Is it that all that 7.5 Watts is dissipated by the transmission distance increasing from 1ft to 2ft? Or is it that the EMF at the receiver reduces by distance^2?
I just upgraded my parents PC from 64 MB to 256 MB. It runs like a dream with Windows XP on it. It would be quite comfortable with 128MB. I think a standard desktop operating system should be able to do word processing and web browsing, at the same time, with 32MB. How much crap do you need to store resident in core to do a few desktopish things? Really?
It seems that what players really, want... What they think is fun, is to beat real humans at a task. Not to take a challenge against real people, nor to beat the computer, but to really beat other humans.
Take the arcade game, it has a score card, the human wants to beat the other players to the top and if they can't they don't play the game for long - that's why the score card gets reset occasionally, and that's why they ban the people that just keep scoring the highest and fill up the score card as soon as it's reset.
What an MMORPG operator should do is what gambling machine vendors do, let everybody win sometimes. Just pick a guy and stack it in his favour for a bit. Let everybody think that they are consistently beating people, losing sometimes, but having a steady winning trend. That's what people will pay for.
Let somebody get killed, but give them an easy way to recover their character, so the killer thinks he's beaten somebody, but the one that got beaten gets a comeback.
> Calling layoffs "realignments" and difficult people as "challenging" is obviously just doubletalk nonsense designed to hide what's real.
"layoffs" implies that you think you are being brutal, "realignments" implies that think you are doing what you have to.
"difficult" implies that you disapprove of a person's interation with other people, "challenging" says you don't care, you just want to get the best out of your staff.
Your choice of word will affect the actions taken by your colleagues. That is why managers use C-speak - they have to influence the way their colleagues behave toward staff and problems.
Some C-speak is unpleasant though, ie, referring to staff as "resources". A manager using that isn't trying to hide anything, he's telling you that you are expendable, and he will cut your throat like he might cut a utility bill.
These revenue reports just say "Some geezer made some money off of selling Linux this year". Who cares about that? I want to know how much the number of installed computers increased by.
> That's like saying that since a movie is shown on HBO, that there is nothing harmful to the movie maker when the fans never buy the DVD, but just make a digital copy off of digital cable TV.
Yeah! They should ban not buying DVDs of new releases - the content producer makes the DVD expecting us to buy it, and then we say "Nooo, I don't think its cheap enough", and the police man hears you "You're buying that DVD sonny, shopkeeper, take his credit card off of him". Better yet - just tax everybody and send them a DVD every month straight from government offices.
Because not buying things off of people is unfairly harmful to them... riigghht. I've got an old sock, and I'd like you to buy it from me. No? Well that's harmful to me... "Officer arrest that man, he won't buy my sock".
Re:Assign rights to individuals rather than gadget
on
Sun's Open Source DRM
·
· Score: 1
That is exactly what copyright laws do. They assign the right to prevent the free flow of art to the author or anybody else that the author wants to sell that right to.
Cringley's pulpit is a trolling column, but that is its point. It is just entertainment, not journalism. He does a lot of very good journalism when he's not in the circus ring.
Because everybody knows that a necktie is imbued with magical powers and carries a logical deduction field that emanates modus-ponentrinos into it wearer's brain, thus making his/her software better. As if Microsoft programmers don't wear sandals and pony tails too...
The glass will experience an inward force *where it breaks*, but an outward force everywhere else as air rushes in and the tensions from the pressure differencial during the inrush "flick" the rest of the screen outward. Normally when you break glass, it shatters and falls down. A CRT is one of the few exceptions where it will fly in your face of its own accord.
If it is made to appear to be *from* the subject of the ridicule rather than just to be in his style, then it is libellous. In this case, I could see nothing in the PDF to show that it wasn't actually from him - it really looks like somebody has used a "print to PDF" facility of their web browser. If somebody found this through google, they would have no way of knowing that it wasn't from the Australian PM himself.
As an example, a parody of, say, Tony Blair would be performed by a receding actor with a huge grin stood in front of number 10 Downing Street, pausing like he was reciting Shakespear and injecting "you know" all over the place, but they could *not* make it actually appear to be Tony Blair himself.
