You forget, I'm a/. geek like the rest of you... Calculus is easy to me.:-) It's just that finals are generally cumulative and difficult no matter how easy the material is throughout the semester. It's not the calculus that's difficult. It's the complexity of the problems that professors like to choose, providing several chances for tiny yet very significant mistakes, that makes calculus difficult. The math itself is very easy.
Yesterday I called my local cable internet provider, which is Cox Communications' @home service, and after pressing numbers after fourteen push-button menus, I finall received a message that said to go to such-and-such website and pull down the such-and-such menu and send an email to so-and-so with your problem.
Well, you [insert expletives here], if I wasn't have a problem with your [expletive] service, or had wanted to send you a [expletive] email, do you think I would have tried to call the tech support line?
So, @home users, this is your warning. If you ever have a problem with the service, there is no one on the other end to talk to. Or, if there is, I'd certainly like to know why you're getting service and I'm not. (Perhaps it's just that the local service sucks.) Either way, all I wanted was a gateway address, a subnet address, and a few other small bits of similar information to install a router, and I couldn't even get in touch with a human voice.
So, slashdot, I'll ask my question here. My father bought a Linksys router thinking that he could use it to network his three computers so that each could be online at any time without having to pay @home for extra cable lines for each machine for an additional montly fee. I'm not familiar with routers, but I have gotten so far as to get everything hooked up right. So anyone want to help? Feel free to send me an email me if you have any good suggestions or witty comments to make.:)
I don't know anything about DSL - I'm a cable kinda guy myself - but I just wanted to make a comment because the title of this article suspiciously resembles my slashdot user name. Imagine the improbabilities of that!
Wow, what an interesting new device for drug trafficking. Strap the dope in the pilot's seat, fly that sucker at just above tree-top level, send it to Cousin Vinny... Hell, I don't know anything about it, but if this model plane can make it across the Atlantic, then it can certainly carry drugs across a border.
I asked if you knew how much it cost, not how to figure out how much it cost. All that information that you just gave me assumes that I know what all of the constituent parts cost... And... it's all moot anyway.:-)
That's an oximoron if I've ever heard/read one. Games are not meant to be taken seriously, man. They're fun. They're relaxing. They're for letting loose and taking a load off. Don't get so caught up in the appearance of things. They're just games...
Oh, and would you care to back up your argument that "Sony has a complete hold" with real evidence, rather than your bias? Sony is certainly more hated than Nintendo where I come from.
(Could it be because Sony ditched Nintendo? Oh, wait, that couldn't be... because, as the story has been [incorrectly] told, Nintendo ditched Sony. Research the story, and note that it was Nintendo's call to bring Sony into the deal, Sony got a little greedy [Who could blame them? There was money involved!], and eventually corporate differences led to the split. Nintendo didn't leave Sony out to dry... Nintendo knew very well that Sony, as a mega-corporation as it was, would not suffer at all by losing the "Nintendo PlayStation," as it was first called.)
This comment is completely inaccurate and slightly disturbinb. Um, sure, yeah... it's completely obvious that Nintendo's blood spilling games like Perfect Dark and every-fourth-word-is-bleeped-out games like Conker's Bad Fur Day, in which you begin the game as a drunken squirrel puking his guts out, are made just for the ten-and-under crowd. Good call, man.
Also, the Daily Radar is not highly regarded for their accuracy in much of anything. My experience leads me to know the Daily Radar as an "organization" that frequently misinterprets (whether it is intentional or not is not for me to decide) games news. I would say that the Daily Radar is much like the National Enquirer, except that, once in a while, the National Enquirer might post something of relevance to something important regarding its intended audience. (In other words, I wouldn't trust the Daily Radar... not even on their opinions.)
Lastly, the GameCube is in absolutely no danger. I have seen or heard no reputable games sources reporting anything even remotely negative (aside from possible delays) about the GameCube, and cancelling production is not under any kind of consideration whatsoever.
Talk about misinterpretations, and talk about slashdot's inability to catch them.
I would suspect so, since its a product of your body... DNA exists in all of our sells, right? I mean, it's a natural by-product that contains (a) that which we consume and (b) that which attempted and failed to digest it, which is why it is what it is. So, given that, I'm sure that there are all kinds of chemicals and cells and enzymes there that could provide for DNA testing.
...why they can't just make the best piece of hard-/software given their talents, release it, and then just better it a few months later. If they are "so good" that they can sell their products by intentionally implementing flaws to be fixed later, try to imagine how wonderful our lives would be if they would just give us the goods and trust that we'll buy them anyway. (Something tells me that we would.)
