Yes, and the economies of scale associated with accessing that information are what have allowed both the private sector and government to take wholesale advantage of it. Maybe we need to be more proactive. Just the other day I stopped for some gas. Upon handing the attendant a $10 bill, noting which pump I'd be using, I was told that they don't accept cash. I could have whipped out my debit card and been done with it, but I went somewhere else instead. How many people would be willing to go the extra mile and actually shun some convenience in order to protect themselves? Damn too few, I'd argue. Convenience is like crack...it's a long-term addiction, and very difficult to overcome.
mullahs and supplied them with replacement parts and additional arms, in exchange for them delaying release of the US hostages until AFTER the election,
I watched a documentary (BBC?) ( http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8905191678 365185391&q=Iraq ) on the activities in Fallujah, Iraq, and apparently this same tactic was used to ensure that no negative PR would come during the 2004 election. Even though everything was ready and in place, they purposely waited until AFTER the election (assuming a Bush victory) to attack. Of course, I don't know if that's the bigger problem, or the horrors that ensued after the attack was launched.
I still wonder about the election being as close as it was, that there were some weird oddities with respect to the vote counts in certain districts (where e-voting was used), and finally, that Kerry conceded so readily.
I've played in two clans where the average age is probably close to what you've desribed - however, how they *act* is another matter entirely. Sometimes it seems like there's a real disconnect between age and maturity.
I am upwards of 30 and I still enjoy firing up Vice City to raise HELL once in a while. I've also started Prince of Persia- granted my pace is somewhat slow, but I have other things going on so my time is limited. I've played WoW. Lineage2, America's Army, Planetside, and others. Games are something I enjoy, so I don't see putting the kibosh on playing them just because of some arbitrary age thing. I remember one guy playing AA was in his 70s.
Point taken. I didn't to my research. Although my general point that they should have picked on someone who deserves it, the example I chose wasn't appropriate.
The article was an interesting read, but I wonder why they chose one of the "good guys" - Stoddart is working in favor of privacy protection, not against it. I'd have much rather seen them acquire records of the Verizon CEO, or upper management of some other company that regularly pimps customer data.
Everyone seemed to have been predicting the demise of Nintendo, or at least becoming relegated to the status of a second-rate gaming hardware company. With two giants in close proximity (Sony and Microsoft), it's good to see that at least some semblance of balance will continue for a while longer.
I also disagree with your statement that Apple hardware is all about fickle and impressionable folks being wooed by gee whiz industrial design and ergonomics. People happen to like Apple hardware and software solution because it offers a well integrated solution that minimizes finger pointing.
Let's see...the non-replaceable iPod battery, the problems with scratched screens on the iPod Nano, cracks in the casings of the Mac cube, etc. The original nano didn't even include something as basic as a texture on the scroll wheel so that people be able to use it with less effort. It's ALL about folks being wooed by gee whiz industrial design and ergonomics, because Apple's batting record with respect to product design flaws isn't all that great.
Is there a laundrette or facilities for washing clothes? No Is there a telephone available in the room / hotel? No Can I store my bicycle within the hotel? No Can I buy alchohol at the hotel? No Is there a mini-bar in the room? No Is there a gym in the hotel? No Is there a swimming pool in the hotel? No
I'm trying to figure out why the people who designed this architecture didn't realize that putting this level of functionality down at the OS was NOT a good idea. This shouldn't be used as a justification for "Trusted Computing," it should be used as a prime example of what happens when one vendor decides to tightly couple all manner of functionality with its OS. I realize they might not have seen this when the WMF format was implemented, but the reason for implementing it this way most likely had something to do with Microsoft's monopolistic mindset.
It seems to me that the client should be responsible for ALL failures of this nature- what would have been so difficult about simply returning a result code?
I've heard promises from politicians every time I open a paper or turn on the news -- and those promises never bear fruit.
