Other than, perhaps, being at one end of the age curve of Penny Arcade readers I'm not at all sure why reading it is any particular mark of distinction.
As I understand it a whole lot of people do, some of whom, judging by Tyco and Gabe's comments about their email, I would likely consider to be arrogant, snot nosed, ignorant savages unlikely ever to acquire enough culture to reach the pottery making stage.
At best it makes me psuedo-hip, and I haven't a clue why the GBA even exists.
In this way it is possible to escape Earth's gravity with continual acceleration. ..
Yes, which acceleration makes you go faster and faster and faster. ..until you reach escape velocity. Sorry, but that's how it works. Turn off your engines one moment before attaining that velocity and you don't escape. You are confusing the fact that you may choose your acceleration rate with the idea that you don't have to attain a particular velocity to escape orbit.
. ..and never actually experiencing speeds of Mach 25.
I think ' Moderate: Needs coffee -2' might be in order...
If that were available as a self-mod I'd be inclined to use it. I've certainly responded to the odd criticism of my posts with "Sorry, not enough coffee yet," when I've been a brainless twat for no apparent reason other than the fact that I was silly enough to post while the pot was still doing its thing.
Maybe some sort of AI would be in order that reviews posts before you hit the submit button and if they look too braindead issue a popup "Are you sure you wouldn't like a cup of coffee before you post this? Yes/No".
Foremost from my amateur racer point of view is the cost: Being able to tune any one of 60 some-odd parameters probably means being able to swap out any one of 60 some-odd parts with some other part, so you've got to have one of every possible part on hand or be able to fabricate it.
Well, no, not exactly. Do you use adjustable dampers on your car? Simple bump/rebound adjustment is 8 parameters (each wheel is a seperate system) right there alone. Roll bar lever arm length adustment, another two. Tire pressure, another four. Camber, another four. Toe, another four.
We're up to 22 so far and haven't spent a penny or changed a part, nor have we yet exhausted simple suspension settings. Toe, 26. Castor, 28. Anti dive/squat, 30. Half way there already.
Front and rear wing angles, brake bias, weight distribution. More stuff that simple adjustable.
Ok, let's look at some of the parts that are commonly changed. Tires. Did you think of tires as a part? They are. They're a parameter. How many compounds have you got, hard/soft/wet? Maybe you're poor and only have three sets of springs, hard/medium/soft
We're over our 60 parameters now and are still well within the range of changes that an amatuer racer would consider common and haven't touched the gearbox yet.
Which is why we are also still within the range of simple car adjustments allowed in a video game which doesn't allow for fabrication of unique parts.
Assuming you race in a catagory that allows these changes. Many amatuer, and even "entry level" pro catagories deal with the issue by simply disallowing changes. If you race Formula Vee/Star Mazda/Spec Miata/Barber Dodge you aren't going to be doing anything like changing suspension arms.
Have you any idea how much harder it is to make hats out of wallpaper than it is out of tinfoil?
Yeah, 'cause like with wallpaper you have to actually make it vaguely hat shaped, and thus run the risk of ending up vaguely fashionable.
a Non La is fairly easy to make out of wallpaper though. Just draw a big circle, cut a wedge out of it, and then glue the edges together.
The Non La is an emminently functional hat too and spreads a good "tin foil umbrella". Much better than those skull cap thingies the average paranoid wears.
A side effect advantage is that if you're wearing one while walking down Main Street, and a car backfires, and you hit the ground, roll under a parked pickup while yelling "Incoming!" people don't get weirded out all that much, they just mutter, "Aw Jeez, another one" and simply go about their business.
KFG
Re:Great for paranoid nuts, useless for real peopl
on
RF-Blocking Wallpaper
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Obviously you can still pipe stuff through wires.
Which, for home applications, may very well lead to that "TV antenna" thingy that's strapped to your chimney.
Anybody involved in selling that property would seem to have cause to complain, possibly legally.
Did I not say that Red Hat has grounds for their suit?
