwise, copyright law can not apply. How am I to know its protections haven't expired yet? Dredging up some tamper-proof proof it wasn't created long ago is harder to do than you might think.
Much like the US Constitution provides us the concept of "Innocent until proven guilty", I assume all works are Copyable unless proven protected.
Protip: Connect two PCs' modems to a single phone line. (Null modem works, but for portability we're going with the lowest common denominator).
Some modems can be told to ignore the "No Carrier" error, so you can connect the PCs directly to each-other, but if yours can't, or the machines are in different rooms just connect the lines directly to the wall outlets to get the carrier...
You can't ring yourself (unless you have two phone lines), so instead you just wait... The booo Dooo BEEEEP "Please Hang Up" (off-hook alert) plays. Then you wait some more for that to stop... Now you have an open phone line to connect two modems via. So all you have to do now is drop to the modem command mode (+++), and issue an ATDT on one PC (Hayes compatible: Attention Dial Tone), but you don't specify a phone number. To the the other PC's modem you issue: ATA (Attention, Answer). The handshake should begin and you can copy / paste ASCII text back and forth once the connection is established. I've used this trick recently with Xmodem, Kermit, etc to transfer Ethernet NIC driver sources, and other files in a pinch.
Maybe transferring ASCII was a headache to you, but it was a breeze to me: even back then digital distribution was miles ahead of sneaker-net & proprietary file system formats...
Hmm, I would have thought that Google successfully having a fleet of autonomous vehicles roaming about in California without the public even noticing bests Watson. Fast natural language search vs Self Driving Cars. Yeah, I'm going with the cars...
Yup. You're spot-on fella. Guess what? Linux is a great server platform. Know what else? You can own your own personal "cloud" at home and stream / sync all your data privately and securely between all your mobile devices and your Linux home server... In fact, you can load balance & increase uptime by setting up mutual redundant servers in each of your family's homes.
On top of that, KDE and Gnome are both usable enough for my grandparents now, (you don't have to touch the terminal to use Linux). So, 2011 was the year of Linux on the Desktop, Laptop and Mobile phone for my family, and THEY LOVE IT.
Actually, it's not just the "campaign" money, it's the promise of a cushy job afterwards, and also Corps being able to pull favors for you with other congressmen who are already in their pockets. For facts, why just look at FCC members becoming *AA Goons, or just maybe search for lobbyist owns congress.
Gee, that wasn't hard now was it? What's that? Oh, you want COLD HARD FACTS... you mean, the info they've paid big bucks to hide very very well? Yeah, keep dreaming fool.
No, it doesn't prove his point. What would prove his point is someone proposing legislation that made manufacturing, selling, or owning a device that allowed the user to compile and run their own code illegal.
Apparently there already is such legislation. You see, it's called the DMCA. Gun's don't kill people, people kill people. Software doesn't defeat DRM, people defeat DRM with software. We've been given VERY LIMITED exemptions to manufacture, sell, own or run software capable of cracking DRM, or Jailbreaking phones, but it's still illegal for me to crack my XBox or Playstation3, or ANY OTHER DRM DEVICE not on the magical white list.
You're wasting your time if you're on the watch for legislation that prevents you from running any code you want. It already exists; It just depends on YOUR definition of "any". Furthermore, as long as EULAs allow MFGs to instant click-wrap legislation into being, you're looking in the wrong place, and you're even looking in the wrong direction!
What we need now is the right to bear technology; I've been saying this for years, and am glad to see the sentiment being finally adopted. When my first 128bit public key encryption program was basically classified as "munitions" and prevented from exportation in the early 1990s I REJOICED! I actually danced a little jig! I foolishly believed that this meant my 2nd amendment rights, "The right to bear arms, lawfully", would come into effect and I'd be able to wield any computing technology just as I can legally wield a gun: If its self defense and/or I'm not physically harming anyone, what I'm doing shouldn't be illegal. To my dismay our Constitutional rights have not been interpreted in this way.
The definition of what is "lawful" has become: That which the EULA allows. The definition of what is "causing harm" has become: That which we can not measure or prove, but suspect.
It would have been as RIDICULOUS to outlaw guns in the pioneer era as it would have been to outlaw possessing ANY stone tool in the Stone age, or for using an iron tool on your own possessions in the Iron age. Yet, here we are in the INFORMATION AGE, and we've got laws against using particular information processing tools...
