The whole idea behind "dark energy" is that we don't know what it actually is or where it come from. So my guess is that until we know enough about it to put a better name on it, we won't do anything with it.
But, don't worry, we have a hell of a lot of time to figure it out.
maybe, but it works...well enough. When you just have to reskin a game, production's costs go down that much. And you don't have to sell the reskin as well as the first version for it to be profitable.
You still need re-entry atmosphere to land on the launch loop. 80km doesn't get you into space. You obviously also need to adjust speed in a non zero G environment. And you'll have to make the loop stronger to handle landing.
And for the climbers of the space elevator, I don't see a problem with re-entry. Their speed would be controlled and slow, so their shouldn't be any burning.
But It's just my understanding of physics. Enlighten me if I'm wrong.
Seriously? "The future is done, let's get to rest and enjoy!"?
Will I'm all for the "enjoy" part, thinking that no tech revolution will happen anymore is just as ridiculous as buying a flying car for next year. Look the prediction for the future along all the twentieth : It's 90% bullshits (certainly more so...). They even wanted you to eat radioactive materials as a way of keeping health! How can you talk about "the age of sifi having a real influence on tech"? There was never such an age more than nowadays. So okay, maybe a space-elevator won't be build, but you have lots of science fiction materials being done : Invisibility cloak! cybernetic limbs! 3D TV! Those are maybe not exactly as good as what you would like them to be, but they exist and are being build! (and even more ! some are actually commercialized!)
Science fiction product bullshits, it's ok... Part of why one read it is that it's about think not possible with our understanding of science, speculated with what the author do know about science. Some of them are cool enough that people actually try to realize them, and sometimes they succeed. Sometimes not. But anyway, technologies doesn't need science-fiction to evolve. Science fiction exist because people think about what can be done, or what could be cool(or... very not cool) if done. It's not preliminary research. If anything, it's popular brainstorming coupled with stories. You don't ask science fiction for doable stuff with practical application, it's just lame...
I would like to say it's the silliest thing I have ever read, but sadly, it's not.
Still, this is plain stupid : if you want to try linux and don't know which distro to get, just pick one mainstream, preferably known for being user-friendly (Ubuntu is still the simplest distribution to begin). As you say, most distribution is about particular choices that are irrelevant to you, so you shouldn't even bother with that. (Well at first... you can always choose to think about it later, or not.) Some jerks will say you picked the wrong distribution for reasons good and bad, but the same jerks will still critic your choice to stay on windows anyway... (I may be a jerk saying your reason to stay on windows is stupid, but at least I won't critic your choice whatever OS you Choose, and by that I mean "not use by default".)
Multiples distributions exist because some people aren't satisfied with the other ones. That fine : They work to have what they want and share it with others. It's nice really. If you're not interested, just stay mainstream, it really isn't as complicated as you make it sound.
And then if you don't like, say, the windows manager, you can change it, because their are alternatives. And that is just great, because if you don't like what one thing is becoming, you can try something else. But as a beginner, you shouldn't bother to much with choosing a distro, since you'll only get a good idea of what you want with practice. In the meantime, the choices of a mainstream distribution are as fine as microsoft or OSX choices in usability.
First,ssh as a windows implementation. Second ssh and vnc aren't exactly comparable...
But part from that I agree. Plus scrolling unactive windows allow you to keep an other windows on the foreground. It really bother me sometimes when I can't do that and I have to clic one windows then the other then the first etc... Call me lazy if you want, but desktop comfort is all about small things like that. (and modularity is a key features I think, because nobody like the same settings... That's my first issue against Unity.)
Yeah yeah, you can whine all you want that adults should behave that way, they won't. Cause humans are lazy (much like anything alive...)
I don't say you should weaken the contract and I'm not saying Anon are good or bad guys...
The fact is : People don't read that shit. The other fact is : people know it and use precedent fact to there own benefit.
It annoying enough when being the one who didn't read get you screwed... You can say you deserve it then, but really it shouldn't be that bothersome to install a program or to sign in on a website.
Face it : FB or Google doesn't really expect anybody (except lawyers) to read it : their would be far less "sign in"s if they somehow forced people to read 10 pages of boring policies and warnings and stuffs. They didn't try to be clearer because they don't give a damn. Seriously, I wouldn't either...
I agree that it wouldn't be wise to spawn a law about it. So how do you make people to care about what they agree ? One way is advertising on the matter. That's basically what Anon is doing right now. Whether it'll be effective or not is an other story. We'll have to wait and see. And I'm not saying it's a good way to do it, just that it's not random bragging.
People don't understand what they trade off most of the times... When was the last time you actually reads an agreement before signing up?
