a cube IS a sphere. There'll be a way for lawyers to wrest patent infringement out of cubes, too. I suppose Plato could claim prior art on his solids, though...
When it comes to security, the distro matters and I'm not just talking about things like Hard Hat Linux. I got a Debian box pwnz0red once and come to find out, by default Debian's services are lit up like a farging Christmas tree.
Rather than futz with a full Debian reinstall I erased the disk and put Slack on. Slackware has fewer services on by default, and furthermore its rc.d is much simpler and easier to tweak by hand. (What can I say, I'm a fan of just going in there with vi and configuring things myself.)
It is Nick Petreley's law of the computer press, but it also applies to mainstream IT acceptance. Things just don't catch on in the corporate world until Microsoft comes up with a shoddy implementation of the exact same technology.
We've had X11 around for years now, but you didn't really see network-transparent GUIs and thin-client computing with a GUI catch on until Microsoft Terminal Server came out.
Recently I picked up a superb video game -- Katamari Damacy on PS2. Conventional game-industry economic theory dictates that if you want to make money you will publish a game in one of a narrow set of genres: jumping platformer, first-person shooter, fighting game, etc.
A game involving rolling a ball of junk around and around, attracting objects as you go till it gets bigger and bigger and bigger, doesn't have a place in this conventional view. But I think Namco, much to their credit, realizes certain things about the US game market: it has at its center a richly connected core of young adults who have discriminating tastes in gameplay and a fondness for the offbeat and original, and who laughed at the "All your base are belong to us" jokes. KD appeals directly to these cultural values. Before, Japanese companies were reticent to release games that were a) weird and b) possessed a distinctly Japanese cultural flavor. Word of mouth spreads quickly about games like this throughout the chewy-nougat otaku center of American game fans, and what was once a sort of throwaway $20 release has become something of a cult hit.
I'm reminded of a series of booklets Radio Shack used to sell, back before it sucked, called "Engineer's Mini-Notebook". Written in a draftsman's block-print hand, they contained schematics and explanations of fun electronics projects to try -- all of the parts, of course, available from Radio Shack. I still have two or three of these.
These days you can't buy anything much more wireheadish than gold-plated audiowank cable.
At the DNC, protesters were herded into fenced enclosures with concertina wire. At the RNC there were far more lenient restrictions as to where and how people may protest.
There is a cultural assumption on the political scene that the Democrats are all compassionate progressives (so their actions are ipso facto less evil), and the Republicans are all hateful religious zealots (so their actions are ipso facto more evil). It seems the Republicans are far more creepy to you simply because they are Republicans, and any restrictions that exist just proves their jackboot nature. I guess the DNC's prison-like FSZ's are simply just necessary steps to ensure that the protesters (many of them likely Republicans or GOP-sympathetic libertarians) don't spread their vile hateful poison while Kerry "Reports for Duty".
Preventing crime is a necessary function of society, not just punishing criminals but fortunately there's a Right Way to do it without imposing draconian restrictions on individual liberty.
The Swiss are issued guns as part of their mandatory military service, and required to keep them in the home and be proficient with them. You don't hear much about violent crime being committed in Switzerland.
Arming citizens, giving them the duty and more importantly the *ability* to protect themselves, is a great way to prevent crime. Unfortunately, the USA is so stricken with cultural victimitis that even though guns are still allowed, actually using them in self-defense is likely to result in civil or criminal prosecution because the would-be assailant is a victim of The Man, racial profiling, whatever. It is strange that this is one of the few cases Europeans provide a social model that Americans would do well to emulate.
How far would a terrorist, or even a normal murderer or rapist, get in a well-armed society? Especially the kind of society where the people can text-message each other quickly and easily? The end of the Wild West started with the proliferation of the telegraph, so that distant towns could communicate with each other and warn each other about dangerous outlaws.
Indeed. The term has been somewhat coopted by more right leaning individuals, along with objectivists and others like them to mean "let the market decide everything".
