Oh sure. I've played around modifying various controlers for use in unintended ways, including foot switches. As an experiment I even made a foot mouse once. I didn't use it long enough to get very good with it, but it was surprisingly easy to use, including clicking with toes.
I never did try it for gaming (I really don't play FPSes), but it did allow me to mouse around the desktop without removing my hands from home on the keyboard when doing document processing.
I imagine I looked a little odd though. Bonzo Goes to College.
Denver's plane was a used white box, not a new Dell. It makes a tremendous difference in liability.
And it is always, always, always the pilot's responsibility to determine the the basic airworthiness of his craft. Denver violated good practice in several respects, including relying on his reserve tank. In an aircraft the reserve tank is emergency safety gear. Any pilot who relies on the reserve fuel capacity to make his destination is knowingly taking a possibly fatal risk. Especially on a shakedown flight in an unfamiliar craft.
This one just looks like it is designed for very old/young/simple people.
This simply demonstrates that if you make it yourself you can make it in any fashion and with any key layout.
If you don't like the key layout, make a different one. He is showing you how you can be in control of your control devices. It's about hacking, not replication. It's not about impressing. It's about knowledge.
You go make a keyboard out of Dance Dance Revolution dance pads, because now you know how.
I don't claim any great authority, here, however, and would be happy to be proved wrong.
You are correct, of course. My linguistic/logical reflexes are those of a natural philosopher, not a lawyer, and sometimes the reflex overides my "knowledge."
This is actually the way most suits against the tobacco companies have been resolved. The precedent is now that if you did not start smoking before the warning labels started to appear you have no case.
Sometimes even people who weren't clever enough to avoid jury duty "get it."
. . . the government would do things to put booksellers out of business. ..
Simply selling books would tend to do this without any "evil" intent.
Book-selling chains do have money, after all.
So do governments. Your money as it happens. I'm perfectly happy with the government using my money to buy books to loan to me. I'm not happy with the idea of the government using my money to set up lending libraries as profit centers at the expense of the local booksellers. Nor do I see how a library is any more convienient a place to purchase books than a bookstore. They even often coexist in close physical proximity. There are three within two blocks of mine, all owned locally, not chains.
Of course you don't, because you read books. That's what books are for, right? Like plates are made for eating off of, thimbles are made for sewing with and action figures are made for playing with.
A goodly number of people buy a goodly number of books with absolutely no intent to read them, ever. They go on display on the shelves right next to the plates that no one had better ever eat off of, the thimbles that will never be used for sewing, the model cars that will never pushed around while making "Vroom, vroom" noises and the action figures that any child who actual plays with them will likely get a punishment for doing so.
Entire companies exist, profitably, for selling nothing but plates that will never be eaten off of. People are funny.
Then there are the even larger number of books sold where at the time of purchase the intent to read them was at least present, but the attempt is never actually made, because reading does not have a high enough priority in their lives to support that intent. The fact that they rarely actually even attempt to read a book rarely disuades them from purchasing more and more books that they have "good intentions" about, but never actually read.
I do not, personally, understand this behavior, but I certainly observe a good deal of it.
But your librarian would. They don't want to be retail outlets. They want to be lending institutions. Walk down the block to the local retail outlet and purchase it from them for the same few dollars.
Any personal objections that arrangment, retaining sales in the private sector and lending in the public? Do you really want a government institution to be a general purveyor of books in direct competition with book stores?
People actually buy used books by the foot for decorative purposes. Many books are purchased just to possess and display them, sort of like trophies. Just about every upper middle class home has a copy of Moby Dick in it somewhere. I'd guess about 1 in 100 has actually been read.
I habituate estate sales and such looking for "used" books, many of which have obviously never been read, especially those in shrink wrap. I once got free first pick of an extensive private library with dozens of unread books in it, and it had belonged to a history professor. The commemorative editon of the Feynman Lectures, still in the shrink wrap, was a nice bit of booty, it went very nicely with the unopened recordings of the same.
Library checked out of the book you need for that paper? Just make a copy!
The music store out of the CD you want? Just make a copy!
Someone still has to pay the publisher per copy for works under copyright protection, not to mention for the paper. Don't expect libraries to become retail centers.
Now, thanks to a subsequent poster, I am better educated on British law and the parent post to which I am here responding makes more sense, since under British law the 15-17 year old spread would, indeed, be a case of at one partner being over the age of consent and one under, and the age of consent for sex matching the age of consent for pictures.
These guys ought to be tried and convicted for barratry, regardless of whether their legal counsel is this stupid or not.
Every one of their "claims" and even every one of their "clarifications" of their claims does read as if they filed the suit in order to go on a fishing expedition to justify the filing a posteriori, don't they?
Slashdot Mirror
Oh sure. I've played around modifying various controlers for use in unintended ways, including foot switches. As an experiment I even made a foot mouse once. I didn't use it long enough to get very good with it, but it was surprisingly easy to use, including clicking with toes.
I never did try it for gaming (I really don't play FPSes), but it did allow me to mouse around the desktop without removing my hands from home on the keyboard when doing document processing.
I imagine I looked a little odd though. Bonzo Goes to College.
KFG
Denver's plane was a used white box, not a new Dell. It makes a tremendous difference in liability.
And it is always, always, always the pilot's responsibility to determine the the basic airworthiness of his craft. Denver violated good practice in several respects, including relying on his reserve tank. In an aircraft the reserve tank is emergency safety gear. Any pilot who relies on the reserve fuel capacity to make his destination is knowingly taking a possibly fatal risk. Especially on a shakedown flight in an unfamiliar craft.
KFG
No. He wasn't.
Nor was his crash in any way due to the "flimsyness" of his aircraft. It stemmed primarily from pilot error before he left the ground.