In this case, the intention was clearly for parody, so perhaps the author would not have been liable for damages, but a court probably would have ordered that he remove the offending PDF and issue an apology on the website. But the libelled party should have had his solicitor contact the publisher of the material (the author), and not the host.
> Given that the parody provides factual data, where's the lie?
It provides factual data about various world events, but it also claims to represent the Aussie PM's opinion of them, and that he believes they happened as described in a very, very non-ironic way. But as usual, a slashdotter thinks one factual accuracy in an article can imply total omnicognisance of the Aussie PM's thought process. I do not dispute that various facts given as the Aussie PM's opinion are true, I dispute that the author should have pretended that they are the Aussie PM's opinion.
During my recent trip to India, also horribly touched with extremist violence, I was reminded by their soft spoken Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh, that the British had seriously erred by clinging too long to their former colony.
Indicates that the PM has "remembered" that the British had seriously erred, and thus accepts it. Also indicates that the PM thinks the Indian Prime Minister is soft spoken - this may not be true (ie the aussie PM may not think that the Indian PM is soft spoken).
Despite widespread opposition to their presence, British politicians continued to insist that their departure would lead to chaos. Dr Singh said, 'But it would be our chaos, dont you see?' At that moment I understood what he was saying.
Says that the Aussie PM now believes that the Indian PM is correct - but claims to be a statement of fact from the Aussie PM himself, and not the statement of opinion of the author that it really is.
There is tremendous pressure from the US for our troops to remain in Iraq, and of course mutual loyalty is a vital component of the alliance.
Again, by claiming to be from the Aussie PM, this gives as a statement of fact that the Aussie PM believes he is under pressure to do what he's doing, while it is really only a statement of the authors opinion.
But the longer the Coalition of the Willing remains, the more we are detested, and the more blood is shed.
This claims that the PM believes he and some third party or second party he associates himself with (maybe his government, maybe Australians in general) are detested. If he *doesn't* think he is detested, that is misrepresentative of his opinion.
The country is already tearing itself apart, so I am asking you, could our departure really make it any worse?
Implies at best that the PM admits that he hasn't formed an opinion, or that he admits that troops should be pulled out.
Perhaps it is time for Iraqis to regain control of their future, and for the coalition of the willing to be willing to leave the stage.
Pretends to be the PM when it has awful writing style, also indicates that the PM admits to more that he might not.
When I say this, I speak as a troubled private citizen, and not as the Prime Minister of Australia.
Perhaps this is supposed to be the part where the author is stating that this is not claimed to represent the Australian PMs opinions or beliefs.
Flying home from India, I started to ask myself what a leader like Mahatma Gandhi would do
Did he ask himself that, or is this another misrepresentation?
but I feared I would not be able to live up to the answer, unless I have some wise advice form my longtime friends. Please look into your hearts and let me know what you find.
Claims as a statement of fact from the Aussie PM himself that he doesn't know what to do.
This entire article is written, not as a parody, but as the Aussie PMs own statement of opinion. If the Aussie PM *doesn't* hold all those opinions, and I have taken only a very small portion of the document above, then it is misrepresentative and libelous.
I just read through this "speech transcript", and there is no way this is a parody. I can understand the author being angry at the host, since it is the auther that should have been contacted, and (rightfully) sued. That article is nothing but a lie and an attempt to unjustifiably discredit a man. If you disagree with his policies, you should point them out - perhaps via satire, but you shouldn't misrepresent him - that is illegal.
But this still should not have been actioned by the host.
The Ubuntu live CD has numerous games installed on its desktop that you can play while the installer is running. I've tried the installer (espresso), and it works, although it is not finished yet, and YMMV.
I think Microsoft is *very* interested in being compatible with Linux. If Windows can become the very best choice for heterogenous networks, then it becomes an easy decision for *any* users and *any* network. The default question when making a buying decision will be "What compatibility bug prevents us using Windows here?". If there isn't one, they'll buy Windows.
Part of the reason for enterprises to choose Linux so far has been "It works in nearly any point in our network, so we can always just install Linux servers". Since purchase price is not a big issue for business users, the only downside to Windows would be client access licenses. If they got rid of those and bumped up the initial purchase price of Windows server systems, Linux would be hurt very, very badly.