Only because the socialists took "liberal" from us, and changed it to mean "let the government decide everything".
I know that my economic views are very "right wing": free enterprise with minimal government interference. Their survey had me placed as a leftie, because I was critical of the role of corporations. My views on them are similar to Mr. Badnarik's (I will doubtless be voting for him this November). This tells me that they have a dim view of economic liberty -- that it is merely the liberty to let eeevil corporations run amok with power -- when in fact it is government policy which permits such things to exist, and true economic libertarianism would put things squarely in favor of the individual.
PoliticalCompass tends to be oriented in favor of the European-style socialism which pervades much of the developed world today. I suspect that in Europe equal rights means having something of a Pangloss parity in the freedom department: everyone, regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation, has the same set of limited rights. As other responders to this post discussed, true free speech is not often seen in Europe; the point of view appears to be that everyone agrees there are some things (like nazism and anti-semitism) that you should not be allowed to say, period.
Much has been made about the Chomsky quote at the top of the page. It *is* rather ironic that Chomsky is often way off base when it comes to political issues due to an a priori assumption that American capitalism is, necessarily, detrimental and oppressive.
However, he is right in that quote, in that sometimes it's convenient to dismiss other people when you don't like what they have to say, and this is an impediment to objectivity.
However, there's another side to this: sometimes someone will come around, spewing horseshit, and everyone, sometimes even the speaker himself, knows it's horseshit, except you're not allowed to say "That's horseshit" because you can be accused of prejudicially dismissing a valid opinion. (Substitute a more polite word where appropriate; although I wish more people would use words like "horseshit" at places like academic symposia when they genuinely apply.)
Me, personally, I dislike XML for anything but what its predecessor, SGML, was intended for: large documents consisting of mainly human readable text with markup to add structure and shape formatting. For query languages we could do probably do better than SQL but I think XQuery was invented merely to be buzzword compliant. The debate is probably far from over and done with, though so laissez les bons temps rouler.
Nowadays it seems that the trend of wearing the skin of a deceased beloved company like a corporate Ed Gein is increasing in today's post-dot-com business climate.
The Sega Genesis didn't fail. It was manufactured and sold until 1997 -- it had a run longer than most consoles. The reason probably had to do a lot with Sonic: The Saturn didn't have a significant Sonic release at all (yes, I know NiGHTS was cool, but Sonic was money in the bank).
Namely, insinuate that Linux is somehow more "unsafe" because it is not controlled by a good old American-as-apple-pie capitalistic company whose sole reason for existing is profit motive. If it isn't made to make money, it isn't legitimate (and, if you're Scott McCollum, is probably an Al-Qaeda plot against the nation). Nevertheless, the idea is to engender an attitude of danger and trepidation toward the decision to move away from proprietary software.
This also underlies the whole "indemnification" dog-and-pony show. Why does only Linux need to be indemnified against copyright infringement? Why is there no one calling for people to indemnify Windows, even though Windows can potentially have more untraceable copyright-violating code? The answer: Windows is assumed to ipso facto contain no such code because it is made by Microsoft, a trusted company which is believed to only employ legitimate business practices also ipso facto.
I'm not sure who benefits here. I get the vibe that it's just an aura of "perceived safety by following the procedures".
Slashdot Mirror
The opposite of debugging is, of course, "embuggening".
Hat tip to Jebediah Springfield.
a cube IS a sphere. There'll be a way for lawyers to wrest patent infringement out of cubes, too. I suppose Plato could claim prior art on his solids, though...
When it comes to security, the distro matters and I'm not just talking about things like Hard Hat Linux. I got a Debian box pwnz0red once and come to find out, by default Debian's services are lit up like a farging Christmas tree.
Rather than futz with a full Debian reinstall I erased the disk and put Slack on. Slackware has fewer services on by default, and furthermore its rc.d is much simpler and easier to tweak by hand. (What can I say, I'm a fan of just going in there with vi and configuring things myself.)
