Number of Slashdotters who realise that SPAMMERs are not stupid and randomly try combinations of words and numbers (bob1@hotmail.com, bob2, bob3...)...Priceless
Do you really think that if I register afsradoij294@hotmail.com that I won't get any spam? I'd bet you a large sum of money I'd get some in the first few days.
Yeah, the problem is that they don't get rid of the codename very well. A lot of driver.inf files had (have?) lines that read:
Blahblahblah="$CHICAGO"
Or something like that. Well, it's not a real *problem*, but it's a little odd when you're trying to force drivers that worked with 2k and NT into XP, which is what I think I was trying to do at the time.
Re:Roulette baiting Re:Hacking Roulette?
on
Net Vegas
·
· Score: 2
There are two ways displays work. First, it attracts casual gambling by those who might be walking by, see the displayed trend, and put money down because they feel "lucky" betting for/against the trend. Supermarkets call this an impulse buy.
Oh. Duh. =p
I was thinking too much about the game mechanics, and not enough about the actual fact that *people* were playing the game. Whoopsie.
Re:Roulette baiting Re:Hacking Roulette?
on
Net Vegas
·
· Score: 2
...
Could you explain please? The nit-picker in me wants to say that since past trends doesn't matter, the casino can't possibly influence someone to bet 'wrong'... so the ammount of money would be the same either way.
I agree but wonder, if this is typically the case, why do companies, businesses, and individuals persist on using such long, useless verbage?
All my legal experience is from John Grisham books, and all my statistics are completely fabricated. Consider that a warning!
Very likely, it's because most people don't get themselves a lawyer. As a company, you have a very good chance of snowballing someone who has a serious legitamate grievance by showing them a contract they agreed to absolving you of all blame, and then offering them a lowball settlement, and getting them to sign the rest of their rights away.
Even if the thing they signed wasn't legally binding. Or even applicable. Or even if they didn't agree to it.
I wouldn't dream of underestimating them, but I just hope that they don't overestimate themselves. Even if they did achieve a market share that allowed them near-monopolistic powers, I'd be worried they'd lose it the moment they tried to leverage them.
I just don't see a huge ammount of brand loyalty in the beige box business. I see loyalty for servers, I see people get worked up into a slather over operating systems, but very rarely do you see Dell and Gateway fans having it out. I think it's a bit like Intel - they thought they had near monopoly powers, and they certainly had near monopoly size... but the moment they let their guard down, AMD jumped in down their throats. Intel had raised prices, and AMD slashed them. Things are only just now getting back to what used to be 'normal'. It'll be interesting to see what happens when each company rolls out it's line of 64 bit processors.
What does this have to do with Dell? I just think a Dell isn't like a Ford, or McDonalds. People compare the (meaningless) numbers, and come up with some not entirely usefull $/MHz comparison, and then buy whatever seems best to them. Apple has brand loyalty because they have some kind of soul lurking in each machine. Dell has... a kid who's very excited about getting one on TV.
I like Dell, I do. They revolutionized quite a few things by building to order, rather than keeping stock. But I think things like bundled printers have been giving other bundled devices bad names. (You know these printers. They come with no ink, cost more than the printer to refill, and then break conveniently.)
By the way, what makes you say Gateway is slowly dying? I think things like their Profile line offer them more than bundling a PDA. They seem fairly unique. (To the non-apple world.)
I wonder why Dell considers this a good move. It has potential - like Apple, they can offer you a handheld gizmo (ipod) with your computer... but is Dell really going to put out their own line of handhelds? Or just offer handsprings (or something) in a bundle?
If they're just going to offer handsprings, their revenue stream will be severely limited, since their main business model is to sell hardware fairly cheaply. If they put enough of a markup on the handheld hardware, people won't want to buy them (I hope) because they'll be able to purchase them elsewhere for less.
If they put out their own piece of hardware, it's a major departure from what Dell already does. It has massive potential, if it's a good piece of kit, but it will be coming into a saturated market no matter what. Right now, Dell is a value added reseller. I'm not sure they would want to try to be something else.
The only other option that I could imagine them thinking is that they will be able to 'guarantee' that whatever handheld they sell will work with whatever desktop they sell, due to software they pre-load on both.
Er... wait. Actually that's a great idea. Dell, do that. They won't get the hardware geek market, but then, they never have. They'll get the home family market, and rake in money for software that pretty much already exists. It's good sense on their part.
Well heck, stamp collecting is a hobby, and there you just... buy things, I guess. IMO, it's a hobby if you enjoy it, and it passes some time. And I guess hobbies don't make a profit - then it's called a job.
Besides, overclocking isn't the simplest thing in the world. You have to track down and compare which chip batches overclock well, find a motherboard that allows you the control you need, and twiddle with some airflow in your case. I'm sure you could just pop in a chip and change some BIOS settings, but that's asking for trouble if you just do it willy-nilly.
