It's true - I'll concede that the CATO is at least honest to their ideology today. Though they were among his big cheerleaders back when the whole "Privatize Social Security" and "Tax Cuts for the Wealthy" schtick was going on.
Didn't they look at Bush's record in Texas wrt deficit spending? Why were they gullible enough to believe he'd be a different president than he was governor? Oh well, live and learn.
While that's true - that XP and 2k3 are far more stable than 2000, which was far more stable than NT, there's still the issue that's fairly common, that Outlook sometimes hangs on network issues, which can impact Explorer, or IE. The three share some resources, and those shared resources can hang eachother up. When Explorer goes down, you're boned. Yes, it's true that sometimes you can End Task, and restart Explorer. But my experience, in XP, sometimes you can't, and you end up having to restart the whole box. And even if you can restart Explorer, your environment is now re-set, you've lost your data, which folders you had opened, which pages you had opened, which email's you had queued up. . .
I'm hoping they address some of THAT instability in Vista.
Right now there is zero evidence to suggest any connection. To claim one is actually quite laughable and ammo to Rush Limbaugh and other right-wing pundits.
"It's irresponsible not to speculate." - Anne Coulter.
But I'm especially funny today, because, you see, the article is about a region in the brain that maps meanings to words, and I said that the PRESS was trying to conflate the meanings of the words correlation and causa- . . . oh, never mind.
Let me know when they come up with a brain scan that identifies the region of the brain that processes humor.
All he said was you can't blame this stupid corporate scandal on Bush.
While that's true - you can't blame it directly on Bush, there is a huge network of rightwing thinktanks and pundits; Club for Growth, Focus on the Family, Heritage Foundation, Aspen Group, CATO, etc. etc. ad nauseum, who dominate the newsmedia op ed and commentary pages and shows, and to them, Bush is their hero, their figurehead, their demigod. They mindlessly push their ideology using trumped up "facts" and faked "studies", vitriol and personal attacks on various figures on the "left", they re-define terms, present false dillemas, strawmen, and every logical fallacy known to man (and I think they've even invented a few the Greeks didn't know about).
Bush is currently the de facto figurehead of this movement. This movement's ideology fits perfectly with the actions of HP's board in this "stupid corporate scandal": The ideology that people should only have privacy if they aren't using it. The idea that corporate profits are more important than the rights of individuals. The ideology that the wealthy and powerful are above the law, and are the only people that matter.
No - Bush didn't make these people act this way. This ideology has been around for a very long time, and its recent resurgence in America does pre-date Bush's rise to prominence (whether you call it from Nixon, or Reagan's election, or the congressional takeover in 1994), I think it's entirely appropriate and accurate to "blame this on Bush". If not Bush - then at least the blame lies in "the horse he rode in on."
I only hope that when I get to be a director, I would have the cajones to resign rather than to serve under or carry out orders from a boss with a history of such behavior.
If you do, then you most likely will never be in that position.
I don't know - I imagine that these "walking lobotomies" probably care more about their six and seven figure incomes than right and wrong. That's probably the case for the vast majority of six and seven figure income earners. Which is probably a major factor that allows them to actually earn that much money.
Can they figure out how to map the word "Correlation" to "Causation"?
This is actually a press-problem. Neuroscientists doing this kind of work know the difference, and the field is actually called "Neural correlates". But the popular press seems to always conflate correlation with causation. Bad press!
Could you summarize for us in a couple of sentances, a mechanism by which increased heat from the Sun could cause increased CO2 in the atmosphere? Because as far as I know, (especially when we're talking about large quantities), there's only a couple of sources of CO2; Plant and animal respiration, Volcanism, and Combustion.
Most of the science around this subject is not confirming increase in plant and animal respiration, or vulcanism, over the past 400 years, that would explain this increase, and there's ample data that can confirm a combustion increase. Where is all this CO2 coming from, if not from human activity? Surely this idea can be conveyed without having to link to sites and research papers. The idea's credibility can be established by that means, but really - for the rest of us, what's the theory behind this?
