Well, I hear you there. Nevertheless, the CIA is a big organization, and there are certainly some bumblers. Didn't you hear about the CIA director who was fired because he was taking classified documents home to work on them on his personal Win 9x desktop that was full of trojans and viruses from all the porn sites he was surfing? Of course that is exactly how Microsoft got cracked as well.
So yes, the CIA had better maps, but the group in charge of making the targets did not, and the left hand did not know what the right hand was doing. Pretty common thing in government, as is lying, so we may never know which is true. Still, if they bombed the CHinese Embassy on purpose, what was the purpose? If I could think of one, I would be more inclined to believe it was not an accident.
As it was, the bombing of the Chinese Embassy was a big embarrassment. Then again if there was someone in there the CIA wanted dead, we may never find out...:P
The cop did not have to search your house to see you were breaking the law. You were doing it out in the open and s/he caught you redhanded. Case closed, mon frere.
Actually, you can publish the names of abortion doctors (The infamous Nuremburg Files website was brought back to life). You can also yell fire in a theatre. What you cannot do is incite a riot. People try to use this example to say it is a limit to freedom of speech and justify all kinds of nutter laws. But the point of the "fire in the theatre" thing is not that speech is not protected, but that certain actions are illegal which may involve speech.
If you were in a theatre, giving a preformance in which you yelled "fire" it would be absolutely legal. It is when you attempt to create a public disturbance and cause people to panic and riot that you step over the law. It is a very fine line, of course, and is almost always misused, but the line is there.
MOre to the point, didn't they libel Mr. Max by calling him a "smut peddler?" I mean it does not seem that is what he does, the quality of his work notwithstanding...
The libelouse even if true has been held up in court on numerous occasions, including this one. The case depends, in part, on how the information is presented.
As a former student myself, I feel your pain. However, I recently befriended someone who was a little better at dealing with the system. Her school recently came up with a plan whereby they would get all education students to buy laptops. One of the components of this plan was that they mandated the purchase of this ~$900 laptop.
Since it was mandatory, the cost of the laptop went into the official need calculation for the students' financial aid and most students got that covered. In those cases where for some reason the normal available aid was not enough, there were emergency loans available.
So essentially getting stuff like this depends to some degree on your uni and their financial aid department, but it could be done (or at least it worked in this case). YMMV. I wish I had gone to a school that mandated that we got "free" laptops (yes these people will have to pay for it eventually, but until then it is "free money" right? woohoo!)
Of course as I write this I am trying to figure a plan to pay off my student loans before I die:P.
Actually some people did start a project that cached slashdot articles and started to publish links to the cache in articles. The result was a bunch of webmasters bitching and threatening to sue because the posters had not asked permission to mirror their content. Like the parent said, there really are litigious assholes out there who want to ruin it for everyone. Then again without such people we would have no need of a YRO section.:)
BeOS has always been about instant reaction to the user, no matter what else was going on. Although most programs (with the exception of Mozilla/Phoenix) load too quickly to be intercepted...
If BeOS stays true to it's roots as a media OS - musicians, video artists, animators and their ilk would switch from the ever more bloated, less free(DRM) windows. BeOS needs media, like media needs BeOS.
You know what, I like a lot of things about the BeOS, and I think that Linux could learn a lot from them. But I never understood this argument about BeOS's responsiveness and the claim that it is a "multimedia OS."
Yes, I found it responsive, useful, and user-friendly. There were even many free-as-in-beer (and as in speech in some cases) applications. But none of them seemed to be multimedia applications; neither did I see any for sale.
Maybe it is a Multimedia OS by 1990 standards, where pictures+sound with a CD drive means multimedia. But nowadays I would see a multimedia OS as a viable platform for creating and recording music, editing video, etc. I never saw a single application that would do these things. There is no animation software for BeOS, either.
So if the BeOS is really popular with multimedia firms, what in hell do they run on it? NetPositive?
This is not meant to be a troll. I really and truly would like to know because I want to like the BeOS, but I think it would be more useful with some applications that actually take advantage of the capabilities inherent in the OS. Unfortunately everyone who advocates the BeOS says it is great for multimedia creation, and neglects to mention a single application with which one could create multimedia which runs on the OS. AFAIK there are not any.