Xeons and Pentium 4's are not the same processor. This article was in no way about Xeons. The desktop Pentium 4 shown in the article can not be run in dual configuration.
Actually, I was referring more to what I was running - dual Athlon MP's. Intel isn't the only kid on the block.
Quite a lot of work, money, and mess for 17% more CPU performance. In a month or two they can probably just buy an official 3.3Ghz chip.
Not only that, but if they actually want to spend money, they can just go out and build multiprocessor systems. Yes, yes, not everything is multithreaded, but I think it gets you a heck of a lot more than a 17% performance gain on average. And it won't catch fire if you spring a hose! Overclocking was origionally for the cheap buggers who figured out they could buy a slower chip for $$$ - $50, instead of a faster chip for $$$, but you could make them run the same. Now it's all about the $$$ - $50 for the chip, + $$$ for the cooling system.
On the other hand, it's a hobby. And probably a fun one. Like tricking out cars, or BASE jumping from higher hights... It's not about the sense, it's about the numbers, beating your personal bests, and quite possibly the cool noise this system would make when running. Just to say you did something a lot of other people haven't.
Yeah, I was reading some of the other posts to that end... don't worry about the picture, I really do believe you. =)
I've been thinking - IBM must have used some kind of local ad agencies, right? I mean, I highly doubt they were flying some kind of penguin swat team around the country. It seems that they said to use chalk, and some local goobers fouled things up.
It also sounds like it happened in Chicago too, though. So maybe the NYC agency fouled up and used chalk, while IBM specified paint.;p
Um, no. The IBM/Linux pieces were neither 'spraychalked' nor 'bio-degradeable'. Over a YEAR later, they are still visibile.
Seriously, I'd be interested to see that. There were two of those ads on my block, and they were gone in a week. And it really *was* chalk.
These MSN sidewalk stickers are stickers, and aren't pulled up easily. (lord knows I tried;p)
Slightly odder is the stickers they're placing on *buildings* of the MSN butterfly, willy-nilly. They're those static kind of stickers that don't really use any glue or anything, so it's really okay. I have a couple of those now.;)
And the rollerbladers are evil, not because they are generating waste, but because they're a "distraction". A pedestrian might walk into an open manhole because they were too distracted by the butterfly men.
Yeah, I agree he's digging with that. Manholes are only laying around open in the movies anyway.;)
The thing is, there were about 30-40 of these butterfly guys, and they went straight down the center of the street. Blocking *all* lanes of traffic, probably intentionally. If I was down there driving instead of leaning out my window seeing it, I'd have been all sorts of pissed.
You're a troll. Plain and simple. If you've been with slashdot a long time, this is your all new hot-off-the-presses troll account. Wow, I'm so excited for you, I can hardly stand it.
Here's you, some armchair fuckwad, likely unemployed in his parents basement, talking about how unimportant you were to Y2K (again, I laugh thinking that you tried to one-up me there).
Hey, if you want to think that, go ahead, get your rocks off. I couldn't be happier with my actual life, job, and family. So keep looking for the chink in the armor that'll turn me into a derranged loony-toon character like yourself. You won't find it. =)
Hearing you calling me illiterate just makes me laugh: I've been published.
Oh, man, the laughter I got from that. Seriously, tears in my eyes. I've never read anyone who could communicate less effectivly. Fuck grammar, spelling, and everything else - you can't get a point across.
Secondly, quit double posting as yourself and then as an AC a short time later:
I did that? Huh. I mean, I don't remember doing that. In fact, I didn't do that. I'm a little concerned about your paranoia complex, though.;p I'd be curious to see which one of the AC's you think is me.
Doubling up with AC replies is one of the clearest signs of desperation.
I agree. Good job.
The inappropriate use of the dictionary to try to refute a statement has got to be my favourite.
Seriously, you misspoke. Horribly. And you can't quite come to grips with it, I'm sorry. If you have another way to refute a statement that makes no sense in the english language, please... let me know. Maybe I'll use it next time I'm flaming for laughs.;)
Oh, and since this *is* your first troll account, I'll give you another tip: you're not supposed to entertain me so damn much! Am I supposed to be laughing when I read your posts? No! I'm supposed to be *upset*! Read up on some posts by PhysicsGenius, or the WIPO Troll, and learn how it's done. Don't worry! You can get better!
Nice revisionist history asshole. Slashdot originally linked directly to the map (you probably wouldn't know that as you were too busy rushing in to proclaim that it's all alarmists) with no definition on it what it was (you'll note that there are other posts saying "So what does this mean? What are these numbers?") with no definitions, hence my presumption.