That's a given, sad to say. A chief job of the politician is to deceive. At the onset of the Republican control of Congress, we were deceived into believing that Republicans represent less government. Of course, that's only true when the Republicans are in the minority - but when they do get their hand on the wheel, money flows like water runs. Politicians don't get elected to office because they'll do anything worthy of mention (much less keep their word), they get elected because their ability to wrap their hands around large wads of federal cash, which they then cart back to their home districts. It's a pretty sad state of affairs, if you ask me.
To make matters worse, as some others may have pointed out, there are security issues that are listed multiple times. The Apache mod_ssl alert, for example, is listed nine separate times, but they all refer to the exact same issue- like that won't skew the results.
I'd be embarrassed if I were the Washington Post, as it appears as though someone didn't do their homework.
I've noticed that on some of the 'nix-based alerts, the initial "discovery" was made in 2004, but not reported by various distros until after the beginning of 2005. I also noticed that with some of them, ALL of the distros listed reported the problem in 2004, but then, someone else chimes in right after the beginning of 2005 (Avaya Security Advisory), basically restating what has already been announced by several other parties prior to 2005.
This is the only solution that I believe will put an end to an era of abuse by an entrenched industry. If you don't buy what they produce, you're cutting the blood supply, so to speak. If you don't copy, you're completely severing their gonads, because they have absolutely NO GROUNDS on which to place culpability on anyone but themselves. Sometimes, the image in the mirror is rather repugnant.
Let the come back, but with offers instead of threats.
Few contest that the U.S. patent system is overburdened. Only a few weeks ago, Patent and Trademark Commissioner John Doll was reported saying: "When you've got 1.3 million cases in the backlog, and it's taking [four to six] years to take a first office action, you've got to ask the question: Is the patent system still actually working, or are we just stamping numbers on the applications as they come through?
Funny - they brought a lot of this on themselves, and I wouldn't be a bit surprised if they had a bit of prodding from the inside, since it the revenue stream generated by patent filings is significant. They didn't HAVE to allow the first software patent, and the could have challenged patents that veered further and further into the murky gray area associated with software, but they didn't. As I recall, there were a couple of court decisions responsible for the interpretation that it was now OK to patent software, but this was never corrected. As a result, we are now chest-deep in the so-called "IP" cesspool that we have today.
Fixing the system now will be much more difficult, because there are many entrenched interests with a great deal at stake.
The overriding presumption is that they will use their tools effectively - which means, when it will provide them with information that is both necessary AND justified. I wonder sometimes if the massive technology push since 9/11 is nothing more than paper tiger, because what ultimately matters, is not only how the information is used, but how effectively it's used.
Information is meaningless unless the infrastructure behind it is sound. If the organization using it is just as unfocused as the pre-9/11 government, it really won't matter what they do, insofar as any actual protection from terrorist threats is concerned.
One of Nielson's caveats: 'keep distracting elements out of the frame of your shots.
This can't be right...the major networks have elevated the element of distraction to an artform. If not a scrolling banner across the bottom, then all manner of "cute" little animated junk (some even with sound effects). If not that, and you can almost certainly sit and stare at a crappy station ID logo (except for commercials, when you're faced with another form of distraction entirely). All of this to "enhance" your viewing pleasure.
I hate it, but they keep doing it anyway, so perhaps the larger audience actually likes it - similar to the way that they must like the crap produced by the RIAA, because they keep buying it (but only if they aren't copying it instead). Maybe our worst enemy here isn't bad podcasters, broadcasters, or music producers, but our own popular culture.
Consequently, the people who should be paying taxes for software are the ones who actually 'own' the software,
I completely disagree...do you know what this would mean? It would mean that in order to simply write something (software), and share it with someone else(or even a few hundred others), I have to PAY for the privilege. I'd say it borders on a constitutional issue - government taxation on the mere production of work of literature is tantamount to censorship- people who cannot pay, cannot play.
How did Echelon help deter the 9/11 attack? Oh, it didn't. More importantly, WHY? Doesn't anyone find it rather odd that despite already having the most all-encompassing surveillance technology available and in operation, 9/11 occurred anyway? What's different about the no-warrant wiretaps and TIA (or whatever they're choosing to call it today?) Could it be that the government is merely looking for a way to force public acceptance of a hideous (and, based on the lack of results from Echelon) probably unecessary surveillance state?