You are failing to keep the abstraction layers clear. The claim is that Linux has no possible cause for a slander action. IBM, Red Hat, Novell, et al may well under certain circumstances.
Red Hat != Linux, right?
OTOH, if I say, "Windows is insecure" and cite all the worms and viruses, I am directly stating something as a fact about Windows. Is Microsoft prepared to sue over these statements? Based on the Brazil case, it would seem so.
You read neither the article or my post carefully enough. Microsoft is not suing over any claims about Windows. They are suing over claims about Microsoft. A legal person, not a property.
Microsoft would have little, if any, grounds for bringing a slander action for the claim that "Windows is like drug."
Which is why they have not done so.
Of course you may sue just about anyone, anytime, anywhere, for anything and try to argue your case, but few lawyers, even corporate ones, are happy about the idea of bringing an action that's just going to get laughed out of court (SCO and FOX not withstanding. SCO is a payed lackey and FOX is a big, fat idiot. Let me say that again, just in case their lawyers didn't hear me. SCO is a payed lackey, and FOX is a big, fat idiot).
My mom might. She travels a lot, and in places with iffy internet connections, and Hotmail and Earthlink web mail are often problamatic for her, but she needs web based mail because of the amount of time she spends traveling.
Me, I travel less and stay closer to home these days, so it's never any real trouble to "phone home", and I'm having a certain amount of trouble figuring out why in hell I'd want to put a gig of my personal email on someone elses server that's going to hang around, in the practical sense, forever.
Why should a professor holding a green card, having come here specifically because our government is at least less repressive than the one he/she left, fear a government agent who properly identifies him/herself and asks reasonable questions in the professor's area of expertise?
If our government is, indeed, not repressive, they have no right to expect answers to such questions and he has a right not give answers.
Do you understand what a right is?
He may give or withhold information to whomever he choses and for whatever reason he choses. Even if actually charged with a crime (pre "PATRIOT", of course) he still retains the right to just shut the hell up and not utter a word.
This is exactly why this law is being sought, to infringe upon that right and lend credence to the idea that he has not traveled very far from government repression.
Of course there are. Try actually applying one to a property that is distributed freely and you'll find the orthoganality you suggest pretty much vanishes. Slander of title and like property torts only apply where direct economic harm is the result. I can call your house ugly 24/7 and there is no slander. If I say it has termites, there may be, because it reduces the salability of the house.
Not one single penny has ever been asked or received for the millions of copies of Linux that have been distributed.
There is no extention of the idea of slander of reputation to property. That idea is based on fitness for intercourse with society. The slandered is innately harmed if he is shunned because we are social animals.
Red Hat may sue SCO for reducing the value of Red Hat by slander against Linux which is part of its product, but "Linux," that is the stuff that Linus distributes freely, has little cause for action because it suffers no harm from speech. Its price is in no way diminished and Linus suffers no economic harm.
There is good legal reason why Red Hat is suing SCO but Linus is not. SCO may impune Linus's title to Linux, but there is no possible legal redress, and a suit without redress is void (and, of course, SCO has certain legal rights to impune Linus's title, which matter is before the courts. It takes more then impuning title to create slander of same).
And yes, this is one of the effects of the GPL and why Microsoft cannot attack it with the direct means that it can bring to bear on a company. That lack of attack point works both ways legally. You can't have your cake and eat it too, as they say. The extent to which you make yourself so amorphous that you disapear to the business and legal structure is the extent to which you make yourself so amorphous that you. . . disappear to the business and legal structure. You can't be parallel and orthoganal at the same time.
Linus may well have a good case against Ken Brown. There Mr. Brown is attacking Linus's professional reputation directly and the normal rules of slander and libel apply. He has no cause for action against Mr. Brown for devaluing the sale price he recieves for Linux.
Saying a man or a company is like unto a drug dealer may be a slander in some jurisdictions, (and note that in the case in question it is the company against which the slander is charged, not its property, and that such like claims as have been made in America have not been a cause of action because here there would be no slander at all, especially as Microsoft has actually been convicted of the sort of criminal behaviour that is being complained about).
