From the document, looks like Harlan hasn't learned how impolite and silly it looks shouting in all capital letters.
Maybe Harlan's still using that old Commodore 64. Now that I think of it, Isn't he the guy that uses way too many exclamation marks in his stories. Egad!!! I think we've uncovered the prolific writer of all those virus hoaxes!!! SEND THIS TO ALL OF YOUR FRIENDS WHO USE THE INTERNET, OR TOASTER OVENS, OR WHO READ SCI-FI/FANTASY!!!!!
What kind of guidance are they giving these robots?
If it's pulling fiber, why not hook the end of the fiber up for purposes of control (though I would guess it's actually pulling a 'pull string'.
I knew of a guy that used radio controlled toy tanks to pull wire in suspended ceilings and in subfloors. Another guy I heard about was using a crossbow with a fishing reel attached to lay deploy a pull string. He thought it worked great until he shot straight through some AC ducts.
I just sadly wonder how long will it take to start saving lives and is society as a whole supporting these efforts with enough resources?
One of the resources, when dealing with medical breakthroughs, is time. You don't want to rush something into use until you're reasonably sure that, in time, the technology won't break down and become worse than the condition it was intended to correct. Sometimes the process takes too long and needs to be circumvented as was the case with early AIDS research. It's a lot easier to do an end-run around the red tape when you're treating a group of patients who will be dead in five to ten years if nothing is done. An example of a failure of the system would be the rush to get breast implants into the market. Long term studies might have shown the breakdown, leakage and damage caused by some implants. There was no real need (other than economics) for these devices to be speeded to market as no one dies (except, perhaps, from embarassment) by being less buxom than another.
Because, unfortunately, there's a 1/2hr block of dead television time between the first hour of FOX TV (Futurama and King of the Hill), and the following 1.5 hrs (Malcolm in the Middle and X-Files).
And, being mesmerized by the box with the shiny screen, you can't read a book for a half hour, or call a friend (actually interact with unscripted characters) or run around the block....
You could use the time to look up words like, 'disjusted' and 'brillence' because you used them incorrectly. 'Disjusted' is someone or something who is not adjusted very well and 'brillence' is the shine left on stainless steel after a scrubbing with a Brillo pad (no endorsement intended). Those just don't fit well into the context of your post.
I saw one of those shows that purports to expose the lunar landing fraud. It was slickly done. Don't know if the NASA spokesman didn't offer any refutation or if they just edited it out, but it left me with a feeling of dissatisfaction. I just doesn't sit well with me when someone takes the position that their word is good enough and I shouldn't need any data to know that the other guys are laughably wrong.
I don't mean to bust the creationists' bubble, but consider this:
We used to think the earth was flat -- We know it's round, now
We used to think the universe revolved around us -- We know the world revolves around the sun, which revolves around the center of the galaxy, etc...
So... When you really think about it, No we were not Created.
Quite honestly, These are the types of people that refuse to listen to anyone who does not believe what they believe, what's the word for that? Ignorance?
So, you're saying that because the world is round and that we revolve around a sun in a solar system that is part of a much larger galaxy, that it follows that we were not created? I'm having difficulty following that logical sequence. Even if it were solely the religious folks that were once wrong (and it wasn't) in these two instances, does it also follow that if we can find two instances where the scientific community was wrong that if we think about it we will conclude that certain (perhaps unrelated) scientific theories are therefore wrong?
As far as the definition of ignorance, it is simply not knowing something. We are all ignorant to some extent. I am totally lost when it comes to automechanics. I understand the concepts, sometimes better than the guy working on my car, but he can fix it while I tend to make things worse. When discussing medical science, I may know more than a lot of folks, but I would appear ignorant to those who make their living in that field, and yet I may know of things that some professionals aren't aware of.
Perhaps you shouldn't toss words about in an attempt to ridicule others, especially if you're not fully aware of the implications. I do hope you listen to this attempt at correction, otherwise you risk being ignorant by your own definition....
As always, it is difficult to select an impartial jury, but that is true for any case.
It is virtually impossible to select an impartial jury given that neither side wants that anyway. Both sides get to eliminate a certain number of jurors they see as potentially 'hostile' to their position, and having a command of the issues would severely hamper an attorney's ability to sway that individual emotionally.