Dude, seriously. Click the fucking slashdot link you're talking about. Look RIGHT BELOW THE GODDAMN map you claim to be looking at. It says in plain fucking english:
Analysis of the human footprint map indicates that 83% of the land's surface is influenced by one or more of the following factors: human population density greater than 1 person per square kilometer, within 15 km of a road or major river, occupied by urban or agricultural land uses, within 2 km of a settlement or a railway, and/or producing enough light to be visible regularly to a satellite at night. 98% of the areas where it is possible to grow rice, wheat or maize (according to FAO estimates) are similarly influenced. However human influence is not inevitably negative impact -- in fact conservation organizations, including the Wildlife Conservation Society, have shown remarkable solutions that allow people and wildlife to co-exist. Nature is often resilient if given half a chance. Human beings are in the position of offering or withholding that chance.
Right from the same damn screen you say you're looking at. Literally, the line below the map. I'm darn curious to see how you try to weasel your way out of this one. I notice the more I prove you wrong, the more you resort to ad hominem attacks. Always a sign of real intelligence.
You're an illiterate moron, who is intentionally ignorant. I've proved you wrong countless times, and your responses have degraded into a name calling contest. I'm done with you. Expect no more replies to your useless drivel.
Crop: Cultivated plants or agricultural produce, such as grain, vegetables, or fruit.
Okay, so. Sterile... Farmland...
That would be land... incapable of producing seed or fruit... that... cultivates grain, vegetables, or fruit?
Tip: Grain's a seed. Shit, maybe you need the definition of oxymoron?
Oxymoron: A rhetorical figure in which incongruous or contradictory terms are combined, as in a deafening silence and a mournful optimist.
Or sterile farmland.
Now, since you skipped all my great examples of alarmists that have been proven wrong in the past, I feel safe skipping your bullshit about running a powerplant, or whatever your job is when you close your eyes and dream. All I really need to slam dunk you is this...
You're not an alarmist, right? Okay, fine. You said: You can call them "alarmist", but if it was for alarmists the entire Western world would be a love canal. Let's ignore the fact that I know what a Love Canal is, and can use capital letters. I was, of course, making fun of your horrid grammar. Naturally, you missed it. I mean, seriously, if it *was* for alarmists? Anyway, let me emphasize what you said:
THE ENTIRE WESTERN WORLD WOULD BE A LOVE CANAL
Alarmist: A person who needlessly alarms or attempts to alarm others, as by inventing or spreading false or exaggerated rumors of impending danger or catastrophe.
Holy cow, where would we find a person attempting to alarm others by inventing false or exaggerated rumors of impending danger?
Real people take care of the real problems by calmly addressing them, and fixing them. Alarmists, like yourself, gnash your teeth and wail about them, while making stuff up. If it's your job to run critical systems, you don't need the media huffing and puffing for eighteen months straight about the upcoming non-existant disaster to do your job. You do your job. Period.
The only reason to be an alarmist is to stir up the ignorant masses. Well, I suppose there is another reason - if you're a member of those ignorant masses, repeating what you've been told by someone trying to use you.
Looking at the map my presumption is that for a given sample size (say 1KM^2 samples, for example), there is at least one human.
Gee, that's your *presumption*? Funny, I'm looking at the map too. And it nicely tells you how they came up with 83%. human population density greater than 1 person per square kilometer (wow, amazing *presumption)...
But wait! That's not all!
Either ONE person *MIGHT* live within that square kilometer, OR!
That square kilometer is within 15 kilometers of a ROAD, or RIVER!
Or within 2 kilometers of a railway!
Not AND... OR! Any one of those requirements are met, and it's clearly unsuitable for wildlife.
So, if you have a pristine wildlife preserve... it's being used by humans if there's a road to be used to get to a ranger station? Or an old forest fire lookout? Or, there are no people on that kilometer, no roads, no people, no sign of human life, but it's near a *RIVER*?!?
Gee, I kind of get the feeling they're trying to exaggerate their statistics, don't you? Almost like they wanted that 83% to be just about as high as possible, for some *cough* funding *cough* reason.
Seriously, now that I've handed your ass to you, can you just go away and shut up? Or do you want to try to 'get me back' by imagining some shit about how I don't like my job?
Hell, I wasn't even going to reply to your ramble, but it seems too fun.
I live in Southern Ontario, a very urbanized area, and I think of what used to be here. Now it's all sterile farmland...
Why, I couldn't have come up with a better oxymoron if I tried.
As long as we're putting "alarmists" in quotes, here's a pickle for you. Why aren't the "alarmists" screaming that the hole in the ozone layer has gotten significantly smaller? (which it has) What happened to the "alarmists" in the 1970's that proudly proclaimed a new ice age to be coming? Why aren't the "alarmists" mentioning that natural CO2 output (the only "greenhouse" gas actually present in large quantities) so far outweighs manmade output it's nearly laughable?
