...but but but.. MCCAIN isn't Bush! Bush isn't the republican WE voted for! WAAAAAH! Seriously! MCCAIN is CHANGE!
You have no idea how many of my republican friends swore by Bush in 2000, and only now, in their own defense, they claim that Bush just didn't turn out how they expected, and there's no doubt he was a bad president. But McCain will be different!
It's like they keep tricking themselves into voting republican, getting shit on, and then rationalizing it. Repeat.
The outright untrustworthiness is something that I'm surprised the slashdot crowd misses. Especially on McCain's side.. Anybody watch the debates and just count logical fallacies? It seems a single logical fallacy can't get by in a slashdot discussion, but on TV, it's almost as if everybody's infallible, like a certain level of lies and illogical statements are expected, and we should just discuss these issues like they're legit.
Plus, the infrastructure he wants to build will also help that little global warming thing (if it exists), or worst case scenerio, at least free us from foreign oil, which everybody agrees is a good idea.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who heard him go off on that during the second debate-
"I know how to get Osama Bin Laden, my friends. I'll get him. I know how to get him. I'll get him no matter what, and I know how to do it."
I don't know what's creepier- the fact that he purports to know more than the US government, the millitary, and the collective knowledge of our allies... or the fact that he kept calling us his "friends.."
I'm overwhelmingly impressed with the non-anti-microsoft response from this thread.
Personally I use vista on a number of machines. I repair computers for a living. 2 out of 3 Vista Machines have what I call "the vista bug" where things are just slow and clunky. Why is XP with 512 just fine, and vista with 3 gb still sloppy?
Hmm.. still taking hours.. latest updates installed. What's that? internet explorer has stopped responding again? I don't understand why all my programs are now unstable. Is it the software, or Vista?
Seriously, the only people claiming vista is fine with no performance problems are the people who don't use vista as their main machine. Try spending a day at work on a Vista machine. You'll see what we're talking about.
I work in the field, and I guess after programming for a long time before the "web 2.0" thing, you just get used to the technology. Ajax is clever, there's no doubt- but it's nothing new in the http protocol. It's just a clever way of using an existing technology. I was writing ajax-type applications before the term ajax was used. And there were clearly interactive sites (less common) before web 2.0 was coined.
So, I guess the problem I see with some buzzwords is that they're typically used to convey a meaning to somebody less technical. I don't consider the term "web 2.0" useful unless I'm a hype machine (ie the media). Typically, as a developer, I would only use the term if I'm speaking with a client who likes buzzwords.
On the other side, AJAX is very specific, and a useful word that has also turned into a bit of a geek buzzword, but you won't see a Time magazine article referencing ajax like they do web 2.0. I use the term AJAX frequently, as the current business app I've been working on is fully ajaxed (and super-cool might I add).
Anyway, my point is that the people who don't understand the under-lying technologies are precisely who these phrases were invented for. For those who understand, it's typically nothing actually new under the sun, just somebody decided to coin the term. I refuse to call my audio downloads "podcasts." They were downloads, and still are just plainly downloads.
Except AJAX is a useful implementation of server and client side scripting that developers use often.
Web 2.0 is just a groan-worthy phrase that broadly defines an era of (questionably) more-useful websites, but not neccessarily with any strict definition.
One's useful in classifying applications, the other is a buzzword.
This is true with Amazon's take on cloud computing, but according to the accepted (read:wikipedia) definition, the scalability and auto-growing/shrinking of your resources isn't neccessarily what makes it cloud computing. The thing that makes it cloud computing is the fact that it's remote application that handles your normally-local activities. Amazon's new service just cashes in on the new buzzword.
To expand on this, because now you've made me research this, basically cloud computing refers to hosting business applications remotely- typically, but not neccessarily, on multiple servers. (Such as an application server, a sql server, and so on)
"But I already have my business software hosted on an application server, and it utilizes a seperate SQL server... how is this any different?"
Is it stored somewhere offsite, say, by a hosting company?
"Why, yes.."
Then welcome to the cloud computing club!
But I've been doing this since the late 90s, I'm confused, what's changed?