Some would say that I do not own some of the information that I possess. To them I would ask: "Do you own the memories in your head?" Can I not read 1s and 0s and then use my mind to break encryptions? Can I not use the information in my own mind? I can use external tools such as graph paper and pencil to help me perform my mathematic algorithms too. However, If I use a GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER to help me do certain tasks with the INFORMATION that can be or has been absorbed and then extracted from MY OWN MIND -- Then I can be found guilty of violating existing legislation.
Perhaps you're saying that as long as they don't outlaw all programs and general purpose computers, we've nothing to fear. I put it to you that standing buy while our 1st AND 2nd amendment rights are being restricted in any fashion is OUTRAGEOUS, has already occurred, and continues to occur each time you click the [_] Accept button on a restrictive EULA.
What we need is the right to use our computers. The right to possess and use technology. You wouldn't stand a chance taking ancestors' stone or iron tools, or guns from them. I'll be damned if I'll stand idly by and let ANYONE take my INFORMATION tools from me.
Those stone age peoples who opposed iron tools quickly became extinct: Welcome to the Information Age.
It's bloated. It had its time. I LOVED writing in assembly on my 80286, the rich instruction set made quick work of even the most complex of paddle ball games...
However, that was when I was still a child. Now I'm grown, it's time to put away childish things. It's time to actually be platform independent and cross platform, like all of my C software is. It's time to get even better performance and power consumption with a leaner or newer instruction set while shrinking the die.
Please, just let all those legacy instruction's microcode go. You can't write truly cross platform code in assembly. It's time to INNOVATE AGAIN. Perhaps create an instruction set that lets you get more out of your MFG process; Maybe one that's cross platform (like ARM is). Let software emulation provide legacy support. Let's get software vendors used to releasing source code, or compiling for multiple architectures and platforms. Let's look at THAT problem and solve it with perhaps a new type of linker that turns object code into the proper machine code for the system during installation (sort of like how Android does). DO ANYTHING other than the same old: Same Inefficient Design made more efficient via shrinking.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention having to hold it up a bit, but angled down while taking a dump... so it doesn't droop in the water...
...to say nothing of plopping down on a chair and accidentally sitting on the family jewels.
You know, Women get to show off their external reproductive organs... Most jeans & pants don't accommodate male genitalia well. I mean, women's clothes are made to fit their bosoms, but men's seem to be made as if their organ doesn't exist at all. A spandex pouch or cup should be sewn in to the crotch, or at least a bit more material should be present so it has somewhere to go when one sits down... stuffing it down a pants leg can be problematic & quite embarrassing: "Oh, did you hurt your leg? It looks quite swollen." Uhm, thanks for your concern, but no I didn't; That's just my manhood. Many people assume inappropriate arousal too.
Yeah, but I was a little scared by it at first.
Oh, you're just experiencing "X-com 2".
You know, "Terror from the deep."
Welcome to the Internet.
If you don't like using their "cloud", GTFO.
-The Internet
P.S. If you don't have the snap to figure out that it's YOUR BROWSER that's displaying their content, and that you can control YOUR BROWSER such that it can be customize the pages it displays however you like: Well then, I don't have the patience to teach you how to do it... You'll just have to "Bing" userscripts yourself, (ugh...).
P.P.S. My local grocer changed his store layout to make it easier for their stockers, thus saving them money and providing me better services. Fortunately I'm a human not a statically programmed state machine, and I adapted quite easily. I find it humorous that you should complain about minor changes to anything.
Adapt or become extinct -- It's a law of nature you know?
0. Dynamic Scripting Engine
1. Efficient Operating System
Choose ONE
Compiled VM Bytecode can be transformed into static machine code for a given platform, ala modern VM's: Java, Davlik, etc. JIT compilation tries to do the same thing, for dynamic language platforms (like JS) but it's still got to have an interpretor abstraction layer to support the dynamic changes. JavaScript is a prototype based system, which means I can replace the .toString() function at any time during runtime, and even generate new code to execute on the fly. It's a clusterfsk if speed and/or security is your concern.
iOS runs on the metal. WebOS has multiple layers of indirection between the "program logic" and the metal. Hell even, LuaJIT would be a FAR better choice. It's not like we don't have choices folks. I make extensive use 8-10 languages on a regular basis (two of my own design), JS being one of them; I'm talking about embedding them and working with the under-the hood stuff as well as development in the languages themselves. IMHO, JavaScript is a night-mare that was designed without any thought given to the implementation's performance or speed whatsoever -- It should be considered harmful.
JavaScript isn't a good choice for the Web. We all just use it because it's available, not because it's any better than anything else... IT'S NOT. Here's a hint: I haven't written anything useful in BASIC in 20 years, and I don't miss it one bit.