Bacteria are being used on oil spills already. There was a very interesting group of articles (in 1988 I think) in the National Geographic regarding reclaimation processes using naturally occuring algae, bacterium, even ragweed to eat paint, gasoline fumes from aquifers and leeching lead from the soil. If anyone finds a link to those stories, let me know as I've been looking for my back issues and can't find it.
That quote alone should be enough to show that Corel doesn't understand the meaning of 'Open Source' (or maybe they just don't understand the word 'open' or they don't know that 'source' refers to pre-compiled code and not who provides the binaries... ).
The IBM folks I talk to all deny that they are headed that direction. They are committed to running some form of Linux on all platforms (different distros for different platforms) and porting Linux libraries to AIX (which they've been doing) so that anything Linuxy will run on AIX too.
I absolutely hate to be ignored, especially when I know I'm right, but it comes with the territory.
Sometimes, when you know you're right, your presentation can suffer (especially if you absolutely hate to be ignored). I've also dealt with people who are sure they are right when they aren't. A lot depends on how you let someone know that you know you're right without coming off like you're just trying to tell them how wrong they are. Some people think they can get away with being total jerks because of their skills. That may work somewhat, but there are others who will undermine that person's efforts, right or wrong, based on presentation alone.
I stand (or sit) corrected. I knew portions (sections, even whole articles) could be copied, but wasn't aware that entire periodicals were being distributed electronically after scanning (although at fourteen grand a pop I can certainly understand the temptation).
Remember: "i" before "e" except after "c" except for the word "weird."
No, it's, "'i' before 'e' except after 'c' or when pronounced 'a' as in neighbor and weigh... oh, yeah, and that weird weigh too." But some people just aren't wierd... er, wired for spelling.
We go a step further -- maybe he should write the script and get Freshmeat to link to it. He's pleased by the idea, but later, after inspecting Freshmeat's new redesign and deciding he doesn't like it, he puts the idea aside.
Does this guy sound like a petulant child because he's a hacker or because he's a sysadmin? "I don't like the way Freshmeat(.com?) looks, so I won't send them my script (which I haven't even written yet)! Waaaah." Or is it just my imagination?
But presumably not in groups, or schools where they don't have to buy their own book.
I don't think she feels conflicted. She represents publishers of newsletters that command a $14,000 subscription rate, not curious george....
She did misrepresent (and she's smart enough to know she did) the fact that when a Library loans a work to another library, they don't make a copy but send the original, nor do they make complete copies for patrons, yet her assertion is that 'everyone gets a free copy'.
And a computer game is considered evidence pertaining to precisely what crime?
I would imagine that it is important to gather all potential evidence until it can be evaluated. If elements of the game are loaded on the computer how do you propose leaving just those elements behind? Sifting through the evidence in an uncontrolled environment is not very effective. Perhaps your presupposition is that gamers != script kiddies, an assumption that can't be made by the authorities. We know that these guys are gamers, but outside of their own testimony there's nothing to say that they aren't also involved in cracking.
By the way, I never said that the campus cops weren't overreacting. My point was that more than a few/. readers were too.
Let's get something straight here -- you cannot assault someone by going through their modem. You can't even harass someone via email (ever hear of a filter?). Online is absolutely the most benign media for posing and posturing, simply because YOU CAN'T DO ANY REAL HARM as long as you remain online.
It seems there's as much overreacting from the/. community (if not more) than the Kent State campus cops. When should making a threat be taken seriously (at least to the point of investigation) and when should it be laughed off? Your supposition that you can't harrass anyone via email is false. Yes, I've heard of filters. I've also heard of people with multiple email accounts. How hard is it to create a new web-based account and send emails to your intended victim until they've effectively filtered out everything? If I make a threat against the president, does it matter that I made it via email or usmail or hired a skywriter? No. The threat is taken seriously until I can be evaluated.
As for the confiscation of computer equipment, it doesn't make much sense to tell someone suspected of a computer crime that they are a suspect and, "Oh, by the way, we're just going to leave any potential evidence in your possession until we can assemble an investigative team."