I really don't think that much people knows or understand how FB and Google make money. The whole "We will hit That Day" shit is advertisement. Even if Anonymous do take down FB, I don't think it will die and I'm pretty sure Anon isn't such a fool that "he" believe it will. They just want to be front news to be eared by as much people as they can. Taking down FB even an hour would be a good start for that. Saying it in advance even better. And they say it enough in advance so that enough people will be watching and talk about it. Even if Anon fail to take down FB, they still might be eared. Not good for "him" since "his" credibility will suffer, but still worse it.
And if you say "I don't care they trade my data!", they made you think about it, kind of, and that's a good start.
But you reply to him knowing he won't read you? ( Or, if I let my paranoia run, you're AC and you reply so you have a link to your prior post and can check answers... And so you'ld be trolling.)
Eventually, tourism might have been able to get us on Mars... slowly and not tomorrow but still... In fact I still think it will, because space tourism will need to do more than just 15 minutes in space to continue existing...
But right now, Getting a man foot on Mars seems more doable with China than any other country. I won't hold my breath, but I'm definitely hopping they'll keep their effort at least until there.
Their must be something wrong in your summary. I don't think Oracle could ever not hand over the mentionned project. They are open source! The worry as I remember, was that they might :
1) Drop the open source thing and continue to develop the project as closed. A fork wouldn't eraze the problem, since most Open Office users (for the exemple) won't be willing to change just because of a closed source status. This leading eventually to two products too different for an easy change... bad for open source anyway.
2) Drop the project totally. Bad for most users who don't want to change, even worse for compagny who liked the support of Sun for their product, because clearly the open source community can't be trusted for support, if they even do it... Probably the less of two evil since it doesn't really split the user base or the devs.
Here we have two cases number two. Yes yes, they gave them to the Apache foundation... It's more of a brand trade than anything but it's actually better than a total drop, since the users knows where to go to update they softwares in the futur. But that not conforting for the open source project that are still in Oracle hands. Since it's obvious now that Oracle doesn't want to do Open source, they might end as cases one since they probably won't just drop them.
Well it is openly the goal of canonical after all...
It worried me a little when I read the title, but then I remembered that I hardly used synaptic. Most of the time I use apt-get, and sometimes the Software Center when I feel like browsing for random stuff (mostly games...)
As for Unity, I'll watch how it evolve. I like Gnome somewhat, but I like to see think change over time. For the time being, Unity as some interesting features but the inability to change anything of it is really annoying. And it crash now and then... With chance it will change for the good... or not.
Still Canonical don't seems to focus that much on stability and too much on look and simplicity (meaning less stuffs you can do out of the box, most of the time...). Looking good and being simple isn't bad, but we don't need a new Windows or OSX with less supports for commercial software... Not being able to use Steam to play my Game keeps me on my windows vista (sic) partition way to often. (And god, I hate Steam... ) I wouldn't even look at a vista without that.
To be fair, the research might be independent. It might be right too.
But GP is correct when he say Microsoft suffers a lake of credibility that they earn themselves.They seems to not care thought because this lakes of credibility isn't so big that they can't manipulate opinions with that sort of comment.
So you can't access your profile on an other hardware? sounds like a lot of fun.
But It's just irrelevant. The principal issue those last month is where you can gain access without identifying yourself to a lot of profile at a time.
If you consider that "Hacker" now mean "Evil Spawn who do something illegal with a computer", I would say TFT is right, by your own argumentation. More and more people feel the need to break law on a level or an other to do what they want with their devices. So effectively the number of hackers raise.
Me I think that the more lucrative informations will be hackable, the more hackers will be happy.
Almost none of the recent mediated hacks involved password breaking. At this point I think password isn't the biggest issue with internet security today. Breaking a password isn't fast enough for profitable mass-hacking. And a good password won't be of any use against key-loggers (or any other method to get a password without force breaking it).
A bad password is an issue if you are a particular target, not if you are one of the crowd. (Except maybe an exceptionally bad password like "1234"... damn!)
Indeed since hackers now refer exclusively to the people doing bad stuff on the Internet. Well maybe not exclusively on the Internet, but you get the idea.
Black hat and white hat only distinguish the intent of "crackers" (using this word for clarity purpose...) We need a word for people messing with there computer on any level, not just on the security stuff. Hacker is a cool word, but it seems desperate to keep it for that.
Also I don't see a better word to give to people messing with there computer on whatever level... Stupid media! (Yeah I know, nothing new here.)
Slashdot Mirror
He's just saying what he think. He always does. Get over it.
Damn and it's a anonymous coward who write this? It's a waste!
Exactly my thought anyway.
It's not the end : Jobs is gone, RMS still there... and his battle isn't lost.
I blame them, seriously... ignorance isn't a good excuse, and it's f*cking worst when one choose to be ignorant.