Every widget looks the same: a rectangle. You can't tell just by looking what any control will do when you click it...Compare Blender: it's hidden behind a wall of abstractions. Every widget looks the same: a rectangle. You can't tell just by looking what any control will do when you click it.
I have to disagree.
Yes, by changing a knob on a view camera, you are aware of EXACTLY what you're changing, As I'm sure you are aware, there are many aspects of 3D modeling, rendering and animation that are variable. Stick that many variables into the process of taking a simple photograph, and you'd have a view camera with several knobs, all of which look the same. Appearance aside, most controls in Blender have labels which tell pretty much exactly what they do. They also have pop-up tooltips which provide more in-depth information, should you need it.
Within the realm that Blender exists (a visual front-end to a very complex process), I'm still arguing that there is far less abstraction between you and you work than with other apps in the same category. If you're referring to the absence of cute little icons, these are no magic bullet either, since quite often, you first have to understand with the image is before you can understand what aspect of functionality it is supposed to represent.
Bottom line, there is no substitute for creative talent, or simply knowing your craft.
You seem to suggest that people can't produce work of equal or better quality - which I'm sure you know is complete bunk.
Did Ansel Adams need the equivalent of a fully-automated camera with a motor drive to produce the work that he did? Not even. His tool of choice, in many ways, reflects Blender's approach to 3D. It's a hands on, nuts-and-bolts approach that keeps the distance between you and your work at a minimum (few interface abstractions to interfere)- much like the potter and his/her potter's wheel. It doesn't work for everyone, but if you're serious about creativity, you shouldn't have any problems after a brief introduction to Blender's methodology.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, and the economies of scale associated with accessing that information are what have allowed both the private sector and government to take wholesale advantage of it. Maybe we need to be more proactive. Just the other day I stopped for some gas. Upon handing the attendant a $10 bill, noting which pump I'd be using, I was told that they don't accept cash. I could have whipped out my debit card and been done with it, but I went somewhere else instead. How many people would be willing to go the extra mile and actually shun some convenience in order to protect themselves? Damn too few, I'd argue. Convenience is like crack...it's a long-term addiction, and very difficult to overcome.
mullahs and supplied them with replacement parts and additional arms, in exchange for them delaying release of the US hostages until AFTER the election,
8 365185391&q=Iraq ) on the activities in Fallujah, Iraq, and apparently this same tactic was used to ensure that no negative PR would come during the 2004 election. Even though everything was ready and in place, they purposely waited until AFTER the election (assuming a Bush victory) to attack. Of course, I don't know if that's the bigger problem, or the horrors that ensued after the attack was launched.
I watched a documentary (BBC?) ( http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=890519167
I still wonder about the election being as close as it was, that there were some weird oddities with respect to the vote counts in certain districts (where e-voting was used), and finally, that Kerry conceded so readily.
I've played in two clans where the average age is probably close to what you've desribed - however, how they *act* is another matter entirely. Sometimes it seems like there's a real disconnect between age and maturity.
I am upwards of 30 and I still enjoy firing up Vice City to raise HELL once in a while. I've also started Prince of Persia- granted my pace is somewhat slow, but I have other things going on so my time is limited. I've played WoW. Lineage2, America's Army, Planetside, and others. Games are something I enjoy, so I don't see putting the kibosh on playing them just because of some arbitrary age thing. I remember one guy playing AA was in his 70s.
That server (or those servers) are getting a real workout - this was also on digg a bit earlier.
Point taken. I didn't to my research. Although my general point that they should have picked on someone who deserves it, the example I chose wasn't appropriate.
The article was an interesting read, but I wonder why they chose one of the "good guys" - Stoddart is working in favor of privacy protection, not against it. I'd have much rather seen them acquire records of the Verizon CEO, or upper management of some other company that regularly pimps customer data.