Re:What they had to say about getting slashdotted.
on
DIY Railgun Projects
·
· Score: 1
Mailing list membership triples in an hour.
This is even funnier when you consider the only other comment about the mailing list on that page was from last month stating that there were only two people on the list. Unless they grew in the last few weeks that means they're up to six!
By the way, what was that other show from the same people that was with Space Ghost? The family that had the dragon thing, the rock monkey, and the big and little blobs? They were cooler I think.
Was the 'dragon thing' like a Rhino that shot plasma balls or something out of his horn? I remember the rest of the characters. They were the (something)oids.... Man! I gotta get a PDA so I can remember this important stuff...
Slashdot Mirror
Zelazny died? When did that happen? Now there was a guy who could craft a good story. I'll have to go surfin' for his obit.
Maybe Harlan's still using that old Commodore 64. Now that I think of it, Isn't he the guy that uses way too many exclamation marks in his stories. Egad!!! I think we've uncovered the prolific writer of all those virus hoaxes!!! SEND THIS TO ALL OF YOUR FRIENDS WHO USE THE INTERNET, OR TOASTER OVENS, OR WHO READ SCI-FI/FANTASY!!!!!
If it's pulling fiber, why not hook the end of the fiber up for purposes of control (though I would guess it's actually pulling a 'pull string'.
I knew of a guy that used radio controlled toy tanks to pull wire in suspended ceilings and in subfloors. Another guy I heard about was using a crossbow with a fishing reel attached to lay deploy a pull string. He thought it worked great until he shot straight through some AC ducts.
carlos
One of the resources, when dealing with medical breakthroughs, is time. You don't want to rush something into use until you're reasonably sure that, in time, the technology won't break down and become worse than the condition it was intended to correct. Sometimes the process takes too long and needs to be circumvented as was the case with early AIDS research. It's a lot easier to do an end-run around the red tape when you're treating a group of patients who will be dead in five to ten years if nothing is done. An example of a failure of the system would be the rush to get breast implants into the market. Long term studies might have shown the breakdown, leakage and damage caused by some implants. There was no real need (other than economics) for these devices to be speeded to market as no one dies (except, perhaps, from embarassment) by being less buxom than another.
The difference is that they seeded the 'ear' with bovine cartilage, not fat cells.
And, being mesmerized by the box with the shiny screen, you can't read a book for a half hour, or call a friend (actually interact with unscripted characters) or run around the block....
You could use the time to look up words like, 'disjusted' and 'brillence' because you used them incorrectly. 'Disjusted' is someone or something who is not adjusted very well and 'brillence' is the shine left on stainless steel after a scrubbing with a Brillo pad (no endorsement intended). Those just don't fit well into the context of your post.
I saw one of those shows that purports to expose the lunar landing fraud. It was slickly done. Don't know if the NASA spokesman didn't offer any refutation or if they just edited it out, but it left me with a feeling of dissatisfaction. I just doesn't sit well with me when someone takes the position that their word is good enough and I shouldn't need any data to know that the other guys are laughably wrong.
So... When you really think about it, No we were not Created.
Quite honestly, These are the types of people that refuse to listen to anyone who does not believe what they believe, what's the word for that? Ignorance?
So, you're saying that because the world is round and that we revolve around a sun in a solar system that is part of a much larger galaxy, that it follows that we were not created? I'm having difficulty following that logical sequence. Even if it were solely the religious folks that were once wrong (and it wasn't) in these two instances, does it also follow that if we can find two instances where the scientific community was wrong that if we think about it we will conclude that certain (perhaps unrelated) scientific theories are therefore wrong?
As far as the definition of ignorance, it is simply not knowing something. We are all ignorant to some extent. I am totally lost when it comes to automechanics. I understand the concepts, sometimes better than the guy working on my car, but he can fix it while I tend to make things worse. When discussing medical science, I may know more than a lot of folks, but I would appear ignorant to those who make their living in that field, and yet I may know of things that some professionals aren't aware of.
Perhaps you shouldn't toss words about in an attempt to ridicule others, especially if you're not fully aware of the implications. I do hope you listen to this attempt at correction, otherwise you risk being ignorant by your own definition....
