One kid reported, 'If the demand comes in for $4-5, compared to the losses they're suffering, there's an attraction for the wimps to pay and hope it goes away. But there's nothing to say it will go away.'
Convert LOTR to an integer, then count until you reach it.
Actually, the other day I was generating some really large numbers to look for potential large primes, when I saw a number that struck me as interesting, so I converted the number to binary and dumped it out in a binary file...
Then just yesterday, when trying to do some directory maintenence, I accidentally mistyped a command line and ended up calling perl on the binary file mentioned above. Well, you'd figure that would just give me garbage and die... but to my great surprise, it turns out that that number ended up being identical to a bzip2-compressed stream embedded in a perl script with self-extaction code.
Anyway, to make a long story short, it ended up spitting out the complete LOTR trilogy, nicely formatted in docbook SGML. Sadly, there were some typos, a few dangling reference sto some artwork that I don't have, and oddly enough, it wrote everything into my.gnupg/ directory as files named "bert.smgl", "ernie.sgml", and "bzgbir3.smgl"[sic], so I guess I'll just have to keep looking for interesting numbers and maybe I'll discover a version without these problems.
That way you don't get people at DoD who use "fluffyDoG" as a password that controls a nuculear [simp!] missle silo or something...
If the password was "fluffyDoG", we'd be well off. The problem is that the password is really "5HcvfAS@!d$3", but because that is really hard to remember, it's written on a post-it note and stuck on the bottom of the keyboard.
I count this to their eternal credit. They know who's the David and who's the Goliath as well, so they're not even really taking much of a chance. The worst-case is that they just revive AIX.
I certainly don't hope IBM thinks that THEY are Goliath... remember how David cut off Goliath's head with his own sword?;)
Oh, yes, it's commonly known that they do have the cure--unfortunately, on their worlds, the technology is tied up in a small handful of elite government-like corporations that hold it encumbered in their version of patents and licensing. Even among them, the cure for most diseaes is mete out only to those with lots of power and influence.
The group of them that first landed here would have loved to sell us some pills showing the cure, but we couldn't afford the up-front licensing costs (although they said they'd take good ol' Sol for trade, but we couldn't show documents that we actually OWN it...) and the NDAs we would have had to sign to get it also included a clause that let them completely wipe our brains of all concious thought, turning us into mindless slave-drones.
Actually, it's probably a good trade, and all, but in the end our delegates ended up offending them by hitting on some of their space-program interns and they left in a huff.
You don't already know all this? Don't you watch CNN?!
One skilled in the art would appreciate that the discussion system may be used in conjunction with a non-commercial environment and with a network other than the WWW or even with a system that is not based on a network. Also, one skilled in the art would appreciate that the term "item" refers to anything (e.g., book, news story, musical score, electronic product, scientific theory) for which a user wants to share information about with other users or to elicit comments from other users.
Yeah, just like one skilled in the field of talking about scientific theories, books, or new stories not on a network would see that how obvious it is to apply this to a network (usenet, mailing lists) or the web (forms, reviews, etc).
This paragraph from the patent says to anyone with a brain in their head: "Yes, we know this patent is trivial and obvious, but we're submitting it anyway."
Well, I think it's quite arguable that 350 AD is even close to any bronze age, let alone "firmly in" it. Even the 1000-900 BC dates are not in the bronze age according to very many timelines (most have it in the mid-to-late iron age); but again, it depends a lot on the historian you're getting your info from, and what part of the world you're talking about: remember, not every region of the globe and culture had a bronze or iron age simultaniously... =)
But anyway, I'm pretty sure that's what the person was trying to refer to, and it's probably not terribly wrong to say that a lot of source material of the Old Testiment came out of a bronze-age period; I asked the question rhetorically to kind of make the point that obscure references loose quite a bit of their coolness when it's apparent that the person making the reference doesn't quite grasp what they are referring to (kind of like when "Joy of Tech" comics makes jokes about Linux).
The real irony was that my comment with the question got modded down nearly instantly (literally about a minute after I posted it) as "overrated". If that doesn't strike you as a bit ironic... well... go read some of Joy of Tech's comics about linux. =)
Eh? How is asking a question "overrated"? Especially when it hadn't been moderated previously.
Oh well, typical moderation abuse, I suppose. I guess I'll count it as a benefit to society that whoever did that inane moderation has one less point now.;)
Memories become legend, Legend fades to myth, and even myth is forgotten before the age that gave it birth comes again.
