You got a +4 funny but I wouldn't suprized if you see things like that.
Absolutely! Imagine logging on to SpaceFriedChicken.com, punching in your latitude, longitude, and credit card number, and then holding a baseball glove out the window to catch the chicken thrown down from orbit. (The heat of re-entry sears in the juicy flavor!)
My Saturn gets about 40mpg, but I pay gas taxes which are used for upkeep of roads, and it probably weighs significantly less than an electric vehicle loaded with batteries that causes more wear and tear on the road but pays 0 gas taxes.
FYI, the curb weight of an GM EV1 (which is as good an example of an electric vehicle as any) is 2922 lbs. This qualifies it as a "Compact Passenger Car", according to the NHTSA. If you're worried about heavy vehicles, you ought to be taxing SUVs and trucks, not electric cars.
Long before "everybody is driving gasoline-free vehicle" the roads would be totally useless if we don't revists our tax base now.
Fine with me, but let's be intelligent and tax the actual source of the problem: overweight, gas guzzling SUVs and other heavy vehicles. The obvious way to do that is to increase the gas tax, not to require everyone to buy an electronic tattle-tale to spy on them.
a mile in a small little hybrid, solar, or electric cars is the same mile driven by the huge hulking SUV
Not at all -- as you yourself point out directly afterwards. The reason you see those "no trucks over XXX pounds" signs is exactly because the amount of wear and tear on the road is proportional to vehicle weight.
where the electric doesn't pay *anything* in gas taxes.
... and given that we want to reduce the amount of gas consumed, that's a good thing. Once everybody is driving gasoline-free vehicles, then it will be time to revisit our tax base; but we're nowhere near that point.
does anybody know the etymology of the word "patriot" with respect to this legislation? Whose idea was it to use "patriot" and why?
I can't say who (although I have my suspicions) but I think the "why" is fairly obvious -- to ensure that anyone voting against would be seen as "un-patriotic". What an ingenious way to get (anything you want) passed right after 9/11?
If you were Louis Vuitton you would not be happy about that.
You certainly would be unhappy. But it doesn't follow that the government should outlaw it just to make you happy.
And to claim that people searching for 'Louis Vuitton' are merely doing a generic search for 'luxury good' is just plain stupid. If I search for 'Louis Vuitton' then I only want to see search results for Louis Vuitton. To display anything else is unethical.
By your logic, then, all search engine advertisements are unethical. Perhaps you think search engines should be run as taxpayer-funded public utilities, instead of by for-profit private companies?
... on the other hand, Google is also supposed to be operating under their "don't be evil" rule. Whether or not censoring ads based on their politics counts as "evil" is left as an exercise to the reader.
My IQ is right in the 143-145 ballpark and I typically score in the 99th percentile on any standardized test. I excel in all areas that pertain to mental ability...
... and yet you still haven't figured out that unprovoked, irrelevant bragging impresses no one. Curious.
Wow, that really got your goat, didn't it? Truly you are brave to sacrifice other peoples' lives so willingly.
No, more than 50,000 people have died as a result of Sadaam playing his bluff.
You can point the finger anywhere you want, but it is still American bombs and bullets that did the killing. Blaming someone else for your own actions is a cheap dodge.
people like you wrap themselves in the rotting rags of warped moral self-importance and say that America is the villain
"People like me" would like to see some accountability. When Sudan massacres tens of thousands, it's an outrage. When the US does it, it's somehow considered noble.
The fact that you are so quick to throw insults suggests a deep denial on your part -- you are psychologically unable to take responsibility for those deaths because that would force you to see your country for what it truly is: just another empire that acts according to its own strategic interests, and then tries justify its actions as humanitarian after the fact.
That language about "human differences" and "anti-bias" is actually the liberal position about promoting alternative lifestyles.
One of the problems with the right wing is that they cannot (or will not) tell the difference between tolerance and promotion. To them, tolerance is promotion. So of course they insist that the one is just a "code word" for the other. That doesn't make it so.
Wow, this is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. If it is a new computer, then it is NEW. Meaning nothing could have been edited.
That's another one of those things that used to be true, before the magic of Windows made it otherwise. Remember "you can't possibly get a virus just by reading your email"? These days it is very possible to have your brand-new Windows system compromised within a minute or two of connecting to the Internet, whether you've done anything else or not.
Think before you open your mouth, next time. Or, in this case, touch your keyboard.
I trust next time you will follow your own advice?;^)
He said that if he could not sell to the public, then he would be unable to stay in business, in which case...the military wouldn't have it either.
I don't believe that for a second. If the military wanted his weapons, they could pay him enough to keep him in business. This is the same military that is single-handedly keeping the entire Iridium satellite-phone constellation in orbit, remember? The same one that drops $1 billion a week in Iraq...