Well, unless you count breathing. Maybe we should stop. Hey, let's even address the points you brought up!
My favorite:...if it was for alarmists the entire Western world would be a love canal.
Actually, I have no idea what that means. Let's try another one.
If it wasn't for "alarmists" Y2K really would have been a disaster.
Oh really? I was directly responsable for the whole Y2K bullshit for a large government network. What did you do? I spent more time filling out forms for managers to file someplace than actually fixing the few and far between bugs that existed. Y2K went off without a hitch. In fact, what did Y2K mean for most systems? That the date would be displayed incorrectly. All the predictions of power outages, communications loss, and other 'issues' were either greatly overstated, or totally fabricated. Everyone who mattered knew about the problem and how to fix it. It's the "alarmists" like those in the media, and pudding-brained sheep like yourself who were in a panic.
Well, that and people who wanted overtime pay.;p
I'll leave you with this:
There are vast swaths of unused land. However the land that's unused land could also be called UNUSABLE land : deserts, Northern desolation, etc.
Well, the WWF says we're using it. How about them apples?
Is it really necessary to just keep adding to landfills? Can we reduce our waste? Can we waste more wisely?
I completely agree with you, believe it or not. That's sort of my whole point, with a slight twist - people will stop wasting when they have to, but not a moment sooner.
It's like the whole 'running out of oil' thing, that last made me have to rant against the WWF. (No, not the wrestlers.) You can't run out of oil. You just can't. There's oil that can be extracted from rocks, from extremely deep wells, and so on and so on. It just gets harder and harder. You can translate harder directly into 'expensive'. The only thing 'running out of oil' means is that it's cheaper to run your car with CNG. Or moonshine. Or solar. Or whatever. And then people will switch.
And not a moment sooner.
When we start running out of places to put trash (landfills as we know them), places that have space will start selling it. And individuals will be billed by the pound (or square foot maybe) for trash. And then, believe me... people will waste less.
And not a moment sooner.
It almost makes me wish I was a member of a less selfish species, but I'm not. And the people wasting freely, driving the SUV's, leaving the air conditioners on while they're out, they're doing something wrong. But so are the people making statistics up to get your attention.
Every time there's a slashdot article regarding the World Wildlife Fund, I have to make a post like this.
Looks like it's that time again.;p
They're an alarmist group that really doesn't know what they're talking about. Let's take your first paragraph:
The statistics regarding the World Wildlife Fund's footprint are accurate for TODAY the 'ecological footprint' is defined as the 'area of productive land and water that people need to support their consumption and to dispose of waste'. London's footprint is 120 times as big as the land it covers, and as extrapolated by the WWF, Earth's ecological footprint is in danger of growing larger than the entire planet.
Great, that's very informative. The problem is, it's entirely misleading. So, okay. London has a footprint 120 times as big as the land it covers, but so what? The problem lies here: they're assuming that if an acre of land is used to support human (farming/fishing/living/whatever) that it's completely used. As in, that land marked used is somehow fully used.
If it's used for farming, odds are it's not being used to it's full potential. If it's used for trash, you can just keep putting more trash on top of it... or use it to create *more* land. (Tip: It's called landfill.) What the WWF is neglecting is that there's no reason, aside from a preserve, to *not* use land. Just like a house seems to take up the same 'footprint' as an apartment building doesn't mean that if we want to double the number of people, we need two houses.
It's just flawed, lousy logic. But that's okay. They're cruising for donations.
Then I had to go find drivers, but the drivers for my network card and modem were not working, so I had to find those on one of my other GNU/Linux systems.
Oh yes. I wish that the drivers available and manufacturer driver support for Windows could be half as good as those for Linux.
*cough*
Seriously, are you connected to the same internet as the rest of us?
Following Apple's statement, an IDG World Expo representative said the company had no indication from Apple that the Mac maker would pull out of the show if it was moved to Boston.
Seriously, when you're doing *MAC*World, and making a major change, you'd think they'd ask Apple what they thought.
What "international law" requires any country to make a fancy little "declairation of war" when it defends itself (always allowed under the UN Charter) or when it attacks another country?
Your statement is FALSE and you have provided NO SUPPORT for it.
I agree completely. He argues like my wife - just keep saying the same thing over and over again, a little differently.
Slashdot Mirror
Get Ad-Aware and check your system for spyware like Comet Cursor and other trash.
I had no idea Ad-Aware and Comet Cursor could both run on my Mandrake box. Thanks for the suggestion!
Number of Slashdotters who realise that SPAMMERs are not stupid and randomly try combinations of words and numbers (bob1@hotmail.com, bob2, bob3...)...Priceless
Do you really think that if I register afsradoij294@hotmail.com that I won't get any spam? I'd bet you a large sum of money I'd get some in the first few days.