If you're going to use Robert Jordan quotes as taglines, it's typically good idea to actually cite the author. =) Otherwise, whether you meant to or not, it looks like you're either trying to take credit for thinking it up yourself.
About from the witches, the shamp hags, the archers/rouges, the fat valykies, the elfen girls, etc. But in low res with poor model polycount, you will find that if you don't have exaggerant female features, the character will look that a man.
While this may be true to *some* extent, what about games like "Pool of Radiance" (the original one, not the pathetic remake) where the women looked completely and utterly normal without any confusion or exaggeration? There are plenty of other examples. Whip out your C64 and NES games some time. They don't exaggerate features very much. (i.e. Princess Toadstool from Mario looked normal in a little 48x48 pixel block... it's not that hard!)
Ah, the old nebulous TFLOPS rating again that every freshman CS or EE student learns is completely and utterly worthless in any regard as a speed rating...
Besides, RC5 doesn't USE floating point operations. =)
Since I *am* from the scientific community (http://splish.ee.byu.edu), I'll comment on this...
Obviously, not only is tps12 smart because of his (or her) logical reasoning, but because of the display of absolutely brilliant Tolkien application in several threads, we can only come to the inevitable conclusion that tps12 is a certifiable genius. =)
> Since I run strickly openSource stuff I
> never agree to a license agreement.
Well, maybe not a EULA, but chances are you're using quite a lot of software under the GNU Public License, if you're using any Free or open source software. =)
Slashdot Mirror
One kid reported, 'If the demand comes in for $4-5, compared to the losses they're suffering, there's an attraction for the wimps to pay and hope it goes away. But there's nothing to say it will go away.'
Whoa, the entire suite?! Yeah, I guess it could take a while to port notepad and minesweeper. ;)
Damn! I sold one already!
What's the problem? You've got two, and you only sold one.
But the comments (so far) aren't about the book.
This is slashdot. Nobody reads the articles before posting. Do you really expect them to read a whole BOOK before posting?
;)
. . . I never heard word ONE from them...I had to call and badger them every time I needed a status update. After two weeks of waiting . . .
It's obvious why you didn't get a good response from them. You forgot the mushroom and the snake .
Convert LOTR to an integer, then count until you reach it.
Actually, the other day I was generating some really large numbers to look for potential large primes, when I saw a number that struck me as interesting, so I converted the number to binary and dumped it out in a binary file...
Then just yesterday, when trying to do some directory maintenence, I accidentally mistyped a command line and ended up calling perl on the binary file mentioned above. Well, you'd figure that would just give me garbage and die... but to my great surprise, it turns out that that number ended up being identical to a bzip2-compressed stream embedded in a perl script with self-extaction code.
Anyway, to make a long story short, it ended up spitting out the complete LOTR trilogy, nicely formatted in docbook SGML. Sadly, there were some typos, a few dangling reference sto some artwork that I don't have, and oddly enough, it wrote everything into my .gnupg/ directory as files named "bert.smgl", "ernie.sgml", and "bzgbir3.smgl"[sic], so I guess I'll just have to keep looking for interesting numbers and maybe I'll discover a version without these problems.
That way you don't get people at DoD who use "fluffyDoG" as a password that controls a nuculear [simp!] missle silo or something...
If the password was "fluffyDoG", we'd be well off. The problem is that the password is really "5HcvfAS@!d$3", but because that is really hard to remember, it's written on a post-it note and stuck on the bottom of the keyboard.
I certainly don't hope IBM thinks that THEY are Goliath... remember how David cut off Goliath's head with his own sword? ;)
You're right, those two quotes do have something very important in common: you made them both up.
The other bit of civil disobedience that people conveniently forget is this: You are supposed to get caught and punished.
Just like how all the people involved in the Boston Tea Party purposefully got caught and punished. Ah, I get it now.
Oh, yes, it's commonly known that they do have the cure--unfortunately, on their worlds, the technology is tied up in a small handful of elite government-like corporations that hold it encumbered in their version of patents and licensing. Even among them, the cure for most diseaes is mete out only to those with lots of power and influence.
The group of them that first landed here would have loved to sell us some pills showing the cure, but we couldn't afford the up-front licensing costs (although they said they'd take good ol' Sol for trade, but we couldn't show documents that we actually OWN it...) and the NDAs we would have had to sign to get it also included a clause that let them completely wipe our brains of all concious thought, turning us into mindless slave-drones.
