Links in the summary often point to TFA. Nobody reads those.
And I did click it and find out, but it would be nice to have a one line description in the summary. That is what summaries are for, after all. Plus, the Wikipedia article describes it as "Boy Love" and only later mentions that its not pedophilic. I suspect that will cause problems that a quick definition could have avoided.
I've seen the errors on Firefox 3.6, Firefox 4, and IE9 (via IETab), each one running on both W7 and XP. I've also seen people complain about the errors using Chrome and Safari. In fact, I think IE6 is the only browser not to have reported errors. Maybe that's what/. tests builds on?
The people who don't know about the gag order won't be in a position to violate it by accident. Those who do know the name, are now banned from releasing it through any medium. They can't post it on Twitter and then come back and say "oh, well, the gag order only applied to newspapers!"
Yeah, let's mock those who have just lost a loved one, and expose them to threats of violence from those who think that withdrawing life support is immoral! That'll show 'em for wanting privacy in their time of suffering!
Want to join me at a WBC funeral protest afterwards? You know, just to show those uppity conformists who's boss.
[/sarcasm]
If you really think mocking the grieving for wanting privacy is "fun" then you're a fucking sociopath. Unfortunately, portions of society have decided that trolling is hip, and don't seem to understand that antisocial behavior in "cyberspace" has consequences. A full crackdown with serious fines and maybe even jailtime would do society a load of good. Free speech has never covered harassment. Performing the harassment online with thousands of your buddies doesn't change a thing. Even in cases where it is covered by the first amendment, hurting people just to prove you can makes you absolute filth.
I'm getting the impression that you're a child, based on your English and statements like "You can cancel the First Amendment in that case, as you just forbid Free Speech".
Let me be very clear to you: If good action, and consent: good. If good action, no consent: potentially bad, but the person probably won't mind. If they do mind, it becomes bad -- for example, sexual harassment in the workplace. If bad action, no consent: bad. If bad action, with consent: bad, but if the victim doesn't mind, then third parties generally don't have standing to complain.
You realize that Miss America contestants sign up to be rated, right? Something tells me the girls on his list did not have that choice.
To borrow an analogy from Jonathan Blow... say a guy knocks up out, sticks a knife in you, and takes your money. If it's a mugger doing it without your permission, it's bad. If it's a surgeon doing it with your consent, it's good.
You don't know what it is to lack free speech, because you've had it all your life. You're just a spoiled whiner who wants to be able to do literally whatever he wants, instead of almost whatever he wants.
When a reporter in Russia gets disappeared for saying the wrong things; when a man in Afghanistan gets his organs spread around town square for dancing with his wife; when an elderly Chinese woman is sentenced to a lifetime of hard labor for requesting a permit to protest at the Olympics... that is a lack of freedom.
When you are punished for leaking top secret documents, or copying other people's creations without payment, or spreading vicious lies about your peers... that is called living in an orderly society. You might think it's too orderly, but to claim you have no freedoms is fucking insulting.
You're using the mathematical definition. The common usage of the word is far less restrictive. To quote Merriam-Webster's definition: "without definite aim, direction, rule, or method". That certainly applies in cases where an unexpected bug affects the results.
For example, if I randomly say a string of ones and zeros, it almost certainly won't be random in a mathematical sense, but it will be in the common usage sense: it won't have a definite aim, direction, rule, or method. This is an analogous situation. When I'm speaking in binary, there's some "bug" with the human brain that makes us really bad at making mathematically random sequences. It's even "bugged" in a predictable manner -- my run lengths will be too short.
As a side point, this isn't the only time that mathematical and common usage definitions differ -- see the word "or".
I prefer American Taliban. It's more accurate, in that it captures their (ab)use of religion to justify their actions and rally the weak-minded to their cause.
The democrats are no angels, but the republicans are devils.
But the parent doesn't care about the answer, and you know it. He's just JAQ'ing off, as all good trolls do. Ask a seemingly reasonable question with the implication that the answer is a bad thing.
Tell me, do you really think that the computing power used to mine this data would offset even a single trip by private jet?
FTFA: "a new program to help make travel carbon emissions analysis easier... for the businesses worldwide that use MasterCard corporate cards... to help businesses more efficiently manage their corporate card programs and meet current and future analytical needs"
This is a program that companies can sign up for, in which Mastercard will help them analyze their corporate travel programs. Al Gore isn't digging through your receipts at the sex toy shop. Ignore all the Republican trolls.