I guess I'll find out.
Yeah, the problem is that they don't get rid of the codename very well. A lot of driver .inf files had (have?) lines that read:
Blahblahblah="$CHICAGO"
Or something like that. Well, it's not a real *problem*, but it's a little odd when you're trying to force drivers that worked with 2k and NT into XP, which is what I think I was trying to do at the time.
There are two ways displays work. First, it attracts casual gambling by those who might be walking by, see the displayed trend, and put money down because they feel "lucky" betting for/against the trend. Supermarkets call this an impulse buy.
Oh. Duh. =p
I was thinking too much about the game mechanics, and not enough about the actual fact that *people* were playing the game. Whoopsie.
...
Could you explain please? The nit-picker in me wants to say that since past trends doesn't matter, the casino can't possibly influence someone to bet 'wrong'... so the ammount of money would be the same either way.
The 0 and 00 is how the money is made, I thought.
I agree but wonder, if this is typically the case, why do companies, businesses, and individuals persist on using such long, useless verbage?
All my legal experience is from John Grisham books, and all my statistics are completely fabricated. Consider that a warning!
Very likely, it's because most people don't get themselves a lawyer. As a company, you have a very good chance of snowballing someone who has a serious legitamate grievance by showing them a contract they agreed to absolving you of all blame, and then offering them a lowball settlement, and getting them to sign the rest of their rights away.
Even if the thing they signed wasn't legally binding. Or even applicable. Or even if they didn't agree to it.
It sucks, but... well... no, it just sucks.
I wouldn't dream of underestimating them, but I just hope that they don't overestimate themselves. Even if they did achieve a market share that allowed them near-monopolistic powers, I'd be worried they'd lose it the moment they tried to leverage them.
I just don't see a huge ammount of brand loyalty in the beige box business. I see loyalty for servers, I see people get worked up into a slather over operating systems, but very rarely do you see Dell and Gateway fans having it out. I think it's a bit like Intel - they thought they had near monopoly powers, and they certainly had near monopoly size... but the moment they let their guard down, AMD jumped in down their throats. Intel had raised prices, and AMD slashed them. Things are only just now getting back to what used to be 'normal'. It'll be interesting to see what happens when each company rolls out it's line of 64 bit processors.
What does this have to do with Dell? I just think a Dell isn't like a Ford, or McDonalds. People compare the (meaningless) numbers, and come up with some not entirely usefull $/MHz comparison, and then buy whatever seems best to them. Apple has brand loyalty because they have some kind of soul lurking in each machine. Dell has... a kid who's very excited about getting one on TV.
I like Dell, I do. They revolutionized quite a few things by building to order, rather than keeping stock. But I think things like bundled printers have been giving other bundled devices bad names. (You know these printers. They come with no ink, cost more than the printer to refill, and then break conveniently.)
By the way, what makes you say Gateway is slowly dying? I think things like their Profile line offer them more than bundling a PDA. They seem fairly unique. (To the non-apple world.)
I wonder why Dell considers this a good move. It has potential - like Apple, they can offer you a handheld gizmo (ipod) with your computer... but is Dell really going to put out their own line of handhelds? Or just offer handsprings (or something) in a bundle?
If they're just going to offer handsprings, their revenue stream will be severely limited, since their main business model is to sell hardware fairly cheaply. If they put enough of a markup on the handheld hardware, people won't want to buy them (I hope) because they'll be able to purchase them elsewhere for less.
If they put out their own piece of hardware, it's a major departure from what Dell already does. It has massive potential, if it's a good piece of kit, but it will be coming into a saturated market no matter what. Right now, Dell is a value added reseller. I'm not sure they would want to try to be something else.
The only other option that I could imagine them thinking is that they will be able to 'guarantee' that whatever handheld they sell will work with whatever desktop they sell, due to software they pre-load on both.
Er... wait. Actually that's a great idea. Dell, do that. They won't get the hardware geek market, but then, they never have. They'll get the home family market, and rake in money for software that pretty much already exists. It's good sense on their part.
Well heck, stamp collecting is a hobby, and there you just... buy things, I guess. IMO, it's a hobby if you enjoy it, and it passes some time. And I guess hobbies don't make a profit - then it's called a job.
Besides, overclocking isn't the simplest thing in the world. You have to track down and compare which chip batches overclock well, find a motherboard that allows you the control you need, and twiddle with some airflow in your case. I'm sure you could just pop in a chip and change some BIOS settings, but that's asking for trouble if you just do it willy-nilly.
Xeons and Pentium 4's are not the same processor. This article was in no way about Xeons. The desktop Pentium 4 shown in the article can not be run in dual configuration.
Actually, I was referring more to what I was running - dual Athlon MP's. Intel isn't the only kid on the block.
