the new Warner Bros Powerpuff Girls DVD is infected with the FunLove virus.
Alright, who doesn't agree that this has got to be the funniest/. story EVER.
Don't go double clicking on no web pages now...
on
Netscape 6.2
·
· Score: 4, Funny
From the Release notes:
Known Problems
General
Mac OS: There is a known incompatibility between Netscape and WebFree, a Control Panel commonly used to block HTML-based ads. When using Netscape , disable WebFree.
Keyboard and Mouse
Double right-clicking on a page can disable the keyboard.
Trying to visit a Microsoft owned web page may result in your computer's HCF (Halt and catch fire) instruction being called.
As far as the wingding fonts goes, and in case anyone cares, here's what you get
This is from Windows XP, btw:
NYC in webdings: eye, heart, buildings (I love buildings?)
NYC in wingdings: skull and crossbones, Star of David, thumbs up symbol
There are also two more "wingdings" fonts, WingDings 2 and WingDings 3, but I wouldn't know how to describe some of the symbols that come up for those.
Forget college, just join a gang, learn web design for free, and then start making mucho dinero without the hassles of a student loan, or 4 years of college... Sounds good...
Maybe with two year old code, but what about older code? It gets very expensive to support software when there is something newew that fixes all the known problems with the old code, adds new features, and is easier to maintain.
That's why companies drop supprt of old code. Microsoft shouldn't have to support Win3.1 or MS-DOS or even Win95 at this point. It's not worth the time, money or effort at this point because most of the issues have been resolved in later code.
Does anyone want to support the 1.x version of the Linux kernel? I doubt it. Even a few . versions back it becomes a huge hassle to support because the new way is better than the old way. Trying to figure out what the hell is supposed to happen with older code can be harder than rewriting the entire thing.
People that refuse to move off of old code after support has been dropped for the code should have to pay more for support if they still want to stay with the old code. Maybe they pay on a per incident basis and pay nothing else (since the code is not supported), but if they want fixes and upgrades to obsolete code, it should cost enough where maybe they evaluate if it is worth staying at the old release, or maybe it's better they buck up and upgrade.
With all that fun crap said, obsoleting code (especially OSs) within just a few years just to increase revenue sux.
Not to defend Microsoft on this one, but I don't think you could have legally sold that one anyway. The copy of Windows NT you got with C++ came with the same license as the C++ you bought, an academic license. Those are way discounted and they include the clause that you cannot resell it. In fact the box you got the software in probably had a sticker or two on it saying that you were purchasing academic licensed software and therefore we not permitted to sell it again.
I bought the J++ package because it was $200 cheaper than just getting NT by itself. I don't think I ever installed or used J++.
Ok, after reading this article and many of the replies, I have come up with some observations.
First, the planes would be using liquid hydrogen, not gaseous, so all the comments about needing to compress the gas, or contain the gas, or the gas not having as much energy as jet fuel need to read the damn article!
Secondly, there are about a zillion different opinions based on guesses and I didn't see a single person who was qualified (at least no one say why they were qualified) to say what would happen when the plane hit a building. It's all just a bunch of speculation.
Third, we know what caused the Hindenburg to explode. About half the messages are saying that it wasn't the hydrogen, it was the coating. It should also be noted that the Hindenburg was not filled with liquid H2 so the comparison again is not really valid.
What I'd like to see is someone who works with H2 in a liquid form to post their thoughts on what would happen based on their own observations and experiments with liquid H2. The closest I saw was one individual who talked about seeing the drops of H2 liquid just kind of floating downwards instead of just falling like water.
The other point is that I saw many posts saying how H2 contains a lot of energy, and others saying it contains very little. Logic would say that one of those is wrong. Once again, I would like to see someone who knows what they are talking about post something and include either a reference or a credential, or something to compare H2 and jet fuel in regards to energy density.
I guess this is slashdot, I'd just like to see more people that do know what they are talking about post and less people that think they know what they are talking about claiming that they do... But again, this is slashdot, so I cannot expect much different.
I dont care that they are wasting a little time doing this because it is always increasing the overall competency of the team...
The thing is though, if they are increasing the overall competency of the team, then they are not wasting time.