Nothing at all. It's just like podcasts and web 2.0, another useless name for downloading audio files and websites that are more clever than before.
So basically, the only difference between remote hosting and cloud computing is whether or not you understand what's underneath the hood. If you're not sure how it works, but it just does, it's called "the cloud" otherwise, the rest of us call it "Shared hosting," "VPS," "Colocated," or "Dedicated" offsite hosting.
It's kinda like using the word magic instead of the word science. Makes people feel better.
In fact, if people's behaviors are any indication, we might just be regressing.
I've been worried about this lately. What if modern health care has killed evolution as we know it?
The only consolation I have for myself is that the good strains of human dna will still exist. Unfortunately it will stay spread out like it is now, and won't turn out super-humans in the future.
When I was a child, we just plainly didn't have video games or TV to waste time on, and in turn I made things to do. I seriously recommend it. A big part of development is creativity, and without it, I'd be worried how average I would've turned out.
Yeah-- in the US we have the FCC which would put the porno to a stop... but marketing to kids during kids shows and gambling commercials- I'm pretty sure are in the FCC's "suggested use of air time" booklet.
By layers of security, I'm sure he meant something along the lines of "Even if you can connect to our network printers on the windows server- you can't use them! Heck, we still can't figure out how to use them. Actually if you figure out how to get them to work, can you get the print jobs started? There's probably a couple hundred print jobs waiting.
Oh and you probably can't access any files on our network, because in this HIGH security office, we don't even have network shares or anything of the like. Nopers, we email documents to eachother. Good luck catching us, dude. LAYERS. LAYERS AND LAYERS of security."
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously, well said!
This is a great argument against those who don't believe their tax dollars should pay to give "drug addicts" and "scum" free health care....
I personally believe health care should be a basic right- and that nobody should be left without it, no matter how much money they have...
But this is a brilliant point...
Right, I fix computers.
...but but but.. MCCAIN isn't Bush! Bush isn't the republican WE voted for! WAAAAAH! Seriously! MCCAIN is CHANGE!
You have no idea how many of my republican friends swore by Bush in 2000, and only now, in their own defense, they claim that Bush just didn't turn out how they expected, and there's no doubt he was a bad president. But McCain will be different!
It's like they keep tricking themselves into voting republican, getting shit on, and then rationalizing it. Repeat.
The outright untrustworthiness is something that I'm surprised the slashdot crowd misses. Especially on McCain's side.. Anybody watch the debates and just count logical fallacies? It seems a single logical fallacy can't get by in a slashdot discussion, but on TV, it's almost as if everybody's infallible, like a certain level of lies and illogical statements are expected, and we should just discuss these issues like they're legit.
Plus, the infrastructure he wants to build will also help that little global warming thing (if it exists), or worst case scenerio, at least free us from foreign oil, which everybody agrees is a good idea.
"I know how to get Osama Bin Laden, my friends. I'll get him. I know how to get him. I'll get him no matter what, and I know how to do it."
I don't know what's creepier- the fact that he purports to know more than the US government, the millitary, and the collective knowledge of our allies... or the fact that he kept calling us his "friends.."
I'm overwhelmingly impressed with the non-anti-microsoft response from this thread.
Personally I use vista on a number of machines. I repair computers for a living. 2 out of 3 Vista Machines have what I call "the vista bug" where things are just slow and clunky. Why is XP with 512 just fine, and vista with 3 gb still sloppy?
CTRL-C and CTRL-V
Hmm.. still taking hours.. latest updates installed. What's that? internet explorer has stopped responding again? I don't understand why all my programs are now unstable. Is it the software, or Vista?
Seriously, the only people claiming vista is fine with no performance problems are the people who don't use vista as their main machine. Try spending a day at work on a Vista machine. You'll see what we're talking about.
I work in the field, and I guess after programming for a long time before the "web 2.0" thing, you just get used to the technology. Ajax is clever, there's no doubt- but it's nothing new in the http protocol. It's just a clever way of using an existing technology. I was writing ajax-type applications before the term ajax was used. And there were clearly interactive sites (less common) before web 2.0 was coined.