But you need to consider that election fraud does not seek to win by wide margins. Election fraud seeks to win by razor-thin margins, for several reasons: 1. To supress future voting by the losing bloc, who may have put a lot of effort into campaign and organization, only to lose anyway. 2. To divert suspicion that arises when exit polls differ significantly from election results. 3. To minimize the cost of election spending. They only need to spend enough money to get them within spitting-distance of 49%, then cheating gets them over the hump.
Election machines could allow someone to automate the theft of hundreds of thousands of votes. The same theft, with paper ballots, would require far more people in the "chain" of conspiracy, which increases risks that someone's going to blab to the press. (but even when someone does blab to the press these days, they're considered a "liberal" a "radical" oh "fanatical", "criminal".)
So I think that the benefit these election machines have is just a better way to not get caught, by taking surplus people out of the chain. Which, of course, is the whole point of automation technology in the first place. Reduce the cost. Reduce the accountability.
If you wanted to say, change every 5th vote from a district, or just plain "lose" the results of the district entirely, you'd have a hard time doing it on paper.
Not hard. You just need the "right" officials.
In 04, a pickup truck filled with boxes of marked paper ballots from a non-diebold district was followed to the Republican Party's office in that county, and the truck unloaded there, rather than to the place where they were to be counted. And these ballots were subsequently "lost" - oops!
The chief issue in election integrity today, is not diebold, nor is it even corrupt officials. The chief issue is:
Nobody In Power Gives A Crap.
(mainly because that's how they got into power in the first place.)
And it's not just the voting. Mass media corporate consolidation plays a huge role in controlling the message that gets to voters as well.
I did a study in High School (part of a special learning program) - using a very very expensive slide projector. (1981-ish)
Maybe my survey questions weren't any good, but we saw absolutely zero effect (of the superimposed messages projected during a film-movie). As a result, I tend to think the whole field of subliminal psychodynamic activation to be bunk. If there is an effect, it's not a significant one. That's just my opinion, because other actual professional researchers have shown results from the technique.
Enough dinging the guy for a stupid mistake. He learned the hard lesson. And I think he made the point relevant to this article: the internet is a crucially important element of many peoples' lives and livelihoods.
Personally, I can't wait until congress finally legislates Net Neutrality out of existance, so everyone can truly find out how sweet we have things right now (or actually, how sweet we had things in the 1990's).
It's probably true for a significant portion of people that a lot more hard work and dedication is required to master a skill. However, there's probably another significant group for whom no amount of "practice and work hard" will produce skill mastery, let alone virtuosity.
I had an illustration teacher who thought that way too. He figured that it was all just a matter of having a good protestant work ethic, and drawing 10 hours a day for 5-10 years. (the lazy were punished by failure, of course).
Didn't work for me.
I dropped out of art school and I work in computers now. And, I might add, I work very hard. But because I am relatively good at what I do, I actually ENJOY the work. Unlike drawing, where because I sucked, I did not enjoy it, and after a time, couldn't bear to spend the time. Okay, I don't suck at drawing that bad - obviously I had to be good to a certain degree, because the art program I was in was reputed to be very hard to get into. I guess I was a pickier critic of my work than was the review board.
The point is - if one is talented, one will enjoy the drudgery work required to build the skill to virtuosity. If one is not talented, not only is that "hard work" harder, because it's not enjoyable, there's no reward, no goal in sight, for that work investment.
I guess it's just hard for people with talent to imagine what it's like to not have it. (honestly, I encounter "programming gurus" who are like this as well. They assume that everybody understands the depth of their particular area of speciality implicitly. So when trying to explain something, they'll dive right into the deep stuff and assume you're following them. Tiresome.)
Learn to hear intervals, not notes; and learn to tune by fifths.
You're asking too much from most people, who may or may not be moderately musically inclined, but frankly, just plain can't hear that shit. (hell, at my age, I'm lucky I hear anything higher than 10,000 Hz anymore).
Ironic that you cite "folk music". What you call "folk music" plainly has it's origins and style in actual folk music, taken over by virtuosos.
Nothing wrong with virtuosos, mind you.
But not everyone can be one. Most people don't even have the ability to appreciate one when they hear it.
Back in 1996-ish, I was involved in a very bloody merger (two competitors).
After a couple of years of "rah rah! go team! we're going to keep both products, we're not going to consolidate or lay anyone off, you're vital to our enterprise plans," etc.