Re:"Happy Face" way better than "The Face"
on
Google Goes to Mars
·
· Score: 1
> Instead of that boring face, check out The Happy Face Crater
Ah-ha! *mars* was the first web browser to correctly render the acid2 css test!
Slashdot Mirror
Is it that all that 7.5 Watts is dissipated by the transmission distance increasing from 1ft to 2ft? Or is it that the EMF at the receiver reduces by distance^2?
From TFA: "In an effort to help the internet community..."
Bollocks, this is an attempt to get investors. What's the patent number?
Am I a cynic? Hell yeah!
I just upgraded my parents PC from 64 MB to 256 MB. It runs like a dream with Windows XP on it. It would be quite comfortable with 128MB. I think a standard desktop operating system should be able to do word processing and web browsing, at the same time, with 32MB. How much crap do you need to store resident in core to do a few desktopish things? Really?
They're not alphabetical, my money's on Malodorous Muff.
It seems that what players really, want... What they think is fun, is to beat real humans at a task. Not to take a challenge against real people, nor to beat the computer, but to really beat other humans.
Take the arcade game, it has a score card, the human wants to beat the other players to the top and if they can't they don't play the game for long - that's why the score card gets reset occasionally, and that's why they ban the people that just keep scoring the highest and fill up the score card as soon as it's reset.
What an MMORPG operator should do is what gambling machine vendors do, let everybody win sometimes. Just pick a guy and stack it in his favour for a bit. Let everybody think that they are consistently beating people, losing sometimes, but having a steady winning trend. That's what people will pay for.
Let somebody get killed, but give them an easy way to recover their character, so the killer thinks he's beaten somebody, but the one that got beaten gets a comeback.
> Calling layoffs "realignments" and difficult people as "challenging" is obviously just doubletalk nonsense designed to hide what's real.
"layoffs" implies that you think you are being brutal, "realignments" implies that think you are doing what you have to.
"difficult" implies that you disapprove of a person's interation with other people, "challenging" says you don't care, you just want to get the best out of your staff.
Your choice of word will affect the actions taken by your colleagues. That is why managers use C-speak - they have to influence the way their colleagues behave toward staff and problems.
Some C-speak is unpleasant though, ie, referring to staff as "resources". A manager using that isn't trying to hide anything, he's telling you that you are expendable, and he will cut your throat like he might cut a utility bill.
These revenue reports just say "Some geezer made some money off of selling Linux this year". Who cares about that? I want to know how much the number of installed computers increased by.
> I tried to figure it out, but I got a divide by 0 error.
WOW! Infinity megahurts! Imagine a beowulf cluster of those.
Hah! In the first video it sounds exactly like the wrong trousers.
> That's like saying that since a movie is shown on HBO, that there is nothing harmful to the movie maker when the fans never buy the DVD, but just make a digital copy off of digital cable TV.
Yeah! They should ban not buying DVDs of new releases - the content producer makes the DVD expecting us to buy it, and then we say "Nooo, I don't think its cheap enough", and the police man hears you "You're buying that DVD sonny, shopkeeper, take his credit card off of him". Better yet - just tax everybody and send them a DVD every month straight from government offices.
Because not buying things off of people is unfairly harmful to them... riigghht. I've got an old sock, and I'd like you to buy it from me. No? Well that's harmful to me... "Officer arrest that man, he won't buy my sock".
That is exactly what copyright laws do. They assign the right to prevent the free flow of art to the author or anybody else that the author wants to sell that right to.
Cringley's pulpit is a trolling column, but that is its point. It is just entertainment, not journalism. He does a lot of very good journalism when he's not in the circus ring.
Because everybody knows that a necktie is imbued with magical powers and carries a logical deduction field that emanates modus-ponentrinos into it wearer's brain, thus making his/her software better. As if Microsoft programmers don't wear sandals and pony tails too...
Electronic circuit go wiggle wiggle wiggle wiggle wiggle wiggle wiggle...
Or rather to link the bookmark handling code with a small commandline wrapper and a small xml read/writer lib.
The glass will experience an inward force *where it breaks*, but an outward force everywhere else as air rushes in and the tensions from the pressure differencial during the inrush "flick" the rest of the screen outward. Normally when you break glass, it shatters and falls down. A CRT is one of the few exceptions where it will fly in your face of its own accord.
In fact, polluting a search engines index is probably a criminal offense with a jail term.
