But more importantly, with a component-based unit, these items are reusable as you upgrade. With an off-the-shelf unit, they all end up in the trash in 2 years. You can buy a crap CPU now for pennies, and wait until that top-of-the-line model its the price-performance inflection point in 6 months. You can move the HD to your daughter's PSEmu lap when the 80GB models get cheap.
His distinction may be silly, but English is a silly language: His distinction was *clear*, and meaningful. I think everyone who read his comment understood what he meant, and understood it to be a true statement.
Perhaps more to the point, if you have control over a set of components with standardized interfaces, you can upgrade, so your investment doesn't end up a hand-me-down-to-grandma in 6 months. That's a big savings.
I think the claim can be read more fairly in this way:
It takes courage to sit in your arm chair and advocate that other people commit mass-murder against a crushed and docile nation of children. It takes courage to slit the throat of your bloodied and sobbing rape victim. But of course you don't actually get that rush that confirms your courage until you feel the hot blood gushing out.
If it's anything like my laptop experience, it is most notable when you drag a window with redraw on. It's quiet, but very clearly perceptible in most environments (not on a passenger jet in flight, though).
Yes. I've had laptops that made sounds when significant screen blits occurred. In particular, a Dell Inspirion 5000e uxga. That's an ATI Rage-M video chip. As I recall (my daughter has been using it lately), I only heard it with XFree86, not with Win2k, and it sounded like it was composed of a lot of rapid chirps or clicks (~50 msec), but had a principal harmonic in the kHz range.
> Basically Loebner was using his prize for cheap self promotion.
What you say isn't supported by the material you quote, presumably to support it.
The quote does nothing to self-promote, whether cheaply or expensively. What it does, in my view, is attempt to injoin against others' defamation of the Loebner competition.
"This information includes..." means just that. It may include a great deal more.
Certainly the information they do collect is quite sufficient to identify many users beyond a reasonable doubt, contrary to their explicit claim that no personal identifying information is transferred.
> Would you rather have the military and government > using open source software or Microsoft?
That parses ambiguously;). Taking it as intended, I can categorically state that I would rather have the U.S. military and government using Microsoft, because I think it is more likely to suffer catastrophic failures of access security and availability, thereby saving lives.
Now if you're talking about the government of Nauru, it's quite another matter.
My daughter said she was googling for her other sock, yesterday. I think it's coming to mean much more than just searching online. More like, searching every possible location. A comprehensive search.
I think you're missing the point. "Properly written" code is not something found in the wild. In the real world, you have to deal with Other People's Code more often than not.
I think that if DNS is the best you can do, you should round-robin the IPs from each link on both servers. Only drop the IPs from link1 if link1 goes down. Then even if there is some dead cache on the network, at least your clients can reach the server by trying again.
If you don't have multiple developers working on the same files, your project is poorly organized. Code- ownership is bad^3 news. CVS makes merges 90% trivial. There is nothing fundamentally different about open vs. closed source development. Open development just increases the probability of receiving unsolicited patch sets.
So the correct way to get a signed linux image is to implement a game for publication which incorporates a code to switch to a linux console, then get them to sign the binary of the game.
It seems quite do-able, but it doesn't allow for future updates to the binary image. Of course that doesn't really matter if you just use it to book the harddrive.
One alternative to satellite that I have considered, in order to get Internet into a remote location (Faya-Largeau, in northern Chad, a Saharan oasis town about 300 miles from land lines) is a tethered balloon with a repeater. The power for the repeater would be solar, and run up the tether. Does anybody know of someone who has done anything like this? UAVs are pricey, but I have no clue whether the operating time of a helium weather balloon, or the tether-weight vs. balloon-size tradeoffs would make such an approach prohibitively expensive.
Now most network engineers, when asked to adjust the speed of light, will just look at you like you are crazy, but in fact, given that you can adjust the electrical permittivity and magnetic permeability of the medium (in this case, free space), it's actually a no-brainer: Just frob the mu-zero and epsilon-zero numbers until your ping times through the bird are optimal.
I have permittivity and permeability modulators ready to ship. Unfortunately they are locked up in Nigeria in customs, but if you would care to send me your bank routing number, I could deduct the small customs fee, and in return cut you 10% of the gross on sales when they get to the states! It's a great opportunity for a smart mover!