Whether you think society is too litigious is your opinion. But, to blame that on "lawyers" and not all the assholes who file the frivilous suits is not "insightful" at all.
Laywers run for congress and write the laws we decry. Lawyers become judges and accept these frivolous suits, then make judgements on them we decry. Lawyers accept people who make these frivolous suits as clients and craft the suits in question. Very often the clients are themselves lawyers or the law arm of SomeCompany.
If I come to a lawyer with a suit it is his/her job to decide whether it has merit before taking it. If the suit is brought before a judge it is his/her job to decide whether it has merit before taking it.
Tell me again why lawyers are not to blame here? Litigiousness has the property of generating more business for lawyers at the expense of society. In subverting the law in the way they have been, lawyers are being exceedingly selfish. They also promote the spirit of litigiousness by popularizing this service with barrages of tv ads and with their constant advice to companies to maintain a constant cycle of suing in every direction.
Lawyers aren't to blame? You are insightful for saying that? Whatever!
Re:The only problem is
on
PeltierBeer
·
· Score: 1
Not only that, but if you go to a decent bar or restaurant you can get Guinness served from the tap, as God Intended!;)
By the way, if there's foam in that bra, you're probably getting less than you bargained on. Real women don't need or want padding. Although occasionally I'd bet they'd like hard shielding from octopi disguised as men.
Perhaps, but wouldn't this work better? Hmm maybe they should make bra and panties of a similar nature;).
"Power over CAT5 is quite handy, 20m of network cable should be enough to get me out in the sun with cold beer." Get it to work over 54g and you've REALLY got something.
Therefore 'Windows is an operating system' is something that probably half the computer users out there don't have any serious comprehension of. This means that not only do a large number of people use Windows because they have it, they are unlikely to change it because they really don't know it 'exists' as a product. When they get a new computer, it comes preinstalled and they never really have to worry about it.
It's somewhat ironic the fact that while I've never been a big mac fan my self, I have always respected its relative ease of use, yet i'm finding more often then not, the kids are complaining cause it's not *windows*(tm) which I find to be an unacceptable complaint.
These kids today! [grumble, grumble!]
Maybe you should point them to the poster whose sig said "When I was younger, I wrote games in basic on a 4.7mhz processor with 128k of memory and I was grateful." Actually I remmeber doing that myself because my high school used ancient computers for its programming classes and top-of-the-line 286's for its typing class. We used DOS 1.x and GWBASIC or BASICA. Ah, the good old days. And I really did walk 7 miles to school once and it was uphill both ways (but I did *not* make a habit of it!):)
Why are you attacking the choir? The poster was quoting a (presumably western) poster who said westerners were lazy. The poster (as an Indian) pointed out that most of the computing innovation came from the western world. Perhaps you and the others who saw a post from an Indian that happened to contain the words "Lazy Westerners" but failed to notice they were in italics with a refutation below in normal type are indeed Lazy Westerners yourselves;).
Considering the CIA didn't even know the location of the Chinese Embasssy in Belgrade during the recent bombing of Serbia (despite that location being publically available for over 5 years), I wouldn't be placing too much faith in anything the CIA has to say.
It depends on who you mean by "they." There were people in the CIA who knew where the embassy was, but the people whose responsibility it was to identify targets for the bombing in question were using an old map. As for the Factbook, I think data like population come from the country in question, in the form of census reports and such, so the data may be innacurate. IIRC they say something to this effect in the factbook.
Actually, it DOES work. $100 for the full suit of Matlab applications, for example, is MUCH less expensive than the $5000 or so you would have to pay to buy a commercial licence. Also, schools require students to purchase software like this. In order to be in Engineering at Virginia Tech, for example, students must have Inventor, Matlab, Windows XP, Acrobat, CAD and a whole host of other software. The package costs about $900, but commercial licenses for similar software would be well over $100,000.
And for the previous poster's information, if the student does not have this $900, well, this is what financial aid is for.