If it is made to appear to be *from* the subject of the ridicule rather than just to be in his style, then it is libellous. In this case, I could see nothing in the PDF to show that it wasn't actually from him - it really looks like somebody has used a "print to PDF" facility of their web browser. If somebody found this through google, they would have no way of knowing that it wasn't from the Australian PM himself.
As an example, a parody of, say, Tony Blair would be performed by a receding actor with a huge grin stood in front of number 10 Downing Street, pausing like he was reciting Shakespear and injecting "you know" all over the place, but they could *not* make it actually appear to be Tony Blair himself.
In this case, the intention was clearly for parody, so perhaps the author would not have been liable for damages, but a court probably would have ordered that he remove the offending PDF and issue an apology on the website. But the libelled party should have had his solicitor contact the publisher of the material (the author), and not the host.
It provides factual data about various world events, but it also claims to represent the Aussie PM's opinion of them, and that he believes they happened as described in a very, very non-ironic way. But as usual, a slashdotter thinks one factual accuracy in an article can imply total omnicognisance of the Aussie PM's thought process. I do not dispute that various facts given as the Aussie PM's opinion are true, I dispute that the author should have pretended that they are the Aussie PM's opinion.
Indicates that the PM has "remembered" that the British had seriously erred, and thus accepts it. Also indicates that the PM thinks the Indian Prime Minister is soft spoken - this may not be true (ie the aussie PM may not think that the Indian PM is soft spoken).
Says that the Aussie PM now believes that the Indian PM is correct - but claims to be a statement of fact from the Aussie PM himself, and not the statement of opinion of the author that it really is.
Again, by claiming to be from the Aussie PM, this gives as a statement of fact that the Aussie PM believes he is under pressure to do what he's doing, while it is really only a statement of the authors opinion.
This claims that the PM believes he and some third party or second party he associates himself with (maybe his government, maybe Australians in general) are detested. If he *doesn't* think he is detested, that is misrepresentative of his opinion.
Implies at best that the PM admits that he hasn't formed an opinion, or that he admits that troops should be pulled out.
Pretends to be the PM when it has awful writing style, also indicates that the PM admits to more that he might not.
Perhaps this is supposed to be the part where the author is stating that this is not claimed to represent the Australian PMs opinions or beliefs.
Did he ask himself that, or is this another misrepresentation?
Claims as a statement of fact from the Aussie PM himself that he doesn't know what to do.
This entire article is written, not as a parody, but as the Aussie PMs own statement of opinion. If the Aussie PM *doesn't* hold all those opinions, and I have taken only a very small portion of the document above, then it is misrepresentative and libelous.
No way
I just read through this "speech transcript", and there is no way this is a parody. I can understand the author being angry at the host, since it is the auther that should have been contacted, and (rightfully) sued. That article is nothing but a lie and an attempt to unjustifiably discredit a man. If you disagree with his policies, you should point them out - perhaps via satire, but you shouldn't misrepresent him - that is illegal.
But this still should not have been actioned by the host.
> Remote and automated management of Linux boxes is much more powerful than for Windows.
There are two things I'll give Microsoft credit for technically. One is that the above is extremely not true. The other is VS2005.
Imagine it connected to a barcode reader on your fingertip. Scan, tap, scan, tap, scan, tap... "Load em up boys!"
Paperwork? Who needs paperwork - just press send.
The Ubuntu live CD has numerous games installed on its desktop that you can play while the installer is running. I've tried the installer (espresso), and it works, although it is not finished yet, and YMMV.
I think Microsoft is *very* interested in being compatible with Linux. If Windows can become the very best choice for heterogenous networks, then it becomes an easy decision for *any* users and *any* network. The default question when making a buying decision will be "What compatibility bug prevents us using Windows here?". If there isn't one, they'll buy Windows.
Part of the reason for enterprises to choose Linux so far has been "It works in nearly any point in our network, so we can always just install Linux servers". Since purchase price is not a big issue for business users, the only downside to Windows would be client access licenses. If they got rid of those and bumped up the initial purchase price of Windows server systems, Linux would be hurt very, very badly.
> Instead of that boring face, check out The Happy Face Crater
Ah-ha! *mars* was the first web browser to correctly render the acid2 css test!