Why would it matter if he was or wasn't an American? We imprisoned Manuel Noriega in Florida for breaking American laws, although he was a Panamanian citizen living in Panama. That's just the most famous example. There are a thousand Afghanistani patriots now imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay for defending their country against attack. Heck, we don't just prosecute people, we assassinate them without trial, regardless of whether they are citizens or not, or whether their supposed crimes are capital offenses or not (as in Yemen recently), so it would not be outside of the customary practices of the U.S. to simply kill anybody in their home, anywhere in the world, for breaking an American law.
Commenting on a sig is always going to be offtopic, but having read this one so many times, I am going to finally take the bait.
It is basically a true statement. You are much less likely to get shot if you are not carrying a gun. But it is also basically a misleading statement, designed to lead the reader to a false conclusion, specifically, that it is therefore unwise to carry a gun.
Firstly, if one employs a weapon, and thereby becomes a combatant, it is because the conclusion has been made that it is better to assume the risks of combat than to abstain. Personal safety is not the sole and overriding human value. In fact, it is one of the basest human values. The quote appeals to the lowest and most primitive factors in human nature. Defense of defenseless others is a higher value.
Secondly, it glosses the distinction between open and concealed carry. While open carry attracts attention and may thereby entrain combat, concealed carry does not.
I might continue, but for the press of time. I will be satisfied at least that I have not left the deceptive qualities of these words entirely unchallenged.
Slashdot Mirror
A couple of contrary points:
Firstly, your display and cpu numbers are high.
But more importantly, with a component-based unit,
these items are reusable as you upgrade. With an
off-the-shelf unit, they all end up in the trash
in 2 years. You can buy a crap CPU now for pennies,
and wait until that top-of-the-line model its the
price-performance inflection point in 6 months.
You can move the HD to your daughter's PSEmu
lap when the 80GB models get cheap.
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, man.
His distinction may be silly, but English is a silly
language: His distinction was *clear*, and
meaningful. I think everyone who read his comment
understood what he meant, and understood it to be
a true statement.
Lighten up.
Perhaps more to the point, if you have control
over a set of components with standardized
interfaces, you can upgrade, so your investment
doesn't end up a hand-me-down-to-grandma in 6
months. That's a big savings.
I think the claim can be read more fairly in
this way:
It takes courage to sit in your arm chair and
advocate that other people commit mass-murder
against a crushed and docile nation of children.
It takes courage to slit the throat of your
bloodied and sobbing rape victim. But of course
you don't actually get that rush that confirms
your courage until you feel the hot blood
gushing out.
Somebody who hasn't been censored by slashdot, please
mod this guy up.
> Don't they suck? I've had to use one of those
> pieces of crap for months, 1.8GHz but it's slower
> than my Athlon 1.2.
Well, duh. It's a P4. It's supposed to be slower.
If it's anything like my laptop experience, it is
most notable when you drag a window with redraw on.
It's quiet, but very clearly perceptible in most
environments (not on a passenger jet in flight,
though).
Yes. I've had laptops that made sounds when
significant screen blits occurred. In particular,
a Dell Inspirion 5000e uxga. That's an ATI Rage-M
video chip. As I recall (my daughter has been
using it lately), I only heard it with XFree86,
not with Win2k, and it sounded like it was composed
of a lot of rapid chirps or clicks (~50 msec),
but had a principal harmonic in the kHz range.
> Basically Loebner was using his prize for cheap self promotion.
What you say isn't supported by the material you
quote, presumably to support it.
The quote does nothing to self-promote, whether
cheaply or expensively. What it does, in my view,
is attempt to injoin against others' defamation of
the Loebner competition.
"This information includes..." means just that.
It may include a great deal more.
Certainly the information they do collect is quite
sufficient to identify many users beyond a reasonable
doubt, contrary to their explicit claim that no
personal identifying information is transferred.
> isn't that offto-pic?
.jpg of some
Only if you include a link to a
serious cow-orking action.
> A cow-orker of mine...
> I should have taken him out back and beaten him
> with a frozen salmon.
That will teach him for orking cows.
You know that's just the sort of thing that
brought about the genocide of the Canaanites.
> Would you rather have the military and government
> using open source software or Microsoft?
That parses ambiguously;). Taking it as intended,
I can categorically state that I would rather have
the U.S. military and government using Microsoft,
because I think it is more likely to suffer
catastrophic failures of access security and
availability, thereby saving lives.