They pulled a sneaky-ass move: they sent our former CEO (demoted to "site manager") on a 6 week trip to China to drum-up business partnerships. It was completely bogus. Without the knowledge or participation of the parent company's executives (perhaps a small subset were in the know).
The the other company's ex-ceo->site manager, along with his goons, and some hired guns from corporate HR, showed up, completely unannounced one monday morning, and herded us all into a couple of conference rooms. Depending on which room you were in, you were given a different talk. Either: - You're fired. Clean out your cube, get out by 10am. (about 80% of staff). - You have two weeks to clean up and transition your development work for our maintenance crew to take over. (our product development went on "maintenance-mode"). (smaller sub-set). - We would like you to stay with the company, because if we lose your expertise, we're fucked, because only you key individuals know how to support your legacy product, and we'd like to keep as many of those customers as possible, and transition them to our stuff (developed at the other site). Work at this site for 6 months to help with transition work, and at the end, accept a relo package to one of our other sites. (included about 15 key developers and support staff).
Corporate was pissed, but they couldn't do anything about it, because the trigger had been pulled. There were mea culpas, but some of that was just show; it was kabuki theater to paint the other site manager as the bad guy. He left to spend time with his family a few months later, but his henchmen were still around.
I was one of the few who opted to relo. (though it was not to the site where the goons were from - it was a different site - turned out to be a great move for me and my family, and I did make out like a bandit on stock options).
Two years later, they pulled nearly the same crap at our other site.
I changed industries.
It did not suprise me at all when the parent company had insider trading and fraud charges filed against it, as well as a class action suit by shareholders.
In 95, it was possible to replace logo.sys by simply renaming a.bmp.
Ah - the good old days.
Let's hope Filemon works on Vista. We'll soon figure out where that nasty sound clip is hiding.
I think the ultimate hack would be to record an inverse waveform version of the same sound, and play it back simultanously, causing the two sounds to cancel eachother out.:)
Yeah, there's this nasty BITCH of a mechanism called Windows File Protection - where many of the common system files have backup copies in a hidden subdirectory called dllcache. If you delete the system copy, the os "detects" it (via a filter-driver), and copies the backup from dllcache.
In some cases, the fix is to simply delete the dllcache version - if what you're trying to do is delete the file. But there's also an added level of hackery for a subset of these protected files, because they're also redundantly backed up in a.CAB file in dllcache - and that.CAB file has a manifest that has checksums and digital signatures socked away in a jet database or registry hive somewhere - theoretically, one could ONLY update one of these files via the Microsoft Installer Service API.
So for files that are protected with this extra level, no, it's not really possible to change them via hex editor. I know that there used to be hacks in 2000 to disable WFP. I also know that in 2002, Microsoft did not have the expertise, in house, to answer a developer support question on WFP behavior (for a developer of BACKUP software - ie. "what happens if I restore the system to a previous version via backup software? - answer: nasty stuff. Which is why imaging software became a very popular way of backup and restore windows desktops).
No - I know that guys like Marc Russinovich probably have a much better understanding of how WFP works. But this is my understanding after having to deal with it. Frankly, in the past few years, when I've had to remove spyware and malware from systems, there's an eerie resemblance in self-protection techniques between WFP and malware.
Actually that's more than part of the problem. Many schools don't have halfway competent network administrators, and they certainly don't have the resources to maintain that many laptops, and they would have to maintain them. After all, if little Johnny's laptop stops working, and that laptop is important to his participation in school then someone is going to have to fix it, and in many cases the parents aren't going to be able to afford to.
Besides. . . the school needs a new Football Stadium!
If you want to be social with the guys, talk about cool technology, fun video games, military hardware, or the latest in high horsepower vehicles. (Come on, if you're in technology, you should be interested in at least some of those topics?)
Slashdot Mirror
It's true - I'll concede that the CATO is at least honest to their ideology today. Though they were among his big cheerleaders back when the whole "Privatize Social Security" and "Tax Cuts for the Wealthy" schtick was going on.
Didn't they look at Bush's record in Texas wrt deficit spending? Why were they gullible enough to believe he'd be a different president than he was governor? Oh well, live and learn.