He was so anxious to fly his new plane that he did not do a proper preflight to familiarize himself with it.
Anxiousness to get home is probably the number one killer of general aviation pilots.
KFG
Here I come.
Seriously, the E.III and D.VIII made with modern construction techniques and materials would make a wonderful basis for this catagory of aeroplane.
White silk scarf optional.
KFG
This one just looks like it is designed for very old/young/simple people.
This simply demonstrates that if you make it yourself you can make it in any fashion and with any key layout.
If you don't like the key layout, make a different one. He is showing you how you can be in control of your control devices. It's about hacking, not replication. It's not about impressing. It's about knowledge.
You go make a keyboard out of Dance Dance Revolution dance pads, because now you know how.
KFG
I'm not entirely sure he was talking about disabled people...
I'm not entirely sure he meant disabled physically.
KFG
Why do Linux desktops try to mimic Windows so much?
They don't. Only the few that do do.
KFG
I don't claim any great authority, here, however, and would be happy to be proved wrong.
You are correct, of course. My linguistic/logical reflexes are those of a natural philosopher, not a lawyer, and sometimes the reflex overides my "knowledge."
KFG
This is actually the way most suits against the tobacco companies have been resolved. The precedent is now that if you did not start smoking before the warning labels started to appear you have no case.
Sometimes even people who weren't clever enough to avoid jury duty "get it."
KFG
I'm sorry, but the Franklin Mint NASCAR Heroes Commemorative Plate series do not count as plates. They are just stupid-shit-that-rednecks-buy...
And books are often intelligent shit that stupid rednecks buy to appear intelligent.
KFG
. . . the government would do things to put booksellers out of business. . .
Simply selling books would tend to do this without any "evil" intent.
Book-selling chains do have money, after all.
So do governments. Your money as it happens. I'm perfectly happy with the government using my money to buy books to loan to me. I'm not happy with the idea of the government using my money to set up lending libraries as profit centers at the expense of the local booksellers. Nor do I see how a library is any more convienient a place to purchase books than a bookstore. They even often coexist in close physical proximity. There are three within two blocks of mine, all owned locally, not chains.
KFG
Of course you don't, because you read books. That's what books are for, right? Like plates are made for eating off of, thimbles are made for sewing with and action figures are made for playing with.
A goodly number of people buy a goodly number of books with absolutely no intent to read them, ever. They go on display on the shelves right next to the plates that no one had better ever eat off of, the thimbles that will never be used for sewing, the model cars that will never pushed around while making "Vroom, vroom" noises and the action figures that any child who actual plays with them will likely get a punishment for doing so.
Entire companies exist, profitably, for selling nothing but plates that will never be eaten off of. People are funny.
Then there are the even larger number of books sold where at the time of purchase the intent to read them was at least present, but the attempt is never actually made, because reading does not have a high enough priority in their lives to support that intent. The fact that they rarely actually even attempt to read a book rarely disuades them from purchasing more and more books that they have "good intentions" about, but never actually read.
I do not, personally, understand this behavior, but I certainly observe a good deal of it.
KFG
I would have no problems with this whatsoever.
But your librarian would. They don't want to be retail outlets. They want to be lending institutions. Walk down the block to the local retail outlet and purchase it from them for the same few dollars.
Any personal objections that arrangment, retaining sales in the private sector and lending in the public? Do you really want a government institution to be a general purveyor of books in direct competition with book stores?
KFG
Things are not always what they seem...
Including the purchase of books. That's my very point.
And I too gave away my previous copy of the Feynman Lectures. A nice bit of booty to the recipient.
KFG
I think the idea is that you could go to a store and get a copy.
Of course, but that is not the hypothetical case I was responding to.
KFG
It only implies the desire to possess. It does not even imply the intent to read.
Oh, sure, if you or I buy a book it at least implies the intent (although still not the actual reading), but you and I are not the general case.
KFG
A posteriori? Does that mean ``in the ass''?
While I sympathize with the sentiment, I'm afraid it means "after the fact."
KFG
People actually buy used books by the foot for decorative purposes. Many books are purchased just to possess and display them, sort of like trophies. Just about every upper middle class home has a copy of Moby Dick in it somewhere. I'd guess about 1 in 100 has actually been read.
I habituate estate sales and such looking for "used" books, many of which have obviously never been read, especially those in shrink wrap. I once got free first pick of an extensive private library with dozens of unread books in it, and it had belonged to a history professor. The commemorative editon of the Feynman Lectures, still in the shrink wrap, was a nice bit of booty, it went very nicely with the unopened recordings of the same.
KFG
Library checked out of the book you need for that paper? Just make a copy!
The music store out of the CD you want? Just make a copy!
Someone still has to pay the publisher per copy for works under copyright protection, not to mention for the paper. Don't expect libraries to become retail centers.
KFG
The purchase of books does not necessarily imply the reading of them.
KFG
So where does all the 'MS are a doomed, paniced entity, directionless and running in fear of Linux' we see here on /. fit into this view ?
The fact that Linux and their dropping share price have forced them to make this move to retain investor interest.
KFG
Now, thanks to a subsequent poster, I am better educated on British law and the parent post to which I am here responding makes more sense, since under British law the 15-17 year old spread would, indeed, be a case of at one partner being over the age of consent and one under, and the age of consent for sex matching the age of consent for pictures.
KFG
After all, we can't possibly hope that young people won't fuck.
Given the fact that they seem to be designed for it. Go figure.
KFG
These guys ought to be tried and convicted for barratry, regardless of whether their legal counsel is this stupid or not.
Every one of their "claims" and even every one of their "clarifications" of their claims does read as if they filed the suit in order to go on a fishing expedition to justify the filing a posteriori, don't they?
KFG
. . .who is the horse. . .
AT&T
KFG