We had a professor when I was taking class who would let us sit down, discuss the code, show the code, etc, but nothing could be written down, typed, etc. The only things you could come away with were the things you remembered. I think that way is effective as well, at least in a college/classroom setting.
Team work in college is great if you empower the team like they would be elsewhere.
I had a team I was involved with in college where we had one individual who didn't pull his own weight whatsoever. This was even ok to a point since the rest of use could pick up the slack.
However, this same student was responsible for keeping track of all our project materials and presentation slides. On the day of our presentation, he neglected to show up at all, so in effect, if he'd been doing nothing we would have been better off than what happened.
We talked to the instructor and found we were allowed to fire the student. This responsibility fell on my shoulders and I had to take him aside and tell him that he was no longer in the group and would no longer be part of our project. Since it was near the end of the semester at this point, he wasn't able to find another group that would accept him and he ended up having to repeat the course.
Tough, I know, but fair, and he saw it that way as well in the end.
Any one person in the team should be able to complete the project on their own, given enough time to do so.
I don't think so. The purpose of a team in the Real Word is not just so the project gets done faster, it's because in the Real World, not everyone knows everything. Sure, anyone may be able to get through the whole project by themselves, but that would be after a whole lot or research and learning completely new things.
The teams allow people with different specialties to come together and share their expertise, with each of them working on the part of the project most suited to their area of expertise. There are very few people who are experts in all areas of any decent sized project.
Joe may be great at network code, and even know XML and HTML, but he may not be able to code his way out of a paper bag in Java. Sure, he could learn Java, but that would take time, whereas Sue knows Java, and can also do interface design, but she doesn't really understand TCP. Sure, she could learn TCP, but that's a lot of time when instead we get these two working together along with Bob and Aaron, and soon we've got experts in all sorts of areas and some cross-over expertise and we can get a complex project done.
There are few projects in the real world that can be done by just one person. With source code in the millions of lines, it is not feasible or realistic to expect everyone in the company (or the department) or the team would be an expert or even be familiar with all the code in a complex project.
even copying is good, as long as the student learns the subject matter. Here are some ideas...
You're right, copying is fine as long as the student learns the subject matter. But this is not usually the case. What motivation would a student who is copying an assignment have to learn what is done in the assigmnent? If they were really interested in learning the material, they'd do the code themselves, and maybe collaborate if they were stuck on one piece after struggling for awhile.
I don't think that allowing straight out copying is a good idea, but collaborating as long as both parties are learning the material is great. In fact, it can even help the student who already successfully completed the code by forcing them to think about and explain why each piece was done the way it was.
I teach a data structures course at a Colorado university (not CU). Two weeks ago, I had two students turn in nearly identical code, and two others turn in completely identical code, down to the exact same spacing and comments. There was no difference in the second.
The first example had some differences, such as variable names being slightly changed, comments were changed but all in the exact same place, and the logic was all in the same order. Other than that, just a few if statements were changed but in ways where it meant and did the exact same thing, ie,
if (a)
b();
else
c();
or
if (!a)
c();
else
b();
I asked a former professor what to do and she said that in cases like these she has thrown the book at the students. She said even if there is just a hint or suspicion of cheating, it should be submitted to the Dean, but that I should check with the department head.
He went the complete opposite route and said that we didn't really have any evidence that cheating had occurred, and to just talk to them and tell them that they needed to work more independently. I thought I had more than enough evidence since one set had identical code.
I confronted the first group (identical code) and they admitted to working together. I told them to meet me after class and they admitted to working together. I told them that this was a bit more than just working together and that it wouldn't happen again or there would be consequences.
I then had a meeting with the other two and they explained that they did work heavily together, but would never ever copy, etc. I told them that they just needed to work a little more independently as their code was extremely similar.
Consequently, the students that were copying did not do well on the exam last week and I believe it is due to them not knowing how to code on their own.
Students need to learn to code on their own since most code in the Real World is not already made for them, and the code that is there is written by someone else, and it will be thier responsibility to know how to maintain it. You can't maintain code if you can't code in the first place.
How long has radio time delay been used? You know the ones that allow them to censor the callers who swear on the air before it gets sent out on the airwaves? This sounds a bit similar... I wonder if it is pre-1992?