It's true, it's not... Just xenophobe.
The whole idea behind "dark energy" is that we don't know what it actually is or where it come from. So my guess is that until we know enough about it to put a better name on it, we won't do anything with it.
But, don't worry, we have a hell of a lot of time to figure it out.
maybe, but it works...well enough. When you just have to reskin a game, production's costs go down that much. And you don't have to sell the reskin as well as the first version for it to be profitable.
You still need re-entry atmosphere to land on the launch loop. 80km doesn't get you into space. You obviously also need to adjust speed in a non zero G environment. And you'll have to make the loop stronger to handle landing.
And for the climbers of the space elevator, I don't see a problem with re-entry. Their speed would be controlled and slow, so their shouldn't be any burning.
But It's just my understanding of physics. Enlighten me if I'm wrong.
Seriously? "The future is done, let's get to rest and enjoy!"?
Will I'm all for the "enjoy" part, thinking that no tech revolution will happen anymore is just as ridiculous as buying a flying car for next year.
Look the prediction for the future along all the twentieth : It's 90% bullshits (certainly more so...). They even wanted you to eat radioactive materials as a way of keeping health! How can you talk about "the age of sifi having a real influence on tech"? There was never such an age more than nowadays.
So okay, maybe a space-elevator won't be build, but you have lots of science fiction materials being done : Invisibility cloak! cybernetic limbs! 3D TV!
Those are maybe not exactly as good as what you would like them to be, but they exist and are being build! (and even more ! some are actually commercialized!)
Science fiction product bullshits, it's ok... Part of why one read it is that it's about think not possible with our understanding of science, speculated with what the author do know about science. Some of them are cool enough that people actually try to realize them, and sometimes they succeed. Sometimes not. But anyway, technologies doesn't need science-fiction to evolve. Science fiction exist because people think about what can be done, or what could be cool(or... very not cool) if done. It's not preliminary research. If anything, it's popular brainstorming coupled with stories. You don't ask science fiction for doable stuff with practical application, it's just lame...
What about the fact that Space elevator allow easy atmospheric re-entry and the launch loop does not?
I would like to say it's the silliest thing I have ever read, but sadly, it's not.
Still, this is plain stupid : if you want to try linux and don't know which distro to get, just pick one mainstream, preferably known for being user-friendly (Ubuntu is still the simplest distribution to begin). As you say, most distribution is about particular choices that are irrelevant to you, so you shouldn't even bother with that. (Well at first... you can always choose to think about it later, or not.)
Some jerks will say you picked the wrong distribution for reasons good and bad, but the same jerks will still critic your choice to stay on windows anyway... (I may be a jerk saying your reason to stay on windows is stupid, but at least I won't critic your choice whatever OS you Choose, and by that I mean "not use by default".)
Multiples distributions exist because some people aren't satisfied with the other ones. That fine : They work to have what they want and share it with others. It's nice really. If you're not interested, just stay mainstream, it really isn't as complicated as you make it sound.
And then if you don't like, say, the windows manager, you can change it, because their are alternatives. And that is just great, because if you don't like what one thing is becoming, you can try something else. But as a beginner, you shouldn't bother to much with choosing a distro, since you'll only get a good idea of what you want with practice. In the meantime, the choices of a mainstream distribution are as fine as microsoft or OSX choices in usability.
First,ssh as a windows implementation. Second ssh and vnc aren't exactly comparable...
But part from that I agree. Plus scrolling unactive windows allow you to keep an other windows on the foreground. It really bother me sometimes when I can't do that and I have to clic one windows then the other then the first etc... Call me lazy if you want, but desktop comfort is all about small things like that. (and modularity is a key features I think, because nobody like the same settings... That's my first issue against Unity.)
Yeah yeah, you can whine all you want that adults should behave that way, they won't. Cause humans are lazy (much like anything alive...)
I don't say you should weaken the contract and I'm not saying Anon are good or bad guys...
The fact is : People don't read that shit.
The other fact is : people know it and use precedent fact to there own benefit.
It annoying enough when being the one who didn't read get you screwed... You can say you deserve it then, but really it shouldn't be that bothersome to install a program or to sign in on a website.
Face it : FB or Google doesn't really expect anybody (except lawyers) to read it : their would be far less "sign in"s if they somehow forced people to read 10 pages of boring policies and warnings and stuffs. They didn't try to be clearer because they don't give a damn. Seriously, I wouldn't either...
I agree that it wouldn't be wise to spawn a law about it. So how do you make people to care about what they agree ? One way is advertising on the matter. That's basically what Anon is doing right now. Whether it'll be effective or not is an other story. We'll have to wait and see. And I'm not saying it's a good way to do it, just that it's not random bragging.