This is the most idiotic and trollish response that always gets thrown about. Expending energy to figure out how to save energy can easily be a net positive. I'm sure automotive engineers expelled a great deal of energy designing cars that get 30+ miles to the gallon instead of 15. Electrical engineers spent energy designing LED lighting that is far more efficient than incandescent. But you aren't thinking about that, nor are you thinking at all. You're just trolling, because you've been trained to hate anyone who suggests that CO2 can have a negative impact on the climate.
Without regulations, companies don't compete. They collude.
We know this from experience. Companies will work with each other and create monopolies to fix prices and exploit consumers. This already happens to a large extent -- see the price fixing lawsuits brought by the DOJ against the SRAM and LCD panel sectors. Without laws and investigations and regulators, they would be completely unfettered, and we would be back in the bad old days of the late 19th/early 20th century. Working class folks would be living in overpriced slums, eating unsafe food, working for companies that are free to treat them like crap.
Why improve working conditions, if you're buddies with all the local businesses, and they treat their employees just as bad? Why keep contaminants out of your food, if you've already got a deal with other grocers that they won't sell on your turf? Why make your building safe and sturdy if your tenants have no safer place to go live?
This isn't speculation. It's what happened about a century ago. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
So your argument is that since regulators can be bribed into not enforcing regulations, we should just get rid of regulations entirely? What would that accomplish, aside from saving corporations the money they currently spend on bribes?
None, of course. They need to stay behind, and occasionally go out to dinner with her (purely non-business, of course!). Otherwise, what use is she to Comcast? If they're good little lackeys, they'll get job offers of their own one day.
Haha, wow, flame much? Step back. Breathe. Maybe take a night's rest. Then come back and act like a person, rather than a screaming child.
When you do, consider: 1) Claiming that I'd invest $500 in time to design a better product from scratch is, frankly, absurd. I'd spend a million dollars trying to design a car from scratch, but that doesn't mean I should be willing to pay a million to buy an open source car. 2) Claiming that I don't know the consumer's requirements is, again, irrelevant. Continuing with Slashdot's favorite car analogies, I may not know the requirements for an off road vehicle, but I do know that people aren't going to spend extra on one with a customizable engine unless they're the sort who'll want to customize their engine. Likewise, most musicians aren't going to want to muck around with HDL, so they're not going to spend extra on a device to let them. 3) You put scare quotes around "dev kit" as if to say that this device isn't one. I direct you to the quote at the very top of the linked page: "Before the software is ready for this more general public usage, we sell developer kits to pioneers who can stand a few software problems and embedded devices enthusiasts who would enjoy developing on this open source platform." Emphasis mine, of course. 4) Existing solutions that cost under $500 would include loading some FOSS audiovisualizer software onto the computer that, as a member of the first world, you already own, and then buying some PCI cards or USB adapters to get the desired ports. That is what VJs do, you know. They seem to have been getting by just fine without this $500 box. And if you think this box can replace a VJ's entire setup, then it is you who don't really understand what they do.
Seriously though, sleep on it before responding. Odds are you won't care in the morning.
Honestly, outside of the fact that it's in an acrylic box and lacks a breadboard, it looks just like every other decent quality dev kit I've seen. That's not a bad thing, by the way. While some companies do put out crappy kits, the good ones are a lot of fun to use, and can do all sorts of great stuff. They include tutorials, and are easy to use. I'm sure the Milkymist is the same. But surely it could be made cheaper by moving from open cores on an FPGA to a tighter, less configurable design.
It's actually a great looking device for musicians like myself.
I doubt that. It's a $500 dev kit. Any tool you need for making music can be had from private companies with superior specs for less cash. Even if not, you could make a superior product by using an ASIC from a private company rather than a FPGA. If you buy one, it will be because you like the notion of it being open, not because it's technically superior to existing products.
Slashdot Mirror
There's no telling when they'll start ruining classics.
Have you ever bought a classic on Amazon? They're mostly crappy OCR jobs, rife with errors.
(To be fair, that's not Amazon's fault, and they're only a dollar at any rate)
Links in the summary often point to TFA. Nobody reads those.