Sounds like he was testing a hacked lab to me...
I second this notion. I frequently use the define: $searchTerm query with Google.
For example: telivision,
or: Wordnik
Compare the latter to the same search on Wordnik: Wordnik
Bonus: Those Google links are wrapped in TLS, so no one sees the query terms or results in transit. https://www.wordnik.com/ takes you to their developer site...
So, wait... If my "scam" website uses referrer headers to target iOS instead of Android browsers, then all of a sudden Android is the secure one right? Oh, by the way, my AntiVirus detector for $YOUR_OS shows that $YOUR_OS is infected with { random(100) + 20 } Viruses! I'll post the instructions for how to remove them all. But, to make it worth my while, post your credit card number, expiration date and security code (on the back), and I'll just take $25.00 out... or we can do this securely via pay-palls.com...
(Oh Noes! Now AntiVirus Scams have spread to Slashdot too! -- Unless, if I get your gist, you're browsing with iOS, then you won't see the above?)
Also, Apple's App Store has had Trojans slip thru their "screening process". My favorite one was when some teenager made a "Torch" app that also enabled teathering. Apple pulled the app after they found out about the extra trojan feature. By your logic: This was a good thing for them to do?
Walled Gardens are the TSA Security Theater of the mobile space (coming soon to a PC near you!) I prefer my gardens (software distribution channels) to be gated and have keys that I control.
Also: You can't make idiot proof security, the Universe will create smarter idiots.
"Those who trade convenience for security deserve neither, and will have none."
-Benjamin Franklin
So I found myself wondering... why do some people love it so much? Is there some specific aspect of the show that they consider well made or what?
Nah, we just really want to have a new show to rally around and identify with (like "Star Trek" once was). Its merits or lack thereof are irrelevant; It's just that is was there, not totally crap, and on prime-time TV...
Obviously, I'd suppose you still needed a few lexicographers to come up with the system.
And to maintain it, right?
The problem seems to be when you've put 95% of lexicographers out of a job, who's going to train the next bunch, and will it be cost-effective at a university level to have a graduate program in such for 1 or 2 individuals?
Syntax error on line(s): 1 thru 1
Ambiguous contraction in "I'd".
Syntax error on line(s): 1 thru 1
Mixed tense in "still needed".
Note: Root word "need" satisfies the expression.
Syntax error on line(s): 3 thru 3
Incomplete sentence.
Syntax error on line(s): 5 thru 5
Expected colon after "be" in "to be when".
Syntax error on line(s): 5 thru 5
Expected capitalization of "when" in "to be when".
Syntax error on line(s): 5 thru 5
Extraneous comma.
Note: This message is generated only once for multiple errors.
Point taken: Screw the Lexicographers!
"It lets me do what I want to do, at this very moment."
People never change. You should be just fine.
Now if only all of my channels would work...
For this you may need a public works engineer. I could recommend my moat-guy, but I heard he was injured on the job -- Alligators. Turns out he wasn't certified for Animal Control.
Just because today's customer is more sophisticated...
Just because today's customer THINKS they are more sophisticated because multiple devices can be easily connected to a home network as a result of standards and effective design created by hardworking engineers.
Just because today's customer NEEDS to be more sophisticated because hardware and software engineers don't follow the standards exactly, add in useless vendor lock-in bells and whistles such as "WIFI Speed Boost", and don't release the driver software so that we can actually USE the hardware on OSs (like Linux or Windows7) out of the box, because of the slave drivers the engineers work for don't get bonuses if they don't meet bogus deadlines the hardworking engineers thought were ridiculous in the first place.
What I do:
Them: Hello my name is $OBVIOUSLY_FAKE_NAME
Me: $OBVIOUSLY_FAKE_NAME, is it? I know you have a script and all, but please save us both some time and just escalate me to a higher support tier, the info I need isn't on your script. (If they refuse, then I say: "Sorry about this, I know calls are recorded... so, I'm right pissed off and I'd like to talk to your manager!")
Once I've got the next higher up support personnel on the phone I can usually say things like: "I need the IP list for my name servers, my IP is: xx.xx.xx.xx", or "Your cable-tech guy forgot to give me the admin password for the modem, what's the standard PW or reset procedure & web-based config?" and I'm off the phone in mere moments.
IMHO, there's no need to ever mention what OS you're using. If they ask I tell them it's none of their business, they sell network service, not software.
ActiveX Applications Running IE.