In 1992, RAM was in the hundreds of dollars/meg, so this probably wasn't feasible then. However, I agree with the other reply, in that just because is wasn't feasible or economically sound to implement at the time, it doesn't mean it won't be later.
If I come up with a design for a working warp drive that uses some sort of thing that we cannot readily make today, but can be manufactured cheaply while my patent is still in effect, I should be rewarded for coming up with the idea. Ideas that push the envelope are the ones that help keep technology moving forward.
But I thought the whole point of a remote was not having to get up and go across the room to change the channel... Besides, I've found pressing the buttons with the tip of my finger works better than mashing the buttons my whole palm...:)
Rhino-3D (3D modeling software) has an interesting way to keep licensing legal. In order to install on a computer, you must have an original key. However, it is very possible to install the software on several computers. However, only one copy of the software can be running at the same time if it was installed with the same key. If you start up the copy on the other computer it will inform you that the license associated with the copy you are trying to start is already in use, and then it will exit. (Sounds similar to Quake 3 and Half-Life).
Rhino also has the ability to have a "Zoo Keeper" where many keys can be installed. Every time a user starts a copy of Rhino, it goes to the key server and gets a valid key. If all the keys are being used, it cannot start up since the company only purchased x number of licenses. Seems like a fairly decent way to do things to me. It lets you install on whatever computers you would like, but lets you run only the number of copies you have purchased simultaneously.
Good to know I am not the only one who verbs nouns...
Stupid slashdot filter... It doesn't take frikking 20 seconds to type the above line. And then it's gone when I go back to hit submit again which means I have to retype it and then type this whole thing... It'd better work....
Slashdot Mirror
Imagine all the confusion and offended people when the shepherds were just trying to show them they had 4 sheep...
the new Warner Bros Powerpuff Girls DVD is infected with the FunLove virus.
/. story EVER.
Alright, who doesn't agree that this has got to be the funniest
From the Release notes:
Known Problems
General
Mac OS: There is a known incompatibility between Netscape and WebFree, a Control Panel commonly used to block HTML-based ads. When using Netscape , disable WebFree.
Keyboard and Mouse Double right-clicking on a page can disable the keyboard.
Trying to visit a Microsoft owned web page may result in your computer's HCF (Halt and catch fire) instruction being called.
Ok, so I added the last one.
As far as the wingding fonts goes, and in case anyone cares, here's what you get
This is from Windows XP, btw:
NYC in webdings: eye, heart, buildings (I love buildings?)
NYC in wingdings: skull and crossbones, Star of David, thumbs up symbol
There are also two more "wingdings" fonts, WingDings 2 and WingDings 3, but I wouldn't know how to describe some of the symbols that come up for those.
So will it be per-site or per-page? If per-page, you get the 'lure' factor above. If per-site, how do you rate geocities.com?
How about
This website has been rated:
| C | Craptacular - Not suitable for anyone.
Forget college, just join a gang, learn web design for free, and then start making mucho dinero without the hassles of a student loan, or 4 years of college... Sounds good...
No, seriously, we've gone through the companies that failed with the .COMs, maybe now they want to try the .CAMs.
And CueCat would have worked better if it just had better marketing...
Maybe with two year old code, but what about older code? It gets very expensive to support software when there is something newew that fixes all the known problems with the old code, adds new features, and is easier to maintain.
That's why companies drop supprt of old code. Microsoft shouldn't have to support Win3.1 or MS-DOS or even Win95 at this point. It's not worth the time, money or effort at this point because most of the issues have been resolved in later code.
Does anyone want to support the 1.x version of the Linux kernel? I doubt it. Even a few . versions back it becomes a huge hassle to support because the new way is better than the old way. Trying to figure out what the hell is supposed to happen with older code can be harder than rewriting the entire thing.
People that refuse to move off of old code after support has been dropped for the code should have to pay more for support if they still want to stay with the old code. Maybe they pay on a per incident basis and pay nothing else (since the code is not supported), but if they want fixes and upgrades to obsolete code, it should cost enough where maybe they evaluate if it is worth staying at the old release, or maybe it's better they buck up and upgrade.