Calling a property like unto a drug dealer is a legal absurdity.
Saying something about someone you know to be false with the intent to harm them. ..
And who is this "Linux" someone?
And perhaps I was being a bit too subtle in my method of pointing out that one might almost be led to the conlusion that Linux's license was designed to promote the maximum freedom of speech for the largest number of people.
Hardy, the heavy one, was the charming one, or at least he thought he was, obsequious might be more accurate, and Laurel, the light one, was decidedly strange.
The proposed name is completely apropos and should the particle in question prove out to be real I'll have a hard time thinking of it as anything but the Laurel and Hardy meson.
But then I'm the guy who thought that Maple Walnut would be a perfectly good name for a quark. Of course that's only because, at the time, we didn't have Cherry Garcia as a choice.
Slashdot Mirror
Just make up a name that doesn't sound too suspiciously bland (like John Smith)
My name, Jose Jimenez.
KFG
Anyone who has seen the way cops drive cars. . . off duty know that they will do whatever they want. . .
You meant the law isn't straight ahead on red? I thought they made it rhyme that way so you could remember it.
No wonder when I followed the off duty cop I got a ticket.
KFG
Other than, perhaps, being at one end of the age curve of Penny Arcade readers I'm not at all sure why reading it is any particular mark of distinction.
As I understand it a whole lot of people do, some of whom, judging by Tyco and Gabe's comments about their email, I would likely consider to be arrogant, snot nosed, ignorant savages unlikely ever to acquire enough culture to reach the pottery making stage.
At best it makes me psuedo-hip, and I haven't a clue why the GBA even exists.
KFG
In this way it is possible to escape Earth's gravity with continual acceleration. . .
.until you reach escape velocity. Sorry, but that's how it works. Turn off your engines one moment before attaining that velocity and you don't escape. You are confusing the fact that you may choose your acceleration rate with the idea that you don't have to attain a particular velocity to escape orbit.
.and never actually experiencing speeds of Mach 25.
Yes, which acceleration makes you go faster and faster and faster. .
. .
Could you define "Mach 25" in a vacuum?
KFG
I think ' Moderate: Needs coffee -2' might be in order...
If that were available as a self-mod I'd be inclined to use it. I've certainly responded to the odd criticism of my posts with "Sorry, not enough coffee yet," when I've been a brainless twat for no apparent reason other than the fact that I was silly enough to post while the pot was still doing its thing.
Maybe some sort of AI would be in order that reviews posts before you hit the submit button and if they look too braindead issue a popup "Are you sure you wouldn't like a cup of coffee before you post this? Yes/No".
KFG
Obligatory Penny Arcade link:
A Matter of Life and Death
KFG
If you think Caddyshack is a "classic" then it's you who is probably a "little kiddie." It's a pretty funny film but certainly not a classic!
By actual poll of caddies Caddyshack is the best movie ever made about Caddies. That meets the definition of classic.
Caddyshack II was voted the worst movie about caddies.
Of course they are also the only two movies ever made about caddies, but we'll overlook that for now.
Personally I'm an officiando of dancing gopher puppets, so it's Caddyshack all the way, the undisputed classic of the genre.
Everybody! "I'm alright. . . "
KFG
Foremost from my amateur racer point of view is the cost: Being able to tune any one of 60 some-odd parameters probably means being able to swap out any one of 60 some-odd parts with some other part, so you've got to have one of every possible part on hand or be able to fabricate it.
Well, no, not exactly. Do you use adjustable dampers on your car? Simple bump/rebound adjustment is 8 parameters (each wheel is a seperate system) right there alone. Roll bar lever arm length adustment, another two. Tire pressure, another four. Camber, another four. Toe, another four.
We're up to 22 so far and haven't spent a penny or changed a part, nor have we yet exhausted simple suspension settings. Toe, 26. Castor, 28. Anti dive/squat, 30. Half way there already.
Front and rear wing angles, brake bias, weight distribution. More stuff that simple adjustable.