People don't understand what they trade off most of the times... When was the last time you actually reads an agreement before signing up?
I really don't think that much people knows or understand how FB and Google make money. The whole "We will hit That Day" shit is advertisement. Even if Anonymous do take down FB, I don't think it will die and I'm pretty sure Anon isn't such a fool that "he" believe it will. They just want to be front news to be eared by as much people as they can. Taking down FB even an hour would be a good start for that. Saying it in advance even better. And they say it enough in advance so that enough people will be watching and talk about it. Even if Anon fail to take down FB, they still might be eared. Not good for "him" since "his" credibility will suffer, but still worse it.
And if you say "I don't care they trade my data!", they made you think about it, kind of, and that's a good start.
But you reply to him knowing he won't read you? ( Or, if I let my paranoia run, you're AC and you reply so you have a link to your prior post and can check answers... And so you'ld be trolling.)
Eventually, tourism might have been able to get us on Mars... slowly and not tomorrow but still... In fact I still think it will, because space tourism will need to do more than just 15 minutes in space to continue existing...
But right now, Getting a man foot on Mars seems more doable with China than any other country. I won't hold my breath, but I'm definitely hopping they'll keep their effort at least until there.
Their must be something wrong in your summary. I don't think Oracle could ever not hand over the mentionned project. They are open source! The worry as I remember, was that they might :
1) Drop the open source thing and continue to develop the project as closed. A fork wouldn't eraze the problem, since most Open Office users (for the exemple) won't be willing to change just because of a closed source status. This leading eventually to two products too different for an easy change... bad for open source anyway.
2) Drop the project totally. Bad for most users who don't want to change, even worse for compagny who liked the support of Sun for their product, because clearly the open source community can't be trusted for support, if they even do it... Probably the less of two evil since it doesn't really split the user base or the devs.
Here we have two cases number two. Yes yes, they gave them to the Apache foundation... It's more of a brand trade than anything but it's actually better than a total drop, since the users knows where to go to update they softwares in the futur. But that not conforting for the open source project that are still in Oracle hands. Since it's obvious now that Oracle doesn't want to do Open source, they might end as cases one since they probably won't just drop them.
With a bit of chance, it will decide that it-self serves no purpose before that. And deletes it-self...
Well it is openly the goal of canonical after all...
It worried me a little when I read the title, but then I remembered that I hardly used synaptic. Most of the time I use apt-get, and sometimes the Software Center when I feel like browsing for random stuff (mostly games...)
As for Unity, I'll watch how it evolve. I like Gnome somewhat, but I like to see think change over time. For the time being, Unity as some interesting features but the inability to change anything of it is really annoying. And it crash now and then... With chance it will change for the good... or not.
Still Canonical don't seems to focus that much on stability and too much on look and simplicity (meaning less stuffs you can do out of the box, most of the time...). Looking good and being simple isn't bad, but we don't need a new Windows or OSX with less supports for commercial software... Not being able to use Steam to play my Game keeps me on my windows vista (sic) partition way to often. (And god, I hate Steam... ) I wouldn't even look at a vista without that.
To be fair, the research might be independent. It might be right too.
But GP is correct when he say Microsoft suffers a lake of credibility that they earn themselves.They seems to not care thought because this lakes of credibility isn't so big that they can't manipulate opinions with that sort of comment.
So you can't access your profile on an other hardware? sounds like a lot of fun.
But It's just irrelevant. The principal issue those last month is where you can gain access without identifying yourself to a lot of profile at a time.
If you consider that "Hacker" now mean "Evil Spawn who do something illegal with a computer", I would say TFT is right, by your own argumentation. More and more people feel the need to break law on a level or an other to do what they want with their devices. So effectively the number of hackers raise.
Me I think that the more lucrative informations will be hackable, the more hackers will be happy.
Yeah right!
Almost none of the recent mediated hacks involved password breaking. At this point I think password isn't the biggest issue with internet security today. Breaking a password isn't fast enough for profitable mass-hacking. And a good password won't be of any use against key-loggers (or any other method to get a password without force breaking it).
A bad password is an issue if you are a particular target, not if you are one of the crowd. (Except maybe an exceptionally bad password like "1234"... damn!)
Indeed since hackers now refer exclusively to the people doing bad stuff on the Internet. Well maybe not exclusively on the Internet, but you get the idea.
Black hat and white hat only distinguish the intent of "crackers" (using this word for clarity purpose...)
We need a word for people messing with there computer on any level, not just on the security stuff. Hacker is a cool word, but it seems desperate to keep it for that.
Also I don't see a better word to give to people messing with there computer on whatever level... Stupid media! (Yeah I know, nothing new here.)