So, I guess the problem I see with some buzzwords is that they're typically used to convey a meaning to somebody less technical. I don't consider the term "web 2.0" useful unless I'm a hype machine (ie the media). Typically, as a developer, I would only use the term if I'm speaking with a client who likes buzzwords.
On the other side, AJAX is very specific, and a useful word that has also turned into a bit of a geek buzzword, but you won't see a Time magazine article referencing ajax like they do web 2.0. I use the term AJAX frequently, as the current business app I've been working on is fully ajaxed (and super-cool might I add).
Anyway, my point is that the people who don't understand the under-lying technologies are precisely who these phrases were invented for. For those who understand, it's typically nothing actually new under the sun, just somebody decided to coin the term. I refuse to call my audio downloads "podcasts." They were downloads, and still are just plainly downloads.
I think the big fear, is, you know, ... getting shot.
Except AJAX is a useful implementation of server and client side scripting that developers use often.
Web 2.0 is just a groan-worthy phrase that broadly defines an era of (questionably) more-useful websites, but not neccessarily with any strict definition.
One's useful in classifying applications, the other is a buzzword.
Shoot- my bad. This is what I meant to link to.
The origin of binaural beats has been found.
Scientists would explain, but they're all apparently in the lab "tripping" out to ACID STARDUST.
This is true with Amazon's take on cloud computing, but according to the accepted (read:wikipedia) definition, the scalability and auto-growing/shrinking of your resources isn't neccessarily what makes it cloud computing. The thing that makes it cloud computing is the fact that it's remote application that handles your normally-local activities. Amazon's new service just cashes in on the new buzzword.
To expand on this, because now you've made me research this, basically cloud computing refers to hosting business applications remotely- typically, but not neccessarily, on multiple servers. (Such as an application server, a sql server, and so on)
"But I already have my business software hosted on an application server, and it utilizes a seperate SQL server... how is this any different?"
Is it stored somewhere offsite, say, by a hosting company?
"Why, yes.."
Then welcome to the cloud computing club!
But I've been doing this since the late 90s, I'm confused, what's changed?
Nothing at all. It's just like podcasts and web 2.0, another useless name for downloading audio files and websites that are more clever than before.
So basically, the only difference between remote hosting and cloud computing is whether or not you understand what's underneath the hood. If you're not sure how it works, but it just does, it's called "the cloud" otherwise, the rest of us call it "Shared hosting," "VPS," "Colocated," or "Dedicated" offsite hosting.
It's kinda like using the word magic instead of the word science. Makes people feel better.
According to wikipedia it's a fancy way of saying "the internet" to people who don't understand the infrastructure of the internet.
The terms of use encourage installing a single game multiple times for network play. Which would make sense, with no single player mode...
It is true, at least for verizon prepay. If you don't open it, it's not deducted from your account...
The big difference was 3.1 to 3.11.
If you do not read the message, you are not charged.
In fact, if people's behaviors are any indication, we might just be regressing.
I've been worried about this lately. What if modern health care has killed evolution as we know it?
The only consolation I have for myself is that the good strains of human dna will still exist. Unfortunately it will stay spread out like it is now, and won't turn out super-humans in the future.
So, really, we've just put evolution on pause.
When I was a child, we just plainly didn't have video games or TV to waste time on, and in turn I made things to do. I seriously recommend it. A big part of development is creativity, and without it, I'd be worried how average I would've turned out.
Yeah-- in the US we have the FCC which would put the porno to a stop... but marketing to kids during kids shows and gambling commercials- I'm pretty sure are in the FCC's "suggested use of air time" booklet.
The good news is that this time, the carrier promises look to be delivered on.
Is there something I missed? I don't understand...
By layers of security, I'm sure he meant something along the lines of "Even if you can connect to our network printers on the windows server- you can't use them! Heck, we still can't figure out how to use them. Actually if you figure out how to get them to work, can you get the print jobs started? There's probably a couple hundred print jobs waiting.
Oh and you probably can't access any files on our network, because in this HIGH security office, we don't even have network shares or anything of the like. Nopers, we email documents to eachother. Good luck catching us, dude. LAYERS. LAYERS AND LAYERS of security."