This is bad. There is no "sandbox". Not really. Get it through your heads people. Without hardware supported Virtualization, there is actually no "sandbox", the whole OS is there on the beach right next to my code, and I will figure out a way to interact with it in ways that you do not like.
For what it's worth: At least this isn't another JIT SNAFU. When you compile JS to a "limited" set of machine code instructions, then flag that DATA as CODE, and run it, it just takes one buffer overflow for me to get my "unlimited" machine code running on the metal. One more Kernel level exploit from there gives me Root... JavaScript is SLOW because it's so damn dynamic that it's hard to make fast... This means more complex compiler code to make it run faster, this means larger attack surface for exploits.
IMHO, Lua or other interpreted languages could probably be called sandboxed (so long as all the inputs to native functions are checked for sanity), but even then, it's not a hardware VM, it's not really a sandbox. Once you've allowed external code to run on the bare metal, ALL BETS ARE OFF.
"90 years" is a limited time. So are "592 years," "1098 years," and "17 million years."
The Federalist party held the belief that it was the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law that should be upheld. Unfortunately they wanted broader rights to be granted to government by looser interpretations. It's too bad the Democratic-Republican party won out and the Federalists were extinguished (yes Democrats & Republicans really were once are ONE PARTY, and still largely act as such to this day).
As with anything in nature, either extreme is would be bad; However, now all we have are "letter of the law" folk.
It's up to the Judical systems to apply the old legal sentiment to the changing world... The US's founding fathers knew that they could not foresee everything. If you're going to use the Constitution's words to say that "Limited Time" can mean "592 years" I would put it to you that the words "limited time" were added to the Constitution in a time where Common Sense was actually still common.
Intent is of major import in criminal law (see: premeditation), why should intent be ignored in civil law? Clearly the founding fathers did not intend for "limited time" to mean "592 years"; No, in fact they recommended the limit to be 10 to 14 years. Thus, "592 years" is clearly not a Limited Time, in fact it is beyond the lifetime of a human, or even America itself.
No it doesn't. Copyright is by default.
If you include the Copyright marking...
Copyright $YEAR_LIST $AUTHOR_LIST
Otherwise, copyright law can not apply. How am I to know its protections haven't expired yet? Dredging up some tamper-proof proof it wasn't created long ago is harder to do than you might think.
Much like the US Constitution provides us the concept of "Innocent until proven guilty", I assume all works are Copyable unless proven protected.
You don't steal cars to own, so affordability is irrelevant. You steal cars for parts. Or for joyriding.
How dare you tell me WHY I steal cars! For your information, I steal them to give their owners a reason to finally buy an electric or hybrid.
It wasn't a big deal. I used my BBS.
Protip: Connect two PCs' modems to a single phone line. (Null modem works, but for portability we're going with the lowest common denominator).
Some modems can be told to ignore the "No Carrier" error, so you can connect the PCs directly to each-other, but if yours can't, or the machines are in different rooms just connect the lines directly to the wall outlets to get the carrier...
You can't ring yourself (unless you have two phone lines), so instead you just wait... The booo Dooo BEEEEP "Please Hang Up" (off-hook alert) plays. Then you wait some more for that to stop... Now you have an open phone line to connect two modems via. So all you have to do now is drop to the modem command mode (+++), and issue an ATDT on one PC (Hayes compatible: Attention Dial Tone), but you don't specify a phone number. To the the other PC's modem you issue: ATA (Attention, Answer). The handshake should begin and you can copy / paste ASCII text back and forth once the connection is established. I've used this trick recently with Xmodem, Kermit, etc to transfer Ethernet NIC driver sources, and other files in a pinch.
Maybe transferring ASCII was a headache to you, but it was a breeze to me: even back then digital distribution was miles ahead of sneaker-net & proprietary file system formats...
Hmm, I would have thought that Google successfully having a fleet of autonomous vehicles roaming about in California without the public even noticing bests Watson. Fast natural language search vs Self Driving Cars. Yeah, I'm going with the cars...
2011 was a year where I heard the term x-killer less than usual.
That's funny, for me 2011 was the year where I first heard the term "X-Killer"... Eg: Wayland.
Yup. You're spot-on fella. Guess what? Linux is a great server platform. Know what else? You can own your own personal "cloud" at home and stream / sync all your data privately and securely between all your mobile devices and your Linux home server... In fact, you can load balance & increase uptime by setting up mutual redundant servers in each of your family's homes.
On top of that, KDE and Gnome are both usable enough for my grandparents now, (you don't have to touch the terminal to use Linux). So, 2011 was the year of Linux on the Desktop, Laptop and Mobile phone for my family, and THEY LOVE IT.