And I did click it and find out, but it would be nice to have a one line description in the summary. That is what summaries are for, after all. Plus, the Wikipedia article describes it as "Boy Love" and only later mentions that its not pedophilic. I suspect that will cause problems that a quick definition could have avoided.
Do you really think everyone knows what Yaoi manga is?
I've seen the errors on Firefox 3.6, Firefox 4, and IE9 (via IETab), each one running on both W7 and XP. I've also seen people complain about the errors using Chrome and Safari. In fact, I think IE6 is the only browser not to have reported errors. Maybe that's what /. tests builds on?
The people who don't know about the gag order won't be in a position to violate it by accident. Those who do know the name, are now banned from releasing it through any medium. They can't post it on Twitter and then come back and say "oh, well, the gag order only applied to newspapers!"
So you hurt people just to spite them? If someone asks you to hold the door for them, do you slam it in their face for not saying "please"?
Yeah, let's mock those who have just lost a loved one, and expose them to threats of violence from those who think that withdrawing life support is immoral! That'll show 'em for wanting privacy in their time of suffering!
Want to join me at a WBC funeral protest afterwards? You know, just to show those uppity conformists who's boss.
[/sarcasm]
If you really think mocking the grieving for wanting privacy is "fun" then you're a fucking sociopath. Unfortunately, portions of society have decided that trolling is hip, and don't seem to understand that antisocial behavior in "cyberspace" has consequences. A full crackdown with serious fines and maybe even jailtime would do society a load of good. Free speech has never covered harassment. Performing the harassment online with thousands of your buddies doesn't change a thing. Even in cases where it is covered by the first amendment, hurting people just to prove you can makes you absolute filth.
There are only tern countries in the world that meet that standard, according to Wikipedia.
I'm getting the impression that you're a child, based on your English and statements like "You can cancel the First Amendment in that case, as you just forbid Free Speech".
Let me be very clear to you:
If good action, and consent: good.
If good action, no consent: potentially bad, but the person probably won't mind. If they do mind, it becomes bad -- for example, sexual harassment in the workplace.
If bad action, no consent: bad.
If bad action, with consent: bad, but if the victim doesn't mind, then third parties generally don't have standing to complain.
You realize that Miss America contestants sign up to be rated, right? Something tells me the girls on his list did not have that choice.
To borrow an analogy from Jonathan Blow... say a guy knocks up out, sticks a knife in you, and takes your money. If it's a mugger doing it without your permission, it's bad. If it's a surgeon doing it with your consent, it's good.
You don't know what it is to lack free speech, because you've had it all your life. You're just a spoiled whiner who wants to be able to do literally whatever he wants, instead of almost whatever he wants.
When a reporter in Russia gets disappeared for saying the wrong things; when a man in Afghanistan gets his organs spread around town square for dancing with his wife; when an elderly Chinese woman is sentenced to a lifetime of hard labor for requesting a permit to protest at the Olympics... that is a lack of freedom.
When you are punished for leaking top secret documents, or copying other people's creations without payment, or spreading vicious lies about your peers... that is called living in an orderly society. You might think it's too orderly, but to claim you have no freedoms is fucking insulting.
You're using the mathematical definition. The common usage of the word is far less restrictive. To quote Merriam-Webster's definition: "without definite aim, direction, rule, or method". That certainly applies in cases where an unexpected bug affects the results.
For example, if I randomly say a string of ones and zeros, it almost certainly won't be random in a mathematical sense, but it will be in the common usage sense: it won't have a definite aim, direction, rule, or method. This is an analogous situation. When I'm speaking in binary, there's some "bug" with the human brain that makes us really bad at making mathematically random sequences. It's even "bugged" in a predictable manner -- my run lengths will be too short.
As a side point, this isn't the only time that mathematical and common usage definitions differ -- see the word "or".
I prefer American Taliban. It's more accurate, in that it captures their (ab)use of religion to justify their actions and rally the weak-minded to their cause.
The democrats are no angels, but the republicans are devils.
But the parent doesn't care about the answer, and you know it. He's just JAQ'ing off, as all good trolls do. Ask a seemingly reasonable question with the implication that the answer is a bad thing.
Tell me, do you really think that the computing power used to mine this data would offset even a single trip by private jet?