Second, free speech is not always about what you like or do not like. Sometimes it is about what is right or wrong. Sometimes free speech restricts other rights, and when that is the case, it is up to the Supreme Court (or whatever supreme law-force) to decide which is the greater injustice. Sure, the freedom of speech is covered by the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution, but that does not mean that it is always the greater injustice when infringed upon. If a Nazi organization published the names of thousands of Jews on its web site with the intent of providing means for other Nazis to seek out and harm these Jews (hypothetical situation, here), what would be the greater injustice? Restricting the Nazis' free speech? Or allowing these Jews to be harmed or worse by letting the Nazis' free speech stand?
This is simply my pessimistic interpretation of Hinckley's "advice" that he leaves for you programmers out there, as you can read for yourselves here. Okay, I understand that he might hold a slight grudge, but I still think he's sending part of the wrong message along with his own...
1. Always give in to those that are accepted as more powerful and never fight the system. Let them win because they have the money, and money always wins! Don't attempt to change it because you can't. (Or, if you would rather, you can follow my personal philosophy, which is very similar to the Golden Rule, which is to act accordingly - trust until given a reason not to trust, like until given a reason not to like; it's that "live and let live" philosophy. Of course, you could always do it your way, which is what I really recommend. Use your own judgment. All businessmen aren't the same, no matter how many people try to convince you otherwise. There are honorable people in this world.)
2. Don't do it... Short-cuts or easy ways are like cheating, and you need to work to earn your keep, you know? (Honorable; I don't really disagree.)
3. Trust no one! Always trust no one! You cannot trust anyone! (Back to my "live and let live" philosophy - I'll trust someone until they give me a good reason not to trust them, and then I'll react accordingly.)
4. Very good advice. This can be backed up by words from John Stuart Mill in his political/philosophical essay, On Liberty, in which he asserted:
Though [one's] opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion on any subject is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied.
In other words, no single source of information has the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Another quote from a good friend of mine - "There is only one absolute truth: this is absolutely true" - meaning there is no absolute truth to any situation. The only way you can go about finding the best "truth" for any situation is to vary your sources of information. Excellent advice, that #4 was, I say.
Hinckley then goes on to say how easy it is for someone to fall into those traps, "even after someone warned you." Judging by that statement, he would assume that I would be one of the first to fall into one of those traps. Maybe he's right. Maybe not. We know without the experience to back it up.
The best advice anyone can offer on any situation, really, is to research it well and use your best judgment, and use caution.
And finally... I wish the best of luck to anyone losing their own rights and freedoms simply because the big businesses have the resources to take them.
(Interestingly, this is one of those situations that I have seen organizations such as the ACLU playing both sides. One month the ACLU sides with a company suing an employee for the employee's off-the-clock work, and the next month the ACLU sides with an employee being sued by his company. I wonder how those standards work...)
If the gas mileage is better, and the hazardous byproducts are reduced, I think most of us could stand it. Or the government could just make it regulation and make us deal with it. I say someone has to do something about our increasing environmental problems, and while we may not always agree with such regulations, perhaps our existence would last a little longer if we'd make a small sacrifice now. (Or are we too selfish for that?)
(Warning: slightly off-topic, but in relation to a statement in the article. Moderators ignore, perhaps?)
"We regret the two-month delay in posting this interesting submission."
Are you telling us that you kept this article in queue for two months? Oh, the agony of someone that might have placed any emphasis on acceptance or rejection! I have had one story sit in queue for about thirty-six hours before finally being rejected; otherwise it's usually pretty quick.
Would I be accurate in guessing that, perhaps, if a submitted article makes it past a certain point (say... a couple days in the queue, maybe more, maybe less), that it is nearly certain to be accepted? (Not that I have anything worthwhile to contribute - I'm nothing special, only curious.)
(1) I hate tv. (2) I hate FM radio. (3) I hate AM radio. (4) I'm still not spotting them "all over the place." However, I have found them in increasing numbers by scanning weblogs and such... it seems that those of us that keep up with weblogs and online journals tend to think more freely and individually.
And I already use my piano and guitar to make my own music. Nothing worth recording and releasing, but it's a hobby nonetheless. I prefer to use my writing as my creative outlet.
What gives the RIAA the right to decide what is approved and what isn't? What if something new comes out? What if I make my own music that isn't well-known enough to make such a list? What if? What if?
That's your opinion, and mine was mine. So based on your opinion of freedom of speech, then, what is so wrong about my comments? I merely stated what I felt, and all of you are saying that I am wrong? Freedom of speech, man. And thank you... but don't assume what I know or don't know about the Constitution. And you're right, there is no limit to what we can say, but there is a limit to the situations in which some things should be said. And somethings, regardless of our freedom to do so, should simply never be said.