IIRC Apple introduced extensions into GCC which allow you to vectorize C code.
It is Nick Petreley's law of the computer press, but it also applies to mainstream IT acceptance. Things just don't catch on in the corporate world until Microsoft comes up with a shoddy implementation of the exact same technology.
We've had X11 around for years now, but you didn't really see network-transparent GUIs and thin-client computing with a GUI catch on until Microsoft Terminal Server came out.
"Demobots wage their battle to destroy the evil forces of the Neocons..."
Came up with it the other day. It's been stuck in my head.
Recently I picked up a superb video game -- Katamari Damacy on PS2. Conventional game-industry economic theory dictates that if you want to make money you will publish a game in one of a narrow set of genres: jumping platformer, first-person shooter, fighting game, etc.
A game involving rolling a ball of junk around and around, attracting objects as you go till it gets bigger and bigger and bigger, doesn't have a place in this conventional view. But I think Namco, much to their credit, realizes certain things about the US game market: it has at its center a richly connected core of young adults who have discriminating tastes in gameplay and a fondness for the offbeat and original, and who laughed at the "All your base are belong to us" jokes. KD appeals directly to these cultural values. Before, Japanese companies were reticent to release games that were a) weird and b) possessed a distinctly Japanese cultural flavor. Word of mouth spreads quickly about games like this throughout the chewy-nougat otaku center of American game fans, and what was once a sort of throwaway $20 release has become something of a cult hit.
A Developer's Back of the Envelope, perhaps?
I'm reminded of a series of booklets Radio Shack used to sell, back before it sucked, called "Engineer's Mini-Notebook". Written in a draftsman's block-print hand, they contained schematics and explanations of fun electronics projects to try -- all of the parts, of course, available from Radio Shack. I still have two or three of these.
These days you can't buy anything much more wireheadish than gold-plated audiowank cable.
At the DNC, protesters were herded into fenced enclosures with concertina wire. At the RNC there were far more lenient restrictions as to where and how people may protest.
There is a cultural assumption on the political scene that the Democrats are all compassionate progressives (so their actions are ipso facto less evil), and the Republicans are all hateful religious zealots (so their actions are ipso facto more evil). It seems the Republicans are far more creepy to you simply because they are Republicans, and any restrictions that exist just proves their jackboot nature. I guess the DNC's prison-like FSZ's are simply just necessary steps to ensure that the protesters (many of them likely Republicans or GOP-sympathetic libertarians) don't spread their vile hateful poison while Kerry "Reports for Duty".
Preventing crime is a necessary function of society, not just punishing criminals but fortunately there's a Right Way to do it without imposing draconian restrictions on individual liberty.
The Swiss are issued guns as part of their mandatory military service, and required to keep them in the home and be proficient with them. You don't hear much about violent crime being committed in Switzerland.
Arming citizens, giving them the duty and more importantly the *ability* to protect themselves, is a great way to prevent crime. Unfortunately, the USA is so stricken with cultural victimitis that even though guns are still allowed, actually using them in self-defense is likely to result in civil or criminal prosecution because the would-be assailant is a victim of The Man, racial profiling, whatever. It is strange that this is one of the few cases Europeans provide a social model that Americans would do well to emulate.
How far would a terrorist, or even a normal murderer or rapist, get in a well-armed society? Especially the kind of society where the people can text-message each other quickly and easily? The end of the Wild West started with the proliferation of the telegraph, so that distant towns could communicate with each other and warn each other about dangerous outlaws.
Only because the socialists took "liberal" from us, and changed it to mean "let the government decide everything".
I know that my economic views are very "right wing": free enterprise with minimal government interference. Their survey had me placed as a leftie, because I was critical of the role of corporations. My views on them are similar to Mr. Badnarik's (I will doubtless be voting for him this November). This tells me that they have a dim view of economic liberty -- that it is merely the liberty to let eeevil corporations run amok with power -- when in fact it is government policy which permits such things to exist, and true economic libertarianism would put things squarely in favor of the individual.