Actually, it's not just the "campaign" money, it's the promise of a cushy job afterwards, and also Corps being able to pull favors for you with other congressmen who are already in their pockets. For facts, why just look at FCC members becoming *AA Goons, or just maybe search for lobbyist owns congress.
Oh, wait... You're looking for donation trails?
Gee, that wasn't hard now was it? What's that? Oh, you want COLD HARD FACTS... you mean, the info they've paid big bucks to hide very very well? Yeah, keep dreaming fool.
No, it doesn't prove his point. What would prove his point is someone proposing legislation that made manufacturing, selling, or owning a device that allowed the user to compile and run their own code illegal.
Apparently there already is such legislation. You see, it's called the DMCA. Gun's don't kill people, people kill people. Software doesn't defeat DRM, people defeat DRM with software. We've been given VERY LIMITED exemptions to manufacture, sell, own or run software capable of cracking DRM, or Jailbreaking phones, but it's still illegal for me to crack my XBox or Playstation3, or ANY OTHER DRM DEVICE not on the magical white list.
You're wasting your time if you're on the watch for legislation that prevents you from running any code you want. It already exists; It just depends on YOUR definition of "any". Furthermore, as long as EULAs allow MFGs to instant click-wrap legislation into being, you're looking in the wrong place, and you're even looking in the wrong direction!
What we need now is the right to bear technology; I've been saying this for years, and am glad to see the sentiment being finally adopted. When my first 128bit public key encryption program was basically classified as "munitions" and prevented from exportation in the early 1990s I REJOICED! I actually danced a little jig! I foolishly believed that this meant my 2nd amendment rights, "The right to bear arms, lawfully", would come into effect and I'd be able to wield any computing technology just as I can legally wield a gun: If its self defense and/or I'm not physically harming anyone, what I'm doing shouldn't be illegal. To my dismay our Constitutional rights have not been interpreted in this way.
The definition of what is "lawful" has become: That which the EULA allows. The definition of what is "causing harm" has become: That which we can not measure or prove, but suspect.
It would have been as RIDICULOUS to outlaw guns in the pioneer era as it would have been to outlaw possessing ANY stone tool in the Stone age, or for using an iron tool on your own possessions in the Iron age. Yet, here we are in the INFORMATION AGE, and we've got laws against using particular information processing tools...
Some would say that I do not own some of the information that I possess. To them I would ask: "Do you own the memories in your head?" Can I not read 1s and 0s and then use my mind to break encryptions? Can I not use the information in my own mind? I can use external tools such as graph paper and pencil to help me perform my mathematic algorithms too. However, If I use a GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER to help me do certain tasks with the INFORMATION that can be or has been absorbed and then extracted from MY OWN MIND -- Then I can be found guilty of violating existing legislation.
Perhaps you're saying that as long as they don't outlaw all programs and general purpose computers, we've nothing to fear. I put it to you that standing buy while our 1st AND 2nd amendment rights are being restricted in any fashion is OUTRAGEOUS, has already occurred, and continues to occur each time you click the [_] Accept button on a restrictive EULA.
What we need is the right to use our computers. The right to possess and use technology. You wouldn't stand a chance taking ancestors' stone or iron tools, or guns from them. I'll be damned if I'll stand idly by and let ANYONE take my INFORMATION tools from me.
Those stone age peoples who opposed iron tools quickly became extinct: Welcome to the Information Age.
When's the last time you had to buy booze from a gangster?
I like me.
-Caboose
It's bloated. It had its time. I LOVED writing in assembly on my 80286, the rich instruction set made quick work of even the most complex of paddle ball games...
However, that was when I was still a child. Now I'm grown, it's time to put away childish things. It's time to actually be platform independent and cross platform, like all of my C software is. It's time to get even better performance and power consumption with a leaner or newer instruction set while shrinking the die.
Please, just let all those legacy instruction's microcode go. You can't write truly cross platform code in assembly. It's time to INNOVATE AGAIN. Perhaps create an instruction set that lets you get more out of your MFG process; Maybe one that's cross platform (like ARM is). Let software emulation provide legacy support. Let's get software vendors used to releasing source code, or compiling for multiple architectures and platforms. Let's look at THAT problem and solve it with perhaps a new type of linker that turns object code into the proper machine code for the system during installation (sort of like how Android does). DO ANYTHING other than the same old: Same Inefficient Design made more efficient via shrinking.
Intel, it's time to let x86 go.