Quite a lot of work, money, and mess for 17% more CPU performance. In a month or two they can probably just buy an official 3.3Ghz chip.
Not only that, but if they actually want to spend money, they can just go out and build multiprocessor systems. Yes, yes, not everything is multithreaded, but I think it gets you a heck of a lot more than a 17% performance gain on average. And it won't catch fire if you spring a hose! Overclocking was origionally for the cheap buggers who figured out they could buy a slower chip for $$$ - $50, instead of a faster chip for $$$, but you could make them run the same. Now it's all about the $$$ - $50 for the chip, + $$$ for the cooling system.
On the other hand, it's a hobby. And probably a fun one. Like tricking out cars, or BASE jumping from higher hights... It's not about the sense, it's about the numbers, beating your personal bests, and quite possibly the cool noise this system would make when running. Just to say you did something a lot of other people haven't.
Yeah, I was reading some of the other posts to that end... don't worry about the picture, I really do believe you. =)
;p
I've been thinking - IBM must have used some kind of local ad agencies, right? I mean, I highly doubt they were flying some kind of penguin swat team around the country. It seems that they said to use chalk, and some local goobers fouled things up.
It also sounds like it happened in Chicago too, though. So maybe the NYC agency fouled up and used chalk, while IBM specified paint.
Um, no. The IBM/Linux pieces were neither 'spraychalked' nor 'bio-degradeable'. Over a YEAR later, they are still visibile.
;p)
;)
Seriously, I'd be interested to see that. There were two of those ads on my block, and they were gone in a week. And it really *was* chalk.
These MSN sidewalk stickers are stickers, and aren't pulled up easily. (lord knows I tried
Slightly odder is the stickers they're placing on *buildings* of the MSN butterfly, willy-nilly. They're those static kind of stickers that don't really use any glue or anything, so it's really okay. I have a couple of those now.
And the rollerbladers are evil, not because they are generating waste, but because they're a "distraction". A pedestrian might walk into an open manhole because they were too distracted by the butterfly men.
;)
Yeah, I agree he's digging with that. Manholes are only laying around open in the movies anyway.
The thing is, there were about 30-40 of these butterfly guys, and they went straight down the center of the street. Blocking *all* lanes of traffic, probably intentionally. If I was down there driving instead of leaning out my window seeing it, I'd have been all sorts of pissed.
Oh, what the hell, one more. =)
;p I'd be curious to see which one of the AC's you think is me.
;)
You're a troll. Plain and simple. If you've been with slashdot a long time, this is your all new hot-off-the-presses troll account. Wow, I'm so excited for you, I can hardly stand it.
Here's you, some armchair fuckwad, likely unemployed in his parents basement, talking about how unimportant you were to Y2K (again, I laugh thinking that you tried to one-up me there).
Hey, if you want to think that, go ahead, get your rocks off. I couldn't be happier with my actual life, job, and family. So keep looking for the chink in the armor that'll turn me into a derranged loony-toon character like yourself. You won't find it. =)
Hearing you calling me illiterate just makes me laugh: I've been published.
Oh, man, the laughter I got from that. Seriously, tears in my eyes. I've never read anyone who could communicate less effectivly. Fuck grammar, spelling, and everything else - you can't get a point across.
Secondly, quit double posting as yourself and then as an AC a short time later:
I did that? Huh. I mean, I don't remember doing that. In fact, I didn't do that. I'm a little concerned about your paranoia complex, though.
Doubling up with AC replies is one of the clearest signs of desperation.
I agree. Good job.
The inappropriate use of the dictionary to try to refute a statement has got to be my favourite.
Seriously, you misspoke. Horribly. And you can't quite come to grips with it, I'm sorry. If you have another way to refute a statement that makes no sense in the english language, please... let me know. Maybe I'll use it next time I'm flaming for laughs.
Oh, and since this *is* your first troll account, I'll give you another tip: you're not supposed to entertain me so damn much! Am I supposed to be laughing when I read your posts? No! I'm supposed to be *upset*! Read up on some posts by PhysicsGenius, or the WIPO Troll, and learn how it's done. Don't worry! You can get better!
Keep the (trollin') faith,
Latent IT
Nice revisionist history asshole. Slashdot originally linked directly to the map (you probably wouldn't know that as you were too busy rushing in to proclaim that it's all alarmists) with no definition on it what it was (you'll note that there are other posts saying "So what does this mean? What are these numbers?") with no definitions, hence my presumption.