Hmm, let's try that argument again, with a little search-and-replace action:
Yes, nuclear bombs are designed for the purpose of being a weapon. They are designed to be able to harm people. And, since governments want militaries, nuclear bombs will exist in the world, like it or not. So given that they will always exist, do you want them to be ONLY in the hands of the government? That way leads to totalitarian governments who pass any law they feel like without regard for whether it enrages their citizens or not, since the enraged citizens are impotent to resist the government.
Curious... if there are no/low casualties resulting from this politically-correct warfare, how, exactly, will that lead to extinction?
Perhaps not so many people die from the fighting, but lots of people end up dying from the resulting destruction of the environment, money that was diverted away from other necessary purposes, etc. And of course there is no guarantee that someone wouldn't program their robots to kill the people of the other side, if they thought it would help them to do so...
If I'm reading this right, then you are attempting to implement a feature such that Mac users with a stock setup will not be able to use it.
Nah... those people can still access the feature by holding down the control key while left-dragging. But the thing is, our users are used to our right-dragging functions (from their experience with our software on other platforms) and they complain when it doesn't work on the Mac.
Don't be so damn mysterious, what is this NEED for right-dragging? What function does that do and in which OS? TELL US DAMN YOU!:)
Okay, okay, I'll talk!:^) In our live-audio mixing application, we like to be able to right-drag from one fader to another to copy the source fader's state to the target fader. (Left-drag doesn't work because left-drag is used to move the fader thumb up and down). This mechanism works fine under BeOS, Windows, and X11, but under OS/X a right-drag immediately aborts and TrollTech tells us there is nothing they can do about it, because the Carbon D&D API doesn't support right-drag. So our poor Mac users are stuck holding down the control key while dragging, and complaining that our app is inconsistent across platforms...
IN fact, every mac user I've seen who uses a mouse uses a typical multi-button optical mouse, or other exotic device. Almost nobody uses the stock 1 button mouse.
If nobody uses it, that should be a hint to Apple that 1-button mice aren't what people want.
You plug in a two button mouse, and it behaves as you would expect.
Not quite -- try getting your app to support drag-and-drop via the right mouse button. As far as I (or TrollTech) can tell, there is simply no way to do it under MacOS/X.
(and before someone replies saying that there is no reason to ever need right-mouse-drag, let me simply assert that I do have a good reason for it)
This is one of the big mistakes being made in the popular culture, the myth of the "hydrogen economy".
The idea of a "hydrogen economy" is no more illogical than that of a "petroleum economy". In both cases you have a useful fuel that must be produced somehow, and can then be passed around like any other commodity.
There might be a myth about hydrogen being a free lunch, which of course it isn't. But the idea of using hydrogen as an energy currency is perfectly valid.
At the moment these systems rely on the social contract to make sure they aren't abused by people who download without contributing upload bandwidth.
As I understand it, BitTorrent (and by extension, IceCase which is layered on top of BitTorrent) solves this problem at the peer level using a tit-for-tat algorithm: people who aren't uploading packets don't get many download packets either. This seems like a much more robust solution than "blessed binaries" (which will be hacked anyway, and prevent people from developing their own clients)
With screenshots as abysmal as this , it being a beta is not really an excuse.
I'm almost embarrassed to say it, but all the linked screenshots looked perfectly fine to me. I guess my sense of game aesthetics is hopelessly outdated....
Re:Their called assets...
on
Wish Cancelled
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
The reason you don't see companies going along with reasoning like yours is because in the IP business code is like buildings and machinery.
That's a fair point. If people really want to see the code open-sourced, why not have everyone contribute to a pool of cash and offer to buy the code from them? If their "orphaned" code is really so difficult to to re-sell, they might be willing to part with it for relatively little money.
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely! Imagine logging on to SpaceFriedChicken.com, punching in your latitude, longitude, and credit card number, and then holding a baseball glove out the window to catch the chicken thrown down from orbit. (The heat of re-entry sears in the juicy flavor!)
FYI, the curb weight of an GM EV1 (which is as good an example of an electric vehicle as any) is 2922 lbs. This qualifies it as a "Compact Passenger Car", according to the NHTSA. If you're worried about heavy vehicles, you ought to be taxing SUVs and trucks, not electric cars.
Long before "everybody is driving gasoline-free vehicle" the roads would be totally useless if we don't revists our tax base now.
Fine with me, but let's be intelligent and tax the actual source of the problem: overweight, gas guzzling SUVs and other heavy vehicles. The obvious way to do that is to increase the gas tax, not to require everyone to buy an electronic tattle-tale to spy on them.
Not at all -- as you yourself point out directly afterwards. The reason you see those "no trucks over XXX pounds" signs is exactly because the amount of wear and tear on the road is proportional to vehicle weight.
where the electric doesn't pay *anything* in gas taxes.
I can't say who (although I have my suspicions) but I think the "why" is fairly obvious -- to ensure that anyone voting against would be seen as "un-patriotic". What an ingenious way to get (anything you want) passed right after 9/11?