While that's true - that XP and 2k3 are far more stable than 2000, which was far more stable than NT, there's still the issue that's fairly common, that Outlook sometimes hangs on network issues, which can impact Explorer, or IE. The three share some resources, and those shared resources can hang eachother up. When Explorer goes down, you're boned. Yes, it's true that sometimes you can End Task, and restart Explorer. But my experience, in XP, sometimes you can't, and you end up having to restart the whole box. And even if you can restart Explorer, your environment is now re-set, you've lost your data, which folders you had opened, which pages you had opened, which email's you had queued up. . .
I'm hoping they address some of THAT instability in Vista.
Right now there is zero evidence to suggest any connection. To claim one is actually quite laughable and ammo to Rush Limbaugh and other right-wing pundits.
"It's irresponsible not to speculate." - Anne Coulter.
But I'm especially funny today, because, you see, the article is about a region in the brain that maps meanings to words, and I said that the PRESS was trying to conflate the meanings of the words correlation and causa- . . . oh, never mind.
Let me know when they come up with a brain scan that identifies the region of the brain that processes humor.
All he said was you can't blame this stupid corporate scandal on Bush.
While that's true - you can't blame it directly on Bush, there is a huge network of rightwing thinktanks and pundits; Club for Growth, Focus on the Family, Heritage Foundation, Aspen Group, CATO, etc. etc. ad nauseum, who dominate the newsmedia op ed and commentary pages and shows, and to them, Bush is their hero, their figurehead, their demigod. They mindlessly push their ideology using trumped up "facts" and faked "studies", vitriol and personal attacks on various figures on the "left", they re-define terms, present false dillemas, strawmen, and every logical fallacy known to man (and I think they've even invented a few the Greeks didn't know about).
Bush is currently the de facto figurehead of this movement.
This movement's ideology fits perfectly with the actions of HP's board in this "stupid corporate scandal": The ideology that people should only have privacy if they aren't using it. The idea that corporate profits are more important than the rights of individuals. The ideology that the wealthy and powerful are above the law, and are the only people that matter.
No - Bush didn't make these people act this way. This ideology has been around for a very long time, and its recent resurgence in America does pre-date Bush's rise to prominence (whether you call it from Nixon, or Reagan's election, or the congressional takeover in 1994), I think it's entirely appropriate and accurate to "blame this on Bush". If not Bush - then at least the blame lies in "the horse he rode in on."
I only hope that when I get to be a director, I would have the cajones to resign rather than to serve under or carry out orders from a boss with a history of such behavior.
If you do, then you most likely will never be in that position.
I don't know - I imagine that these "walking lobotomies" probably care more about their six and seven figure incomes than right and wrong. That's probably the case for the vast majority of six and seven figure income earners. Which is probably a major factor that allows them to actually earn that much money.
Can they figure out how to map the word "Correlation" to "Causation"?
This is actually a press-problem. Neuroscientists doing this kind of work know the difference, and the field is actually called "Neural correlates". But the popular press seems to always conflate correlation with causation. Bad press!
No - Apple didn't learn an important lesson.
The whole point of people who wanted a headless imac, was because they wanted to switch, and save the extra $500 by leveraging their current monitor.
Apple's Cube was so grossly overpriced, that these frugal buyers could not be satisfied.
The proof is the success of the mac mini, relative to the cube. Even though the mini's still pretty pricey for what it is.
Macs are not for the frugal. Never have been. Probably never will be.
I wasn't asking you to do it without cites.
I was asking for a brief, ready (and credible) explanation in addition to cites.
You provided that.
Thanks.
Could you summarize for us in a couple of sentances, a mechanism by which increased heat from the Sun could cause increased CO2 in the atmosphere? Because as far as I know, (especially when we're talking about large quantities), there's only a couple of sources of CO2; Plant and animal respiration, Volcanism, and Combustion.
Most of the science around this subject is not confirming increase in plant and animal respiration, or vulcanism, over the past 400 years, that would explain this increase, and there's ample data that can confirm a combustion increase. Where is all this CO2 coming from, if not from human activity? Surely this idea can be conveyed without having to link to sites and research papers. The idea's credibility can be established by that means, but really - for the rest of us, what's the theory behind this?
Bad machines do make this task much easier.