FTFA: "a new program to help make travel carbon emissions analysis easier ... for the businesses worldwide that use MasterCard corporate cards ... to help businesses more efficiently manage their corporate card programs and meet current and future analytical needs"
This is a program that companies can sign up for, in which Mastercard will help them analyze their corporate travel programs. Al Gore isn't digging through your receipts at the sex toy shop. Ignore all the Republican trolls.
It's been like this all day. Apparently Slashdot has moved to the "users == testers" school of software design.
This is the most idiotic and trollish response that always gets thrown about. Expending energy to figure out how to save energy can easily be a net positive. I'm sure automotive engineers expelled a great deal of energy designing cars that get 30+ miles to the gallon instead of 15. Electrical engineers spent energy designing LED lighting that is far more efficient than incandescent. But you aren't thinking about that, nor are you thinking at all. You're just trolling, because you've been trained to hate anyone who suggests that CO2 can have a negative impact on the climate.
Why? What good reason is there to show them? There are plenty of gruesome pics out there on the internet. Go look at those if you want to see death.
Without regulations, companies don't compete. They collude.
We know this from experience. Companies will work with each other and create monopolies to fix prices and exploit consumers. This already happens to a large extent -- see the price fixing lawsuits brought by the DOJ against the SRAM and LCD panel sectors. Without laws and investigations and regulators, they would be completely unfettered, and we would be back in the bad old days of the late 19th/early 20th century. Working class folks would be living in overpriced slums, eating unsafe food, working for companies that are free to treat them like crap.
Why improve working conditions, if you're buddies with all the local businesses, and they treat their employees just as bad? Why keep contaminants out of your food, if you've already got a deal with other grocers that they won't sell on your turf? Why make your building safe and sturdy if your tenants have no safer place to go live?
This isn't speculation. It's what happened about a century ago. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
So your argument is that since regulators can be bribed into not enforcing regulations, we should just get rid of regulations entirely? What would that accomplish, aside from saving corporations the money they currently spend on bribes?
None, of course. They need to stay behind, and occasionally go out to dinner with her (purely non-business, of course!). Otherwise, what use is she to Comcast? If they're good little lackeys, they'll get job offers of their own one day.
I think that if a Kinect saw a rave, it would have a seizure.
Haha, wow, flame much? Step back. Breathe. Maybe take a night's rest. Then come back and act like a person, rather than a screaming child.
When you do, consider:
1) Claiming that I'd invest $500 in time to design a better product from scratch is, frankly, absurd. I'd spend a million dollars trying to design a car from scratch, but that doesn't mean I should be willing to pay a million to buy an open source car.
2) Claiming that I don't know the consumer's requirements is, again, irrelevant. Continuing with Slashdot's favorite car analogies, I may not know the requirements for an off road vehicle, but I do know that people aren't going to spend extra on one with a customizable engine unless they're the sort who'll want to customize their engine. Likewise, most musicians aren't going to want to muck around with HDL, so they're not going to spend extra on a device to let them.
3) You put scare quotes around "dev kit" as if to say that this device isn't one. I direct you to the quote at the very top of the linked page: "Before the software is ready for this more general public usage, we sell developer kits to pioneers who can stand a few software problems and embedded devices enthusiasts who would enjoy developing on this open source platform." Emphasis mine, of course.
4) Existing solutions that cost under $500 would include loading some FOSS audiovisualizer software onto the computer that, as a member of the first world, you already own, and then buying some PCI cards or USB adapters to get the desired ports. That is what VJs do, you know. They seem to have been getting by just fine without this $500 box. And if you think this box can replace a VJ's entire setup, then it is you who don't really understand what they do.
Seriously though, sleep on it before responding. Odds are you won't care in the morning.
Honestly, outside of the fact that it's in an acrylic box and lacks a breadboard, it looks just like every other decent quality dev kit I've seen. That's not a bad thing, by the way. While some companies do put out crappy kits, the good ones are a lot of fun to use, and can do all sorts of great stuff. They include tutorials, and are easy to use. I'm sure the Milkymist is the same. But surely it could be made cheaper by moving from open cores on an FPGA to a tighter, less configurable design.
It's actually a great looking device for musicians like myself.
I doubt that. It's a $500 dev kit. Any tool you need for making music can be had from private companies with superior specs for less cash. Even if not, you could make a superior product by using an ASIC from a private company rather than a FPGA. If you buy one, it will be because you like the notion of it being open, not because it's technically superior to existing products.