Now if you're talking about the government of
Nauru, it's quite another matter.
You're thinking of a googol, log10(googolplex).
My daughter said she was googling for her other sock,
yesterday. I think it's coming to mean much more
than just searching online. More like, searching
every possible location. A comprehensive search.
I think you're missing the point. "Properly written"
code is not something found in the wild. In the
real world, you have to deal with Other People's
Code more often than not.
I think that if DNS is the best you can do, you
should round-robin the IPs from each link on both
servers. Only drop the IPs from link1 if link1
goes down. Then even if there is some dead cache
on the network, at least your clients can reach
the server by trying again.
If you don't have multiple developers working on the
same files, your project is poorly organized. Code-
ownership is bad^3 news. CVS makes merges 90%
trivial. There is nothing fundamentally different
about open vs. closed source development. Open
development just increases the probability of
receiving unsolicited patch sets.
Does your development environment include a command-line?
If so, then it's trivial to use another version control system.
Assuming that eclipse CVS support invokes the cvs
command for its operations, it would be trivial to
make a cvs-compatible commmand line for aegis.
So the correct way to get a signed linux image is
to implement a game for publication which
incorporates a code to switch to a linux console,
then get them to sign the binary of the game.
It seems quite do-able, but it doesn't allow
for future updates to the binary image. Of course
that doesn't really matter if you just use it to
book the harddrive.
One alternative to satellite that I have considered,
in order to get Internet into a remote location
(Faya-Largeau, in northern Chad, a Saharan oasis
town about 300 miles from land lines) is a tethered
balloon with a repeater. The power for the repeater
would be solar, and run up the tether. Does anybody
know of someone who has done anything like this?
UAVs are pricey, but I have no clue whether the
operating time of a helium weather balloon, or the
tether-weight vs. balloon-size tradeoffs would
make such an approach prohibitively expensive.
Now most network engineers, when asked to adjust the
speed of light, will just look at you like you are
crazy, but in fact, given that you can adjust the
electrical permittivity and magnetic permeability
of the medium (in this case, free space), it's
actually a no-brainer: Just frob the mu-zero and
epsilon-zero numbers until your ping times through
the bird are optimal.
I have permittivity and permeability modulators
ready to ship. Unfortunately they are locked
up in Nigeria in customs, but if you would care to
send me your bank routing number, I could deduct
the small customs fee, and in return cut you 10%
of the gross on sales when they get to the states!
It's a great opportunity for a smart mover!
Why would it matter if he was or wasn't an American?
We imprisoned Manuel Noriega in Florida for breaking
American laws, although he was a Panamanian citizen
living in Panama. That's just the most famous
example. There are a thousand Afghanistani patriots
now imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay for defending their
country against attack. Heck, we don't just
prosecute people, we assassinate them without trial,
regardless of whether they are citizens or not, or
whether their supposed crimes are capital offenses
or not (as in Yemen recently), so it would not be
outside of the customary practices of the U.S. to
simply kill anybody in their home, anywhere in the
world, for breaking an American law.
> 2. Should it be illegal to actually do said 'thing'.
> Yes, so long as said thing violates what the citizens want to be wrong.
You don't seriously believe that anybody cares if I decrypt
DBS signals except for DirectTV, do you?
"Citizens" aren't involved in this. This is not an issue of
democracy. It is an issue of corruption.
Commenting on a sig is always going to be offtopic, but having
read this one so many times, I am going to finally take the bait.
It is basically a true statement. You are much less likely to
get shot if you are not carrying a gun. But it is also basically
a misleading statement, designed to lead the reader to a false
conclusion, specifically, that it is therefore unwise to carry
a gun.
Firstly, if one employs a weapon, and thereby becomes a
combatant, it is because the conclusion has been made that
it is better to assume the risks of combat than to abstain.
Personal safety is not the sole and overriding human value.
In fact, it is one of the basest human values. The quote
appeals to the lowest and most primitive factors in human
nature. Defense of defenseless others is a higher value.
Secondly, it glosses the distinction between open and concealed
carry. While open carry attracts attention and may thereby
entrain combat, concealed carry does not.
I might continue, but for the press of time. I will be
satisfied at least that I have not left the deceptive qualities
of these words entirely unchallenged.