It is virtually impossible to select an impartial jury given that neither side wants that anyway. Both sides get to eliminate a certain number of jurors they see as potentially 'hostile' to their position, and having a command of the issues would severely hamper an attorney's ability to sway that individual emotionally.
Bacteria are being used on oil spills already. There was a very interesting group of articles (in 1988 I think) in the National Geographic regarding reclaimation processes using naturally occuring algae, bacterium, even ragweed to eat paint, gasoline fumes from aquifers and leeching lead from the soil. If anyone finds a link to those stories, let me know as I've been looking for my back issues and can't find it.
Had to laugh. This comment reminded me of the old WKRP episode where Johnny Fever thought the phone cops were after him.
That quote alone should be enough to show that Corel doesn't understand the meaning of 'Open Source' (or maybe they just don't understand the word 'open' or they don't know that 'source' refers to pre-compiled code and not who provides the binaries... ).
The IBM folks I talk to all deny that they are headed that direction. They are committed to running some form of Linux on all platforms (different distros for different platforms) and porting Linux libraries to AIX (which they've been doing) so that anything Linuxy will run on AIX too.
Sometimes, when you know you're right, your presentation can suffer (especially if you absolutely hate to be ignored). I've also dealt with people who are sure they are right when they aren't. A lot depends on how you let someone know that you know you're right without coming off like you're just trying to tell them how wrong they are. Some people think they can get away with being total jerks because of their skills. That may work somewhat, but there are others who will undermine that person's efforts, right or wrong, based on presentation alone.
I stand (or sit) corrected. I knew portions (sections, even whole articles) could be copied, but wasn't aware that entire periodicals were being distributed electronically after scanning (although at fourteen grand a pop I can certainly understand the temptation).
No, it's, "'i' before 'e' except after 'c' or when pronounced 'a' as in neighbor and weigh... oh, yeah, and that weird weigh too." But some people just aren't wierd... er, wired for spelling.
Does this guy sound like a petulant child because he's a hacker or because he's a sysadmin? "I don't like the way Freshmeat(.com?) looks, so I won't send them my script (which I haven't even written yet)! Waaaah." Or is it just my imagination?
I don't think she feels conflicted. She represents publishers of newsletters that command a $14,000 subscription rate, not curious george....
She did misrepresent (and she's smart enough to know she did) the fact that when a Library loans a work to another library, they don't make a copy but send the original, nor do they make complete copies for patrons, yet her assertion is that 'everyone gets a free copy'.
.... is how much longer it'll be before I can turn my neighbor in for borrowing my tools!
No. Stations have to pay ASCAP royalties each time they play a song.
I would imagine that it is important to gather all potential evidence until it can be evaluated. If elements of the game are loaded on the computer how do you propose leaving just those elements behind? Sifting through the evidence in an uncontrolled environment is not very effective. Perhaps your presupposition is that gamers != script kiddies, an assumption that can't be made by the authorities. We know that these guys are gamers, but outside of their own testimony there's nothing to say that they aren't also involved in cracking.
By the way, I never said that the campus cops weren't overreacting. My point was that more than a few /. readers were too.
It seems there's as much overreacting from the /. community (if not more) than the Kent State campus cops. When should making a threat be taken seriously (at least to the point of investigation) and when should it be laughed off? Your supposition that you can't harrass anyone via email is false. Yes, I've heard of filters. I've also heard of people with multiple email accounts. How hard is it to create a new web-based account and send emails to your intended victim until they've effectively filtered out everything? If I make a threat against the president, does it matter that I made it via email or usmail or hired a skywriter? No. The threat is taken seriously until I can be evaluated.
As for the confiscation of computer equipment, it doesn't make much sense to tell someone suspected of a computer crime that they are a suspect and, "Oh, by the way, we're just going to leave any potential evidence in your possession until we can assemble an investigative team."
This is even funnier when you consider the only other comment about the mailing list on that page was from last month stating that there were only two people on the list. Unless they grew in the last few weeks that means they're up to six!
Was the 'dragon thing' like a Rhino that shot plasma balls or something out of his horn? I remember the rest of the characters. They were the (something)oids.... Man! I gotta get a PDA so I can remember this important stuff...
So, if we could get every Anime character to jump at the same time.....