Ok, let's look at some of the parts that are commonly changed. Tires. Did you think of tires as a part? They are. They're a parameter. How many compounds have you got, hard/soft/wet? Maybe you're poor and only have three sets of springs, hard/medium/soft
We're over our 60 parameters now and are still well within the range of changes that an amatuer racer would consider common and haven't touched the gearbox yet.
Which is why we are also still within the range of simple car adjustments allowed in a video game which doesn't allow for fabrication of unique parts.
Assuming you race in a catagory that allows these changes. Many amatuer, and even "entry level" pro catagories deal with the issue by simply disallowing changes. If you race Formula Vee/Star Mazda/Spec Miata/Barber Dodge you aren't going to be doing anything like changing suspension arms.
60 parameters is nothin'.
KFG
If you have to take into account nanometer-scale effects to design something, I don't think it's too far fetched to call the result "nanotechnology".
I'm not a bartender. I'm a nanotechnologist!
KFG
Have you any idea how much harder it is to make hats out of wallpaper than it is out of tinfoil?
Yeah, 'cause like with wallpaper you have to actually make it vaguely hat shaped, and thus run the risk of ending up vaguely fashionable.
a Non La is fairly easy to make out of wallpaper though. Just draw a big circle, cut a wedge out of it, and then glue the edges together.
The Non La is an emminently functional hat too and spreads a good "tin foil umbrella". Much better than those skull cap thingies the average paranoid wears.
A side effect advantage is that if you're wearing one while walking down Main Street, and a car backfires, and you hit the ground, roll under a parked pickup while yelling "Incoming!" people don't get weirded out all that much, they just mutter, "Aw Jeez, another one" and simply go about their business.
KFG
Obviously you can still pipe stuff through wires.
Which, for home applications, may very well lead to that "TV antenna" thingy that's strapped to your chimney.
KFG
Roses are red
Violets are blue
There's no reason they can't make RF wallpaper in different "colors" too
KFG
And of course we all know what we get when we increment each letter of VMS by one?
Yes, that's right, "BSOD".
KFG
Where nothing can go wrong. . . go wrong. . . go wrong. . .
KFG
WARNING:Approaching Nerd Factor 9. . .
Cap'n, I canna giv' ye Nerd Factor 9. The lassie weel only go 11 and up.
KFG
Anybody involved in selling that property would seem to have cause to complain, possibly legally.
Did I not say that Red Hat has grounds for their suit?
You are failing to keep the abstraction layers clear. The claim is that Linux has no possible cause for a slander action. IBM, Red Hat, Novell, et al may well under certain circumstances.
Red Hat != Linux, right?
OTOH, if I say, "Windows is insecure" and cite all the worms and viruses, I am directly stating something as a fact about Windows. Is Microsoft prepared to sue over these statements? Based on the Brazil case, it would seem so.
You read neither the article or my post carefully enough. Microsoft is not suing over any claims about Windows. They are suing over claims about Microsoft. A legal person, not a property.
Microsoft would have little, if any, grounds for bringing a slander action for the claim that "Windows is like drug."
Which is why they have not done so.
Of course you may sue just about anyone, anytime, anywhere, for anything and try to argue your case, but few lawyers, even corporate ones, are happy about the idea of bringing an action that's just going to get laughed out of court (SCO and FOX not withstanding. SCO is a payed lackey and FOX is a big, fat idiot. Let me say that again, just in case their lawyers didn't hear me. SCO is a payed lackey, and FOX is a big, fat idiot).
KFG
... now who wants Gmail invitations? :)
My mom might. She travels a lot, and in places with iffy internet connections, and Hotmail and Earthlink web mail are often problamatic for her, but she needs web based mail because of the amount of time she spends traveling.
Me, I travel less and stay closer to home these days, so it's never any real trouble to "phone home", and I'm having a certain amount of trouble figuring out why in hell I'd want to put a gig of my personal email on someone elses server that's going to hang around, in the practical sense, forever.