Dude, seriously. Click the fucking slashdot link you're talking about. Look RIGHT BELOW THE GODDAMN map you claim to be looking at. It says in plain fucking english:
Analysis of the human footprint map indicates that 83% of the land's surface is influenced by one or more of the following factors: human population density greater than 1 person per square kilometer, within 15 km of a road or major river, occupied by urban or agricultural land uses, within 2 km of a settlement or a railway, and/or producing enough light to be visible regularly to a satellite at night. 98% of the areas where it is possible to grow rice, wheat or maize (according to FAO estimates) are similarly influenced. However human influence is not inevitably negative impact -- in fact conservation organizations, including the Wildlife Conservation Society, have shown remarkable solutions that allow people and wildlife to co-exist. Nature is often resilient if given half a chance. Human beings are in the position of offering or withholding that chance.
Right from the same damn screen you say you're looking at. Literally, the line below the map. I'm darn curious to see how you try to weasel your way out of this one. I notice the more I prove you wrong, the more you resort to ad hominem attacks. Always a sign of real intelligence.
You're an illiterate moron, who is intentionally ignorant. I've proved you wrong countless times, and your responses have degraded into a name calling contest. I'm done with you. Expect no more replies to your useless drivel.
You can't think of a better oxymoron than sterile farmland? You're either grossly misinformed, or just an intentional FUDster.
Okay. Let's go over this real slow.
Sterile: Not producing or incapable of producing seed, fruit spores, or other reproductive structures.
Farmland: Land suitable or used for farming.
Friggin' dictionaries.
Farming: To cultivate or produce a crop on.
Okay, okay. Only one more, I promise.
Crop: Cultivated plants or agricultural produce, such as grain, vegetables, or fruit.
Okay, so. Sterile... Farmland...
That would be land... incapable of producing seed or fruit... that... cultivates grain, vegetables, or fruit?
Tip: Grain's a seed. Shit, maybe you need the definition of oxymoron?
Oxymoron: A rhetorical figure in which incongruous or contradictory terms are combined, as in a deafening silence and a mournful optimist.
Or sterile farmland.
Now, since you skipped all my great examples of alarmists that have been proven wrong in the past, I feel safe skipping your bullshit about running a powerplant, or whatever your job is when you close your eyes and dream. All I really need to slam dunk you is this...
You're not an alarmist, right? Okay, fine. You said: You can call them "alarmist", but if it was for alarmists the entire Western world would be a love canal. Let's ignore the fact that I know what a Love Canal is, and can use capital letters. I was, of course, making fun of your horrid grammar. Naturally, you missed it. I mean, seriously, if it *was* for alarmists? Anyway, let me emphasize what you said:
THE ENTIRE WESTERN WORLD WOULD BE A LOVE CANAL
Alarmist: A person who needlessly alarms or attempts to alarm others, as by inventing or spreading false or exaggerated rumors of impending danger or catastrophe.
Holy cow, where would we find a person attempting to alarm others by inventing false or exaggerated rumors of impending danger?
Here: plus5insightful, I guess.
Real people take care of the real problems by calmly addressing them, and fixing them. Alarmists, like yourself, gnash your teeth and wail about them, while making stuff up. If it's your job to run critical systems, you don't need the media huffing and puffing for eighteen months straight about the upcoming non-existant disaster to do your job. You do your job. Period.
The only reason to be an alarmist is to stir up the ignorant masses. Well, I suppose there is another reason - if you're a member of those ignorant masses, repeating what you've been told by someone trying to use you.
Looking at the map my presumption is that for a given sample size (say 1KM^2 samples, for example), there is at least one human.
Gee, that's your *presumption*? Funny, I'm looking at the map too. And it nicely tells you how they came up with 83%. human population density greater than 1 person per square kilometer (wow, amazing *presumption)...
But wait! That's not all!
Either ONE person *MIGHT* live within that square kilometer, OR!
That square kilometer is within 15 kilometers of a ROAD, or RIVER!
Or within 2 kilometers of a railway!
Not AND... OR! Any one of those requirements are met, and it's clearly unsuitable for wildlife.
So, if you have a pristine wildlife preserve... it's being used by humans if there's a road to be used to get to a ranger station? Or an old forest fire lookout? Or, there are no people on that kilometer, no roads, no people, no sign of human life, but it's near a *RIVER*?!?
Gee, I kind of get the feeling they're trying to exaggerate their statistics, don't you? Almost like they wanted that 83% to be just about as high as possible, for some *cough* funding *cough* reason.
Seriously, now that I've handed your ass to you, can you just go away and shut up? Or do you want to try to 'get me back' by imagining some shit about how I don't like my job?
Hell, I wasn't even going to reply to your ramble, but it seems too fun.
...if it was for alarmists the entire Western world would be a love canal.
;p
I live in Southern Ontario, a very urbanized area, and I think of what used to be here. Now it's all sterile farmland...
Why, I couldn't have come up with a better oxymoron if I tried.