But you need to consider that election fraud does not seek to win by wide margins. Election fraud seeks to win by razor-thin margins, for several reasons:
1. To supress future voting by the losing bloc, who may have put a lot of effort into campaign and organization, only to lose anyway.
2. To divert suspicion that arises when exit polls differ significantly from election results.
3. To minimize the cost of election spending. They only need to spend enough money to get them within spitting-distance of 49%, then cheating gets them over the hump.
Election machines could allow someone to automate the theft of hundreds of thousands of votes. The same theft, with paper ballots, would require far more people in the "chain" of conspiracy, which increases risks that someone's going to blab to the press. (but even when someone does blab to the press these days, they're considered a "liberal" a "radical" oh "fanatical", "criminal".)
So I think that the benefit these election machines have is just a better way to not get caught, by taking surplus people out of the chain. Which, of course, is the whole point of automation technology in the first place. Reduce the cost. Reduce the accountability.
If you wanted to say, change every 5th vote from a district, or just plain "lose" the results of the district entirely, you'd have a hard time doing it on paper.
Not hard. You just need the "right" officials.
In 04, a pickup truck filled with boxes of marked paper ballots from a non-diebold district was followed to the Republican Party's office in that county, and the truck unloaded there, rather than to the place where they were to be counted. And these ballots were subsequently "lost" - oops!
The chief issue in election integrity today, is not diebold, nor is it even corrupt officials. The chief issue is:
Nobody In Power Gives A Crap.
(mainly because that's how they got into power in the first place.)
And it's not just the voting. Mass media corporate consolidation plays a huge role in controlling the message that gets to voters as well.
I did a study in High School (part of a special learning program) - using a very very expensive slide projector. (1981-ish)
Maybe my survey questions weren't any good, but we saw absolutely zero effect (of the superimposed messages projected during a film-movie). As a result, I tend to think the whole field of subliminal psychodynamic activation to be bunk. If there is an effect, it's not a significant one. That's just my opinion, because other actual professional researchers have shown results from the technique.
Enough dinging the guy for a stupid mistake. He learned the hard lesson. And I think he made the point relevant to this article: the internet is a crucially important element of many peoples' lives and livelihoods.
Personally, I can't wait until congress finally legislates Net Neutrality out of existance, so everyone can truly find out how sweet we have things right now (or actually, how sweet we had things in the 1990's).
Ah, now if only I could transfer that name to my spiffy 4-digit user id. . .
It's probably true for a significant portion of people that a lot more hard work and dedication is required to master a skill.
However, there's probably another significant group for whom no amount of "practice and work hard" will produce skill mastery, let alone virtuosity.
I had an illustration teacher who thought that way too.
He figured that it was all just a matter of having a good protestant work ethic, and drawing 10 hours a day for 5-10 years.
(the lazy were punished by failure, of course).
Didn't work for me.
I dropped out of art school and I work in computers now. And, I might add, I work very hard. But because I am relatively good at what I do, I actually ENJOY the work. Unlike drawing, where because I sucked, I did not enjoy it, and after a time, couldn't bear to spend the time. Okay, I don't suck at drawing that bad - obviously I had to be good to a certain degree, because the art program I was in was reputed to be very hard to get into. I guess I was a pickier critic of my work than was the review board.
The point is - if one is talented, one will enjoy the drudgery work required to build the skill to virtuosity. If one is not talented, not only is that "hard work" harder, because it's not enjoyable, there's no reward, no goal in sight, for that work investment.
I guess it's just hard for people with talent to imagine what it's like to not have it.
(honestly, I encounter "programming gurus" who are like this as well. They assume that everybody understands the depth of their particular area of speciality implicitly. So when trying to explain something, they'll dive right into the deep stuff and assume you're following them. Tiresome.)
Learn to hear intervals, not notes; and learn to tune by fifths.
You're asking too much from most people, who may or may not be moderately musically inclined, but frankly, just plain can't hear that shit. (hell, at my age, I'm lucky I hear anything higher than 10,000 Hz anymore).
Ironic that you cite "folk music". What you call "folk music" plainly has it's origins and style in actual folk music, taken over by virtuosos.
Nothing wrong with virtuosos, mind you.
But not everyone can be one.
Most people don't even have the ability to appreciate one when they hear it.