Well thank you very much Mr. history major. That was not the point of my comments and you know it. Thanks for pointing that out, though. While I was aware of TJ's business in France, I was simply using his name because most people know that he is a big writer from those days, and most people believe that the Constitution was written and signed in 1776. Sad, right? Sorry... I just wanted a name, and I didn't think people would remember John Adams as well.
Slashdot Mirror
You forget, I'm a /. geek like the rest of you... Calculus is easy to me. :-) It's just that finals are generally cumulative and difficult no matter how easy the material is throughout the semester. It's not the calculus that's difficult. It's the complexity of the problems that professors like to choose, providing several chances for tiny yet very significant mistakes, that makes calculus difficult. The math itself is very easy.
Integration is a very scary thing to those of us approaching finals this week, such as in calculus. AHHH!
Well, you [insert expletives here], if I wasn't have a problem with your [expletive] service, or had wanted to send you a [expletive] email, do you think I would have tried to call the tech support line?
So, @home users, this is your warning. If you ever have a problem with the service, there is no one on the other end to talk to. Or, if there is, I'd certainly like to know why you're getting service and I'm not. (Perhaps it's just that the local service sucks.) Either way, all I wanted was a gateway address, a subnet address, and a few other small bits of similar information to install a router, and I couldn't even get in touch with a human voice.
So, slashdot, I'll ask my question here. My father bought a Linksys router thinking that he could use it to network his three computers so that each could be online at any time without having to pay @home for extra cable lines for each machine for an additional montly fee. I'm not familiar with routers, but I have gotten so far as to get everything hooked up right. So anyone want to help? Feel free to send me an email me if you have any good suggestions or witty comments to make. :)
I don't know anything about DSL - I'm a cable kinda guy myself - but I just wanted to make a comment because the title of this article suspiciously resembles my slashdot user name. Imagine the improbabilities of that!
Wow, what an interesting new device for drug trafficking. Strap the dope in the pilot's seat, fly that sucker at just above tree-top level, send it to Cousin Vinny... Hell, I don't know anything about it, but if this model plane can make it across the Atlantic, then it can certainly carry drugs across a border.
I asked if you knew how much it cost, not how to figure out how much it cost. All that information that you just gave me assumes that I know what all of the constituent parts cost... And... it's all moot anyway. :-)
Just curious. I won't be able to afford anything like 8000 Linux boxes for another twenty-five years...
That's an oximoron if I've ever heard/read one. Games are not meant to be taken seriously, man. They're fun. They're relaxing. They're for letting loose and taking a load off. Don't get so caught up in the appearance of things. They're just games...
Oh, and would you care to back up your argument that "Sony has a complete hold" with real evidence, rather than your bias? Sony is certainly more hated than Nintendo where I come from.
(Could it be because Sony ditched Nintendo? Oh, wait, that couldn't be ... because, as the story has been [incorrectly] told, Nintendo ditched Sony. Research the story, and note that it was Nintendo's call to bring Sony into the deal, Sony got a little greedy [Who could blame them? There was money involved!], and eventually corporate differences led to the split. Nintendo didn't leave Sony out to dry... Nintendo knew very well that Sony, as a mega-corporation as it was, would not suffer at all by losing the "Nintendo PlayStation," as it was first called.)
Also, the Daily Radar is not highly regarded for their accuracy in much of anything. My experience leads me to know the Daily Radar as an "organization" that frequently misinterprets (whether it is intentional or not is not for me to decide) games news. I would say that the Daily Radar is much like the National Enquirer, except that, once in a while, the National Enquirer might post something of relevance to something important regarding its intended audience. (In other words, I wouldn't trust the Daily Radar ... not even on their opinions.)
Lastly, the GameCube is in absolutely no danger. I have seen or heard no reputable games sources reporting anything even remotely negative (aside from possible delays) about the GameCube, and cancelling production is not under any kind of consideration whatsoever.
Talk about misinterpretations, and talk about slashdot's inability to catch them.
I would suspect so, since its a product of your body... DNA exists in all of our sells, right? I mean, it's a natural by-product that contains (a) that which we consume and (b) that which attempted and failed to digest it, which is why it is what it is. So, given that, I'm sure that there are all kinds of chemicals and cells and enzymes there that could provide for DNA testing.
This "testing" seems okay to me. Who put sandpaper on their toilet seats? Can they really, ethically order them around like that? ...
That's all I wanted to say. :-)
1. Rebate request form: of course you need proof of your claim, so be prepared.
2. Rinaldi Class Action Settlement: Iomega's page about the settlement, just because the information might be of use to some of you.
I hope that anyone looking for a rebate of any kind on a defective drive can find what they need!
I don't follow. How does this connect to what I said?