As long as we're putting "alarmists" in quotes, here's a pickle for you. Why aren't the "alarmists" screaming that the hole in the ozone layer has gotten significantly smaller? (which it has) What happened to the "alarmists" in the 1970's that proudly proclaimed a new ice age to be coming? Why aren't the "alarmists" mentioning that natural CO2 output (the only "greenhouse" gas actually present in large quantities) so far outweighs manmade output it's nearly laughable?
Well, unless you count breathing. Maybe we should stop. Hey, let's even address the points you brought up!
My favorite:
Actually, I have no idea what that means. Let's try another one.
If it wasn't for "alarmists" Y2K really would have been a disaster.
Oh really? I was directly responsable for the whole Y2K bullshit for a large government network. What did you do? I spent more time filling out forms for managers to file someplace than actually fixing the few and far between bugs that existed. Y2K went off without a hitch. In fact, what did Y2K mean for most systems? That the date would be displayed incorrectly. All the predictions of power outages, communications loss, and other 'issues' were either greatly overstated, or totally fabricated. Everyone who mattered knew about the problem and how to fix it. It's the "alarmists" like those in the media, and pudding-brained sheep like yourself who were in a panic.
Well, that and people who wanted overtime pay.
I'll leave you with this:
There are vast swaths of unused land. However the land that's unused land could also be called UNUSABLE land : deserts, Northern desolation, etc.
Well, the WWF says we're using it. How about them apples?
Nice nick. Try being insightful.
Is it really necessary to just keep adding to landfills? Can we reduce our waste? Can we waste more wisely?
I completely agree with you, believe it or not. That's sort of my whole point, with a slight twist - people will stop wasting when they have to, but not a moment sooner.
It's like the whole 'running out of oil' thing, that last made me have to rant against the WWF. (No, not the wrestlers.) You can't run out of oil. You just can't. There's oil that can be extracted from rocks, from extremely deep wells, and so on and so on. It just gets harder and harder. You can translate harder directly into 'expensive'. The only thing 'running out of oil' means is that it's cheaper to run your car with CNG. Or moonshine. Or solar. Or whatever. And then people will switch.
And not a moment sooner.
When we start running out of places to put trash (landfills as we know them), places that have space will start selling it. And individuals will be billed by the pound (or square foot maybe) for trash. And then, believe me... people will waste less.
And not a moment sooner.
It almost makes me wish I was a member of a less selfish species, but I'm not. And the people wasting freely, driving the SUV's, leaving the air conditioners on while they're out, they're doing something wrong. But so are the people making statistics up to get your attention.
Every time there's a slashdot article regarding the World Wildlife Fund, I have to make a post like this.
;p
Looks like it's that time again.
They're an alarmist group that really doesn't know what they're talking about. Let's take your first paragraph:
The statistics regarding the World Wildlife Fund's footprint are accurate for TODAY the 'ecological footprint' is defined as the 'area of productive land and water that people need to support their consumption and to dispose of waste'. London's footprint is 120 times as big as the land it covers, and as extrapolated by the WWF, Earth's ecological footprint is in danger of growing larger than the entire planet.
Great, that's very informative. The problem is, it's entirely misleading. So, okay. London has a footprint 120 times as big as the land it covers, but so what? The problem lies here: they're assuming that if an acre of land is used to support human (farming/fishing/living/whatever) that it's completely used. As in, that land marked used is somehow fully used.
If it's used for farming, odds are it's not being used to it's full potential. If it's used for trash, you can just keep putting more trash on top of it... or use it to create *more* land. (Tip: It's called landfill.) What the WWF is neglecting is that there's no reason, aside from a preserve, to *not* use land. Just like a house seems to take up the same 'footprint' as an apartment building doesn't mean that if we want to double the number of people, we need two houses.
It's just flawed, lousy logic. But that's okay. They're cruising for donations.
Then I had to go find drivers, but the drivers for my network card and modem were not working, so I had to find those on one of my other GNU/Linux systems.
Oh yes. I wish that the drivers available and manufacturer driver support for Windows could be half as good as those for Linux.
*cough*
Seriously, are you connected to the same internet as the rest of us?
I'm sure I'll get a -1 (Flamebait & Troll) but *NOW* is just so very much not the time to see the world.
I'm probably being very cynical, but things are just bad right now, in quite a lot of places.
Clearly you've never driven through New York. ;p
(Where it's being moved from)
From the article:
Following Apple's statement, an IDG World Expo representative said the company had no indication from Apple that the Mac maker would pull out of the show if it was moved to Boston.
Seriously, when you're doing *MAC*World, and making a major change, you'd think they'd ask Apple what they thought.
What "international law" requires any country to make a fancy little "declairation of war" when it defends itself (always allowed under the UN Charter) or when it attacks another country?
Your statement is FALSE and you have provided NO SUPPORT for it.
I agree completely. He argues like my wife - just keep saying the same thing over and over again, a little differently.
Dear, is that you?