KFG
Why should a professor holding a green card, having come here specifically because our government is at least less repressive than the one he/she left, fear a government agent who properly identifies him/herself and asks reasonable questions in the professor's area of expertise?
If our government is, indeed, not repressive, they have no right to expect answers to such questions and he has a right not give answers.
Do you understand what a right is?
He may give or withhold information to whomever he choses and for whatever reason he choses. Even if actually charged with a crime (pre "PATRIOT", of course) he still retains the right to just shut the hell up and not utter a word.
This is exactly why this law is being sought, to infringe upon that right and lend credence to the idea that he has not traveled very far from government repression.
The secret police may be looking for him.
KFG
. . .there *are* specialized slander-of- torts.
Of course there are. Try actually applying one to a property that is distributed freely and you'll find the orthoganality you suggest pretty much vanishes. Slander of title and like property torts only apply where direct economic harm is the result. I can call your house ugly 24/7 and there is no slander. If I say it has termites, there may be, because it reduces the salability of the house.
Not one single penny has ever been asked or received for the millions of copies of Linux that have been distributed.
There is no extention of the idea of slander of reputation to property. That idea is based on fitness for intercourse with society. The slandered is innately harmed if he is shunned because we are social animals.
Red Hat may sue SCO for reducing the value of Red Hat by slander against Linux which is part of its product, but "Linux," that is the stuff that Linus distributes freely, has little cause for action because it suffers no harm from speech. Its price is in no way diminished and Linus suffers no economic harm.
There is good legal reason why Red Hat is suing SCO but Linus is not. SCO may impune Linus's title to Linux, but there is no possible legal redress, and a suit without redress is void (and, of course, SCO has certain legal rights to impune Linus's title, which matter is before the courts. It takes more then impuning title to create slander of same).
And yes, this is one of the effects of the GPL and why Microsoft cannot attack it with the direct means that it can bring to bear on a company. That lack of attack point works both ways legally. You can't have your cake and eat it too, as they say. The extent to which you make yourself so amorphous that you disapear to the business and legal structure is the extent to which you make yourself so amorphous that you. . . disappear to the business and legal structure. You can't be parallel and orthoganal at the same time.
Linus may well have a good case against Ken Brown. There Mr. Brown is attacking Linus's professional reputation directly and the normal rules of slander and libel apply. He has no cause for action against Mr. Brown for devaluing the sale price he recieves for Linux.
Saying a man or a company is like unto a drug dealer may be a slander in some jurisdictions, (and note that in the case in question it is the company against which the slander is charged, not its property, and that such like claims as have been made in America have not been a cause of action because here there would be no slander at all, especially as Microsoft has actually been convicted of the sort of criminal behaviour that is being complained about).
Calling a property like unto a drug dealer is a legal absurdity.
KFG
Saying something about someone you know to be false with the intent to harm them. . .
And who is this "Linux" someone?
And perhaps I was being a bit too subtle in my method of pointing out that one might almost be led to the conlusion that Linux's license was designed to promote the maximum freedom of speech for the largest number of people.
KFG
"We cheerfully crush the ones that oppose us!"
Isn't that what drug dealers do?
KFG
"Please explain how Microsoft is like a drug dealer!"
That would be supplying SCO with crack, your Honor.
KFG
You can say whatever you like about Linux, and there's not a lot anyone can do about it.
Which would be freedom, as in, ummmm, speech.
Go figure.
KFG
Hardy, the heavy one, was the charming one, or at least he thought he was, obsequious might be more accurate, and Laurel, the light one, was decidedly strange.
The proposed name is completely apropos and should the particle in question prove out to be real I'll have a hard time thinking of it as anything but the Laurel and Hardy meson.
But then I'm the guy who thought that Maple Walnut would be a perfectly good name for a quark. Of course that's only because, at the time, we didn't have Cherry Garcia as a choice.
KFG
In the words of The Congress of Wonders (those madcap boys who brought us Star Trip and Cedro Willy):
"Meow"
"Do your own thing, dog."
Peace, love, and Free Abbie!
KFG