With all that fun crap said, obsoleting code (especially OSs) within just a few years just to increase revenue sux.
Not to defend Microsoft on this one, but I don't think you could have legally sold that one anyway. The copy of Windows NT you got with C++ came with the same license as the C++ you bought, an academic license. Those are way discounted and they include the clause that you cannot resell it. In fact the box you got the software in probably had a sticker or two on it saying that you were purchasing academic licensed software and therefore we not permitted to sell it again.
I bought the J++ package because it was $200 cheaper than just getting NT by itself. I don't think I ever installed or used J++.
Just some thoughts...
Ok, after reading this article and many of the replies, I have come up with some observations.
First, the planes would be using liquid hydrogen, not gaseous, so all the comments about needing to compress the gas, or contain the gas, or the gas not having as much energy as jet fuel need to read the damn article!
Secondly, there are about a zillion different opinions based on guesses and I didn't see a single person who was qualified (at least no one say why they were qualified) to say what would happen when the plane hit a building. It's all just a bunch of speculation.
Third, we know what caused the Hindenburg to explode. About half the messages are saying that it wasn't the hydrogen, it was the coating. It should also be noted that the Hindenburg was not filled with liquid H2 so the comparison again is not really valid.
What I'd like to see is someone who works with H2 in a liquid form to post their thoughts on what would happen based on their own observations and experiments with liquid H2. The closest I saw was one individual who talked about seeing the drops of H2 liquid just kind of floating downwards instead of just falling like water.
The other point is that I saw many posts saying how H2 contains a lot of energy, and others saying it contains very little. Logic would say that one of those is wrong. Once again, I would like to see someone who knows what they are talking about post something and include either a reference or a credential, or something to compare H2 and jet fuel in regards to energy density.
I guess this is slashdot, I'd just like to see more people that do know what they are talking about post and less people that think they know what they are talking about claiming that they do... But again, this is slashdot, so I cannot expect much different.
<-- end rant...
I dont care that they are wasting a little time doing this because it is always increasing the overall competency of the team...
The thing is though, if they are increasing the overall competency of the team, then they are not wasting time.
We had a professor when I was taking class who would let us sit down, discuss the code, show the code, etc, but nothing could be written down, typed, etc. The only things you could come away with were the things you remembered. I think that way is effective as well, at least in a college/classroom setting.
Team work in college is great if you empower the team like they would be elsewhere.
I had a team I was involved with in college where we had one individual who didn't pull his own weight whatsoever. This was even ok to a point since the rest of use could pick up the slack.
However, this same student was responsible for keeping track of all our project materials and presentation slides. On the day of our presentation, he neglected to show up at all, so in effect, if he'd been doing nothing we would have been better off than what happened.
We talked to the instructor and found we were allowed to fire the student. This responsibility fell on my shoulders and I had to take him aside and tell him that he was no longer in the group and would no longer be part of our project. Since it was near the end of the semester at this point, he wasn't able to find another group that would accept him and he ended up having to repeat the course.
Tough, I know, but fair, and he saw it that way as well in the end.
Any one person in the team should be able to complete the project on their own, given enough time to do so.
I don't think so. The purpose of a team in the Real Word is not just so the project gets done faster, it's because in the Real World, not everyone knows everything. Sure, anyone may be able to get through the whole project by themselves, but that would be after a whole lot or research and learning completely new things.
The teams allow people with different specialties to come together and share their expertise, with each of them working on the part of the project most suited to their area of expertise. There are very few people who are experts in all areas of any decent sized project.
Joe may be great at network code, and even know XML and HTML, but he may not be able to code his way out of a paper bag in Java. Sure, he could learn Java, but that would take time, whereas Sue knows Java, and can also do interface design, but she doesn't really understand TCP. Sure, she could learn TCP, but that's a lot of time when instead we get these two working together along with Bob and Aaron, and soon we've got experts in all sorts of areas and some cross-over expertise and we can get a complex project done.
There are few projects in the real world that can be done by just one person. With source code in the millions of lines, it is not feasible or realistic to expect everyone in the company (or the department) or the team would be an expert or even be familiar with all the code in a complex project.
even copying is good, as long as the student learns the subject matter. Here are some ideas...