PoliticalCompass tends to be oriented in favor of the European-style socialism which pervades much of the developed world today. I suspect that in Europe equal rights means having something of a Pangloss parity in the freedom department: everyone, regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation, has the same set of limited rights. As other responders to this post discussed, true free speech is not often seen in Europe; the point of view appears to be that everyone agrees there are some things (like nazism and anti-semitism) that you should not be allowed to say, period.
How many of you saw this thing and immediately thought of MEGAS XLR?
*raises hand*
... my PlayStation 2 games to run on the Phantom?
Hahaha
http://i-0-i.com/parodycheck/shinji/ossama6.png
Much has been made about the Chomsky quote at the top of the page. It *is* rather ironic that Chomsky is often way off base when it comes to political issues due to an a priori assumption that American capitalism is, necessarily, detrimental and oppressive.
However, he is right in that quote, in that sometimes it's convenient to dismiss other people when you don't like what they have to say, and this is an impediment to objectivity.
However, there's another side to this: sometimes someone will come around, spewing horseshit, and everyone, sometimes even the speaker himself, knows it's horseshit, except you're not allowed to say "That's horseshit" because you can be accused of prejudicially dismissing a valid opinion. (Substitute a more polite word where appropriate; although I wish more people would use words like "horseshit" at places like academic symposia when they genuinely apply.)
Me, personally, I dislike XML for anything but what its predecessor, SGML, was intended for: large documents consisting of mainly human readable text with markup to add structure and shape formatting. For query languages we could do probably do better than SQL but I think XQuery was invented merely to be buzzword compliant. The debate is probably far from over and done with, though so laissez les bons temps rouler.
I'd love to see a language where your program is also musical.
Nowadays it seems that the trend of wearing the skin of a deceased beloved company like a corporate Ed Gein is increasing in today's post-dot-com business climate.
The Sega Genesis didn't fail. It was manufactured and sold until 1997 -- it had a run longer than most consoles. The reason probably had to do a lot with Sonic: The Saturn didn't have a significant Sonic release at all (yes, I know NiGHTS was cool, but Sonic was money in the bank).
I think Guy Steele came up with that one -- if I recall correctly it's in the preface to SICP.
... is for Affleck!!! to reverse engineer the monitor and build one -- that doesn't even need a monitor. (To grok the reference see: Paycheck)
... machine washable? (that's a new feature, dahling.)
"Honeeeyyy... Where is my super suit? You tell me where my suit is, woman!!!"
Namely, insinuate that Linux is somehow more "unsafe" because it is not controlled by a good old American-as-apple-pie capitalistic company whose sole reason for existing is profit motive. If it isn't made to make money, it isn't legitimate (and, if you're Scott McCollum, is probably an Al-Qaeda plot against the nation). Nevertheless, the idea is to engender an attitude of danger and trepidation toward the decision to move away from proprietary software.
This also underlies the whole "indemnification" dog-and-pony show. Why does only Linux need to be indemnified against copyright infringement? Why is there no one calling for people to indemnify Windows, even though Windows can potentially have more untraceable copyright-violating code? The answer: Windows is assumed to ipso facto contain no such code because it is made by Microsoft, a trusted company which is believed to only employ legitimate business practices also ipso facto.
I'm not sure who benefits here. I get the vibe that it's just an aura of "perceived safety by following the procedures".
... you assume a "horse" is a "sphere" to make the math easier.
On the main character, Titus:
In my mind's eye I imagine him to carry a blue water sword and voice-over annoyingly.
On their language:
"Hey Marge, where's that uhhhhhh, thing you use to ummmmmmmmmmm..... dig?"
"Oh, you mean a spoon!"
"Yeahyeahyeahyeahyeahyeahyeah!!!"