Back in 1996-ish, I was involved in a very bloody merger (two competitors).
After a couple of years of "rah rah! go team! we're going to keep both products, we're not going to consolidate or lay anyone off, you're vital to our enterprise plans," etc.
They pulled a sneaky-ass move: they sent our former CEO (demoted to "site manager") on a 6 week trip to China to drum-up business partnerships. It was completely bogus. Without the knowledge or participation of the parent company's executives (perhaps a small subset were in the know).
The the other company's ex-ceo->site manager, along with his goons, and some hired guns from corporate HR, showed up, completely unannounced one monday morning, and herded us all into a couple of conference rooms. Depending on which room you were in, you were given a different talk.
Either:
- You're fired. Clean out your cube, get out by 10am. (about 80% of staff).
- You have two weeks to clean up and transition your development work for our maintenance crew to take over. (our product development went on "maintenance-mode"). (smaller sub-set).
- We would like you to stay with the company, because if we lose your expertise, we're fucked, because only you key individuals know how to support your legacy product, and we'd like to keep as many of those customers as possible, and transition them to our stuff (developed at the other site). Work at this site for 6 months to help with transition work, and at the end, accept a relo package to one of our other sites. (included about 15 key developers and support staff).
Corporate was pissed, but they couldn't do anything about it, because the trigger had been pulled. There were mea culpas, but some of that was just show; it was kabuki theater to paint the other site manager as the bad guy. He left to spend time with his family a few months later, but his henchmen were still around.
I was one of the few who opted to relo. (though it was not to the site where the goons were from - it was a different site - turned out to be a great move for me and my family, and I did make out like a bandit on stock options).
Two years later, they pulled nearly the same crap at our other site.
I changed industries.
It did not suprise me at all when the parent company had insider trading and fraud charges filed against it, as well as a class action suit by shareholders.
Very interesting.
One of those "obvious" solutions that just didn't ever occur to me.
In 95, it was possible to replace logo.sys by simply renaming a .bmp.
:)
Ah - the good old days.
Let's hope Filemon works on Vista. We'll soon figure out where that nasty sound clip is hiding.
I think the ultimate hack would be to record an inverse waveform version of the same sound, and play it back simultanously, causing the two sounds to cancel eachother out.
Yeah, there's this nasty BITCH of a mechanism called Windows File Protection - where many of the common system files have backup copies in a hidden subdirectory called dllcache. If you delete the system copy, the os "detects" it (via a filter-driver), and copies the backup from dllcache.
.CAB file in dllcache - and that .CAB file has a manifest that has checksums and digital signatures socked away in a jet database or registry hive somewhere - theoretically, one could ONLY update one of these files via the Microsoft Installer Service API.
In some cases, the fix is to simply delete the dllcache version - if what you're trying to do is delete the file. But there's also an added level of hackery for a subset of these protected files, because they're also redundantly backed up in a
So for files that are protected with this extra level, no, it's not really possible to change them via hex editor. I know that there used to be hacks in 2000 to disable WFP. I also know that in 2002, Microsoft did not have the expertise, in house, to answer a developer support question on WFP behavior (for a developer of BACKUP software - ie. "what happens if I restore the system to a previous version via backup software? - answer: nasty stuff. Which is why imaging software became a very popular way of backup and restore windows desktops).
No - I know that guys like Marc Russinovich probably have a much better understanding of how WFP works. But this is my understanding after having to deal with it. Frankly, in the past few years, when I've had to remove spyware and malware from systems, there's an eerie resemblance in self-protection techniques between WFP and malware.
Actually that's more than part of the problem. Many schools don't have halfway competent network administrators, and they certainly don't have the resources to maintain that many laptops, and they would have to maintain them. After all, if little Johnny's laptop stops working, and that laptop is important to his participation in school then someone is going to have to fix it, and in many cases the parents aren't going to be able to afford to.
Besides. . . the school needs a new Football Stadium!
So to the women asking how they can "fit in", the answer is that you can't.
Well, now you're running up against the company Diversity policy. . .
If you want to be social with the guys, talk about cool technology, fun video games, military hardware, or the latest in high horsepower vehicles. (Come on, if you're in technology, you should be interested in at least some of those topics?)
. . . not to mention Sailor Moon Cosplay. . .