Actually, it's probably a good trade, and all, but in the end our delegates ended up offending them by hitting on some of their space-program interns and they left in a huff.
You don't already know all this? Don't you watch CNN?!
Yeah, just like one skilled in the field of talking about scientific theories, books, or new stories not on a network would see that how obvious it is to apply this to a network (usenet, mailing lists) or the web (forms, reviews, etc).
This paragraph from the patent says to anyone with a brain in their head: "Yes, we know this patent is trivial and obvious, but we're submitting it anyway."
Heh heh, thanks for posting this! Even if some complete moron modded this down, I think it's the funniest thing I've read all day! =)
Well, I think it's quite arguable that 350 AD is even close to any bronze age, let alone "firmly in" it. Even the 1000-900 BC dates are not in the bronze age according to very many timelines (most have it in the mid-to-late iron age); but again, it depends a lot on the historian you're getting your info from, and what part of the world you're talking about: remember, not every region of the globe and culture had a bronze or iron age simultaniously... =)
But anyway, I'm pretty sure that's what the person was trying to refer to, and it's probably not terribly wrong to say that a lot of source material of the Old Testiment came out of a bronze-age period; I asked the question rhetorically to kind of make the point that obscure references loose quite a bit of their coolness when it's apparent that the person making the reference doesn't quite grasp what they are referring to (kind of like when "Joy of Tech" comics makes jokes about Linux).
The real irony was that my comment with the question got modded down nearly instantly (literally about a minute after I posted it) as "overrated". If that doesn't strike you as a bit ironic... well... go read some of Joy of Tech's comics about linux. =)
Okay, enough slashdot commenting today!
Eh? How is asking a question "overrated"? Especially when it hadn't been moderated previously.
Oh well, typical moderation abuse, I suppose. I guess I'll count it as a benefit to society that whoever did that inane moderation has one less point now. ;)
Bronze age mythology? What mythology comes from the bronze age?
Memories become legend, Legend fades to myth, and even myth is forgotten before the age that gave it birth comes again. If you're going to use Robert Jordan quotes as taglines, it's typically good idea to actually cite the author. =) Otherwise, whether you meant to or not, it looks like you're either trying to take credit for thinking it up yourself.
About from the witches, the shamp hags, the archers/rouges, the fat valykies, the elfen girls, etc. But in low res with poor model polycount, you will find that if you don't have
exaggerant female features, the character will look that a man.
While this may be true to *some* extent, what about games like "Pool of Radiance" (the original one, not the pathetic remake) where the women looked completely and utterly normal without any confusion or exaggeration? There are plenty of other examples. Whip out your C64 and NES games some time. They don't exaggerate features very much. (i.e. Princess Toadstool from Mario looked normal in a little 48x48 pixel block... it's not that hard!)
Wow, an "Anonymous Coward" has the courage to stand by his statement. Am I the only one who senses a bit of irony? =)
Ah, the old nebulous TFLOPS rating again that every freshman CS or EE student learns is completely and utterly worthless in any regard as a speed rating...
Besides, RC5 doesn't USE floating point operations. =)
Since I *am* from the scientific community
(http://splish.ee.byu.edu), I'll comment on this...
Obviously, not only is tps12 smart because of his
(or her) logical reasoning, but because of the
display of absolutely brilliant Tolkien application
in several threads, we can only come to the inevitable
conclusion that tps12 is a certifiable genius. =)
Microsoft doesn't go out of it's way to promote the GPLed software that they distribute (yes they do distribute some GPLed software)
Wait, are you saying Microsoft distributes GPL'd software? Somehow I can't help but think that you're making it up. But maybe I'm all wrong:
Any concrete pointers to where I can get some of this Microsoft GPL'd code?
Go read the page again:
He didn't move any data into the filenames. He split the file, yes, and removed '5' from them, yes, but none of that was stored in the filenames.
He talked about how he *could* do this, but didn't because he (Patrick) considered it cheating.
>Even if the order of files supplid to the
>"decompressor" is preserved, renaming them
>renders the original data unrecoverable.
No, actually if the file order was perserved, even if the files were named anything, it would have worked. =)
The Lego Chef link was much more interesting than the original link.
;)
Not to say it won't be a funny movie, but hey: given the choice between legos now and a movie later, what would you chose?
> Since I run strickly openSource stuff I
> never agree to a license agreement.
Well, maybe not a EULA, but chances are you're using quite a lot of software under the GNU Public License, if you're using any Free or open source software. =)