Everyone seemed to have been predicting the demise of Nintendo, or at least becoming relegated to the status of a second-rate gaming hardware company. With two giants in close proximity (Sony and Microsoft), it's good to see that at least some semblance of balance will continue for a while longer.
If eyebud users start experiencing vision loss like earbud users are experiencing hearing loss, they may not be driving for long.
I also disagree with your statement that Apple hardware is all about fickle and impressionable folks being wooed by gee whiz industrial design and ergonomics. People happen to like Apple hardware and software solution because it offers a well integrated solution that minimizes finger pointing.
Let's see...the non-replaceable iPod battery, the problems with scratched screens on the iPod Nano, cracks in the casings of the Mac cube, etc. The original nano didn't even include something as basic as a texture on the scroll wheel so that people be able to use it with less effort. It's ALL about folks being wooed by gee whiz industrial design and ergonomics, because Apple's batting record with respect to product design flaws isn't all that great.
From the FAQ:
Is there a laundrette or facilities for washing clothes? No
Is there a telephone available in the room / hotel? No
Can I store my bicycle within the hotel? No
Can I buy alchohol at the hotel? No
Is there a mini-bar in the room? No
Is there a gym in the hotel? No
Is there a swimming pool in the hotel? No
This has David Spade written all over it.
I'm trying to figure out why the people who designed this architecture didn't realize that putting this level of functionality down at the OS was NOT a good idea. This shouldn't be used as a justification for "Trusted Computing," it should be used as a prime example of what happens when one vendor decides to tightly couple all manner of functionality with its OS. I realize they might not have seen this when the WMF format was implemented, but the reason for implementing it this way most likely had something to do with Microsoft's monopolistic mindset.
It seems to me that the client should be responsible for ALL failures of this nature- what would have been so difficult about simply returning a result code?
A google search for "bush spending" will give you all the information you need.
I've heard promises from politicians every time I open a paper or turn on the news -- and those promises never bear fruit.
That's a given, sad to say. A chief job of the politician is to deceive. At the onset of the Republican control of Congress, we were deceived into believing that Republicans represent less government. Of course, that's only true when the Republicans are in the minority - but when they do get their hand on the wheel, money flows like water runs. Politicians don't get elected to office because they'll do anything worthy of mention (much less keep their word), they get elected because their ability to wrap their hands around large wads of federal cash, which they then cart back to their home districts. It's a pretty sad state of affairs, if you ask me.
To make matters worse, as some others may have pointed out, there are security issues that are listed multiple times. The Apache mod_ssl alert, for example, is listed nine separate times, but they all refer to the exact same issue- like that won't skew the results.
I'd be embarrassed if I were the Washington Post, as it appears as though someone didn't do their homework.
I've noticed that on some of the 'nix-based alerts, the initial "discovery" was made in 2004, but not reported by various distros until after the beginning of 2005. I also noticed that with some of them, ALL of the distros listed reported the problem in 2004, but then, someone else chimes in right after the beginning of 2005 (Avaya Security Advisory), basically restating what has already been announced by several other parties prior to 2005.
This is the only solution that I believe will put an end to an era of abuse by an entrenched industry. If you don't buy what they produce, you're cutting the blood supply, so to speak. If you don't copy, you're completely severing their gonads, because they have absolutely NO GROUNDS on which to place culpability on anyone but themselves. Sometimes, the image in the mirror is rather repugnant.
Let the come back, but with offers instead of threats.
Few contest that the U.S. patent system is overburdened. Only a few weeks ago, Patent and Trademark Commissioner John Doll was reported saying: "When you've got 1.3 million cases in the backlog, and it's taking [four to six] years to take a first office action, you've got to ask the question: Is the patent system still actually working, or are we just stamping numbers on the applications as they come through?