You certainly would be unhappy. But it doesn't follow that the government should outlaw it just to make you happy.
And to claim that people searching for 'Louis Vuitton' are merely doing a generic search for 'luxury good' is just plain stupid. If I search for 'Louis Vuitton' then I only want to see search results for Louis Vuitton. To display anything else is unethical.
By your logic, then, all search engine advertisements are unethical. Perhaps you think search engines should be run as taxpayer-funded public utilities, instead of by for-profit private companies?
... on the other hand, Google is also supposed to be operating under their "don't be evil" rule. Whether or not censoring ads based on their politics counts as "evil" is left as an exercise to the reader.
... a demonstration of a web server cracking under pressure. :^P
No, more than 50,000 people have died as a result of Sadaam playing his bluff.
You can point the finger anywhere you want, but it is still American bombs and bullets that did the killing. Blaming someone else for your own actions is a cheap dodge.
people like you wrap themselves in the rotting rags of warped moral self-importance and say that America is the villain
"People like me" would like to see some accountability. When Sudan massacres tens of thousands, it's an outrage. When the US does it, it's somehow considered noble.
The fact that you are so quick to throw insults suggests a deep denial on your part -- you are psychologically unable to take responsibility for those deaths because that would force you to see your country for what it truly is: just another empire that acts according to its own strategic interests, and then tries justify its actions as humanitarian after the fact.
And more than 50,000 people have died as a result of the US invasion. If you want to cry a river, cry for them.
One of the problems with the right wing is that they cannot (or will not) tell the difference between tolerance and promotion. To them, tolerance is promotion. So of course they insist that the one is just a "code word" for the other. That doesn't make it so.
That's another one of those things that used to be true, before the magic of Windows made it otherwise. Remember "you can't possibly get a virus just by reading your email"? These days it is very possible to have your brand-new Windows system compromised within a minute or two of connecting to the Internet, whether you've done anything else or not.
Think before you open your mouth, next time. Or, in this case, touch your keyboard.
I trust next time you will follow your own advice?
I don't believe that for a second. If the military wanted his weapons, they could pay him enough to keep him in business. This is the same military that is single-handedly keeping the entire Iridium satellite-phone constellation in orbit, remember? The same one that drops $1 billion a week in Iraq...
Yes, nuclear bombs are designed for the purpose of being a weapon. They are designed to be able to harm people. And, since governments want militaries, nuclear bombs will exist in the world, like it or not. So given that they will always exist, do you want them to be ONLY in the hands of the government? That way leads to totalitarian governments who pass any law they feel like without regard for whether it enrages their citizens or not, since the enraged citizens are impotent to resist the government.
Therefore: legalize nukes! Yeehaw!
You'll have to pry my vi out of my cold dead hands you commies!
Perhaps not so many people die from the fighting, but lots of people end up dying from the resulting destruction of the environment, money that was diverted away from other necessary purposes, etc. And of course there is no guarantee that someone wouldn't program their robots to kill the people of the other side, if they thought it would help them to do so...
Nah... those people can still access the feature by holding down the control key while left-dragging. But the thing is, our users are used to our right-dragging functions (from their experience with our software on other platforms) and they complain when it doesn't work on the Mac.
Okay, okay, I'll talk!
If nobody uses it, that should be a hint to Apple that 1-button mice aren't what people want.
You plug in a two button mouse, and it behaves as you would expect.
Not quite -- try getting your app to support drag-and-drop via the right mouse button. As far as I (or TrollTech) can tell, there is simply no way to do it under MacOS/X.
(and before someone replies saying that there is no reason to ever need right-mouse-drag, let me simply assert that I do have a good reason for it)
Millions of Buddhists would disagree...
The idea of a "hydrogen economy" is no more illogical than that of a "petroleum economy". In both cases you have a useful fuel that must be produced somehow, and can then be passed around like any other commodity.
There might be a myth about hydrogen being a free lunch, which of course it isn't. But the idea of using hydrogen as an energy currency is perfectly valid.
To be more specific: current methods of converting water to hydrogen are too inefficient. I remain hopeful that a more efficient method will be found.
As I understand it, BitTorrent (and by extension, IceCase which is layered on top of BitTorrent) solves this problem at the peer level using a tit-for-tat algorithm: people who aren't uploading packets don't get many download packets either. This seems like a much more robust solution than "blessed binaries" (which will be hacked anyway, and prevent people from developing their own clients)
I'm almost embarrassed to say it, but all the linked screenshots looked perfectly fine to me. I guess my sense of game aesthetics is hopelessly outdated....
That's a fair point. If people really want to see the code open-sourced, why not have everyone contribute to a pool of cash and offer to buy the code from them? If their "orphaned" code is really so difficult to to re-sell, they might be willing to part with it for relatively little money.