You're right, copying is fine as long as the student learns the subject matter. But this is not usually the case. What motivation would a student who is copying an assignment have to learn what is done in the assigmnent? If they were really interested in learning the material, they'd do the code themselves, and maybe collaborate if they were stuck on one piece after struggling for awhile.
I don't think that allowing straight out copying is a good idea, but collaborating as long as both parties are learning the material is great. In fact, it can even help the student who already successfully completed the code by forcing them to think about and explain why each piece was done the way it was.
The first example had some differences, such as variable names being slightly changed, comments were changed but all in the exact same place, and the logic was all in the same order. Other than that, just a few if statements were changed but in ways where it meant and did the exact same thing, ie,
or
I asked a former professor what to do and she said that in cases like these she has thrown the book at the students. She said even if there is just a hint or suspicion of cheating, it should be submitted to the Dean, but that I should check with the department head. He went the complete opposite route and said that we didn't really have any evidence that cheating had occurred, and to just talk to them and tell them that they needed to work more independently. I thought I had more than enough evidence since one set had identical code. I confronted the first group (identical code) and they admitted to working together. I told them to meet me after class and they admitted to working together. I told them that this was a bit more than just working together and that it wouldn't happen again or there would be consequences. I then had a meeting with the other two and they explained that they did work heavily together, but would never ever copy, etc. I told them that they just needed to work a little more independently as their code was extremely similar. Consequently, the students that were copying did not do well on the exam last week and I believe it is due to them not knowing how to code on their own. Students need to learn to code on their own since most code in the Real World is not already made for them, and the code that is there is written by someone else, and it will be thier responsibility to know how to maintain it. You can't maintain code if you can't code in the first place.
How long has radio time delay been used? You know the ones that allow them to censor the callers who swear on the air before it gets sent out on the airwaves? This sounds a bit similar... I wonder if it is pre-1992?
In 1992, RAM was in the hundreds of dollars/meg, so this probably wasn't feasible then. However, I agree with the other reply, in that just because is wasn't feasible or economically sound to implement at the time, it doesn't mean it won't be later.
If I come up with a design for a working warp drive that uses some sort of thing that we cannot readily make today, but can be manufactured cheaply while my patent is still in effect, I should be rewarded for coming up with the idea. Ideas that push the envelope are the ones that help keep technology moving forward.
"Hey, why's the pause button broken on your VCR Drew?"
"Um, for replaying sports.... Yeah, sports..."
And since Titanium cards are now the next better things past Platinum cards, to quote a Busta' Rhymes song:
"I'm so rich, I got ridda' all my platimun cards, and I got me a Uranium card..."
I guess you could always use your Palm.
:)
But I thought the whole point of a remote was not having to get up and go across the room to change the channel... Besides, I've found pressing the buttons with the tip of my finger works better than mashing the buttons my whole palm...
Rhino-3D (3D modeling software) has an interesting way to keep licensing legal. In order to install on a computer, you must have an original key. However, it is very possible to install the software on several computers. However, only one copy of the software can be running at the same time if it was installed with the same key. If you start up the copy on the other computer it will inform you that the license associated with the copy you are trying to start is already in use, and then it will exit. (Sounds similar to Quake 3 and Half-Life).
Rhino also has the ability to have a "Zoo Keeper" where many keys can be installed. Every time a user starts a copy of Rhino, it goes to the key server and gets a valid key. If all the keys are being used, it cannot start up since the company only purchased x number of licenses. Seems like a fairly decent way to do things to me. It lets you install on whatever computers you would like, but lets you run only the number of copies you have purchased simultaneously.
The new Charlie's Angels movie showed how to fake a retinal scan with the use of contacts, and copious amounts of backflipping.
Good to know I am not the only one who verbs nouns...
Stupid slashdot filter... It doesn't take frikking 20 seconds to type the above line. And then it's gone when I go back to hit submit again which means I have to retype it and then type this whole thing... It'd better work....
Seriously, this keyboard looks like it would put a serious damper on any onehanded typing.
That's just too bad since it would mean you could now say "tit" on TV... Oh well...