Funny - they brought a lot of this on themselves, and I wouldn't be a bit surprised if they had a bit of prodding from the inside, since it the revenue stream generated by patent filings is significant. They didn't HAVE to allow the first software patent, and the could have challenged patents that veered further and further into the murky gray area associated with software, but they didn't. As I recall, there were a couple of court decisions responsible for the interpretation that it was now OK to patent software, but this was never corrected. As a result, we are now chest-deep in the so-called "IP" cesspool that we have today.
Fixing the system now will be much more difficult, because there are many entrenched interests with a great deal at stake.
The overriding presumption is that they will use their tools effectively - which means, when it will provide them with information that is both necessary AND justified. I wonder sometimes if the massive technology push since 9/11 is nothing more than paper tiger, because what ultimately matters, is not only how the information is used, but how effectively it's used.
Information is meaningless unless the infrastructure behind it is sound. If the organization using it is just as unfocused as the pre-9/11 government, it really won't matter what they do, insofar as any actual protection from terrorist threats is concerned.
One of Nielson's caveats: 'keep distracting elements out of the frame of your shots.
This can't be right...the major networks have elevated the element of distraction to an artform. If not a scrolling banner across the bottom, then all manner of "cute" little animated junk (some even with sound effects). If not that, and you can almost certainly sit and stare at a crappy station ID logo (except for commercials, when you're faced with another form of distraction entirely). All of this to "enhance" your viewing pleasure.
I hate it, but they keep doing it anyway, so perhaps the larger audience actually likes it - similar to the way that they must like the crap produced by the RIAA, because they keep buying it (but only if they aren't copying it instead). Maybe our worst enemy here isn't bad podcasters, broadcasters, or music producers, but our own popular culture.
Consequently, the people who should be paying taxes for software are the ones who actually 'own' the software,
I completely disagree...do you know what this would mean? It would mean that in order to simply write something (software), and share it with someone else(or even a few hundred others), I have to PAY for the privilege. I'd say it borders on a constitutional issue - government taxation on the mere production of work of literature is tantamount to censorship- people who cannot pay, cannot play.
How did Echelon help deter the 9/11 attack? Oh, it didn't. More importantly, WHY? Doesn't anyone find it rather odd that despite already having the most all-encompassing surveillance technology available and in operation, 9/11 occurred anyway? What's different about the no-warrant wiretaps and TIA (or whatever they're choosing to call it today?) Could it be that the government is merely looking for a way to force public acceptance of a hideous (and, based on the lack of results from Echelon) probably unecessary surveillance state?
Every widget looks the same: a rectangle. You can't tell just by looking what any control will do when you click it...Compare Blender: it's hidden behind a wall of abstractions. Every widget looks the same: a rectangle. You can't tell just by looking what any control will do when you click it.
I have to disagree.
Yes, by changing a knob on a view camera, you are aware of EXACTLY what you're changing, As I'm sure you are aware, there are many aspects of 3D modeling, rendering and animation that are variable. Stick that many variables into the process of taking a simple photograph, and you'd have a view camera with several knobs, all of which look the same. Appearance aside, most controls in Blender have labels which tell pretty much exactly what they do. They also have pop-up tooltips which provide more in-depth information, should you need it.
Within the realm that Blender exists (a visual front-end to a very complex process), I'm still arguing that there is far less abstraction between you and you work than with other apps in the same category. If you're referring to the absence of cute little icons, these are no magic bullet either, since quite often, you first have to understand with the image is before you can understand what aspect of functionality it is supposed to represent.
Bottom line, there is no substitute for creative talent, or simply knowing your craft.
Undo has been available for quite some time.
You seem to suggest that people can't produce work of equal or better quality - which I'm sure you know is complete bunk.
Did Ansel Adams need the equivalent of a fully-automated camera with a motor drive to produce the work that he did? Not even. His tool of choice, in many ways, reflects Blender's approach to 3D. It's a hands on, nuts-and-bolts approach that keeps the distance between you and your work at a minimum (few interface abstractions to interfere)- much like the potter and his/her potter's wheel. It doesn't work for everyone, but if you're serious about creativity, you shouldn't have any problems after a brief introduction to Blender's methodology.