...why they can't just make the best piece of hard-/software given their talents, release it, and then just better it a few months later. If they are "so good" that they can sell their products by intentionally implementing flaws to be fixed later, try to imagine how wonderful our lives would be if they would just give us the goods and trust that we'll buy them anyway. (Something tells me that we would.)
Second, free speech is not always about what you like or do not like. Sometimes it is about what is right or wrong. Sometimes free speech restricts other rights, and when that is the case, it is up to the Supreme Court (or whatever supreme law-force) to decide which is the greater injustice. Sure, the freedom of speech is covered by the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution, but that does not mean that it is always the greater injustice when infringed upon. If a Nazi organization published the names of thousands of Jews on its web site with the intent of providing means for other Nazis to seek out and harm these Jews (hypothetical situation, here), what would be the greater injustice? Restricting the Nazis' free speech? Or allowing these Jews to be harmed or worse by letting the Nazis' free speech stand?
I know, hence why I only said this is one of those "situations."
1. Always give in to those that are accepted as more powerful and never fight the system. Let them win because they have the money, and money always wins! Don't attempt to change it because you can't. (Or, if you would rather, you can follow my personal philosophy, which is very similar to the Golden Rule, which is to act accordingly - trust until given a reason not to trust, like until given a reason not to like; it's that "live and let live" philosophy. Of course, you could always do it your way, which is what I really recommend. Use your own judgment. All businessmen aren't the same, no matter how many people try to convince you otherwise. There are honorable people in this world.)
2. Don't do it... Short-cuts or easy ways are like cheating, and you need to work to earn your keep, you know? (Honorable; I don't really disagree.)
3. Trust no one! Always trust no one! You cannot trust anyone! (Back to my "live and let live" philosophy - I'll trust someone until they give me a good reason not to trust them, and then I'll react accordingly.)
4. Very good advice. This can be backed up by words from John Stuart Mill in his political/philosophical essay, On Liberty, in which he asserted:
Though [one's] opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion on any subject is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied.
In other words, no single source of information has the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Another quote from a good friend of mine - "There is only one absolute truth: this is absolutely true" - meaning there is no absolute truth to any situation. The only way you can go about finding the best "truth" for any situation is to vary your sources of information. Excellent advice, that #4 was, I say.
Hinckley then goes on to say how easy it is for someone to fall into those traps, "even after someone warned you." Judging by that statement, he would assume that I would be one of the first to fall into one of those traps. Maybe he's right. Maybe not. We know without the experience to back it up.
The best advice anyone can offer on any situation, really, is to research it well and use your best judgment, and use caution.
And finally... I wish the best of luck to anyone losing their own rights and freedoms simply because the big businesses have the resources to take them.
(Interestingly, this is one of those situations that I have seen organizations such as the ACLU playing both sides. One month the ACLU sides with a company suing an employee for the employee's off-the-clock work, and the next month the ACLU sides with an employee being sued by his company. I wonder how those standards work...)
If the gas mileage is better, and the hazardous byproducts are reduced, I think most of us could stand it. Or the government could just make it regulation and make us deal with it. I say someone has to do something about our increasing environmental problems, and while we may not always agree with such regulations, perhaps our existence would last a little longer if we'd make a small sacrifice now. (Or are we too selfish for that?)
"We regret the two-month delay in posting this interesting submission."
Are you telling us that you kept this article in queue for two months? Oh, the agony of someone that might have placed any emphasis on acceptance or rejection! I have had one story sit in queue for about thirty-six hours before finally being rejected; otherwise it's usually pretty quick.
Would I be accurate in guessing that, perhaps, if a submitted article makes it past a certain point (say ... a couple days in the queue, maybe more, maybe less), that it is nearly certain to be accepted? (Not that I have anything worthwhile to contribute - I'm nothing special, only curious.)
And I already use my piano and guitar to make my own music. Nothing worth recording and releasing, but it's a hobby nonetheless. I prefer to use my writing as my creative outlet.
My site, if you care:
You're my new hero. Who are you? :-)
Screw the RIAA. They're messing with me now.
That's your opinion, and mine was mine. So based on your opinion of freedom of speech, then, what is so wrong about my comments? I merely stated what I felt, and all of you are saying that I am wrong? Freedom of speech, man. And thank you... but don't assume what I know or don't know about the Constitution. And you're right, there is no limit to what we can say, but there is a limit to the situations in which some things should be said. And somethings, regardless of our freedom to do so, should simply never be said.
Well thank you very much Mr. history major. That was not the point of my comments and you know it. Thanks for pointing that out, though. While I was aware of TJ's business in France, I was simply using his name because most people know that he is a big writer from those days, and most people believe that the Constitution was written and signed in 1776. Sad, right? Sorry... I just wanted a name, and I didn't think people would remember John Adams as well.