I was informing the parent to which I was responding to that Linux is an OS and therefore cannot be smeared. You quoted this and told me I was wrong. But then you cited SCO slandering RMS, IBM, etc. Nowhere in your little tirade did you inform me how SCO slandered Linux; probably because that is impossible. An OS cannot be slandered. I was informing the parent to my post of what the word slander means. Since you told me I was wrong in your first sentence but gave no supporting evidence of this (although none exists because Linux is not a person in any legal sense) I decided not to read the rest of what you posted. Have a good day and when you decide someone is wrong - try to refute what they actually said instead of what you wished they had said.
The problem is that slandering Linux, especially in the way they have done, is indeed slandering Linus. That was part of my point. Something I left out was that both in many posts and in SCO's documents they seem to have used the word Linux when they meant to say Linus. This does not help matters.
That's such bullshit. Pure PR. So MS releases a new version of their software which breaks other applications (no surprise there) and they get to claim it's because it's more SECURE?!? And you BUY this?
Why not? If applications rely on lax security to work, they will be broken when security is made tighter. That is a simple fact. Likewise, users can do less things in more secure environments specifically because making the environment more secure requires telling the user no sometimes.
In the MS world, programming to rely on bugs, undocumented features, and security flaws has always been rampant. MS did a good job of getting everybody and their brother to develop for their platform, but that also meant getting a lot of bad programmers. Unfortunately, rather than design the OS to prevent bad programs from compromising security, they have continually allowed bugs and security flaws to remain where application developers relied on them. If they do otherwise, they get the problem of being told they are "breaking compatability with competitors."
Theo and Linus do not have this problem. They can break compatability anytime they feel like and say "tough noogies, you were writing it wrong anyway" or "well we had to change this to end up with a better kernel. rewrite your code like the rest of us are having to." Personally, I think Microsoft should have stopped this practice back in the bad old days when it started. They also should have learned themselves to write better code and used some of the pull they gained with universities to see that future coders learned the right way as well. They claim to be learning this at last; we shall see if that is true.
The concept pre-dates open source development. They did have peer reviews in the days of the mainframe.
This was before my time, but I had understood that during the mainframe days people did share code with one another. There are some who would claim code was always shared until the day Microsoft invented "piracy" (starting with the nasty letter Bill Gates wrote the Home Brew Computer Club for copying the paper tape of the MS Basic Interpreter for Altair), though I would imagine it is not so cut and dried as all that. Still old timers have claimed on the net that mainframe programmers regularly shared code back in the day. Isn't that what open source development is about? Is this story apocryphal?
For me, this is an important hack not only because it holds the promise of possible increased performance/gas milage, but also because of the attempt to sneak WinCE into cars and not tell us which ones run it. Cars running Windows are unsafe and do not deserve to be on the road. I would prefer the realtime systems that have heretofore been used but if it is WinCE or something I hack then I would prefer to proudly display a "This Truck Powered By Linux!" bumper sticker:).
I think the article describes a system which is not linux (I have been puzzling thorugh it to figure out if I can get this kit and try it out) but if we can do this then embedded realtime linux is a possibility too.
What did you expect? Car-savvy slashdot nerds? Hey moderator assholes! How about you try and learn about the subject before you start modding crap offtopic when it is topical and funny (and then the submitter even provides a link to prove it!)
What am I saying? moderators that can click links? NEVER! Trolls will roast their stomachs in hell!
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I hear you there. Nevertheless, the CIA is a big organization, and there are certainly some bumblers. Didn't you hear about the CIA director who was fired because he was taking classified documents home to work on them on his personal Win 9x desktop that was full of trojans and viruses from all the porn sites he was surfing? Of course that is exactly how Microsoft got cracked as well.
So yes, the CIA had better maps, but the group in charge of making the targets did not, and the left hand did not know what the right hand was doing. Pretty common thing in government, as is lying, so we may never know which is true. Still, if they bombed the CHinese Embassy on purpose, what was the purpose? If I could think of one, I would be more inclined to believe it was not an accident.
As it was, the bombing of the Chinese Embassy was a big embarrassment. Then again if there was someone in there the CIA wanted dead, we may never find out... :P
The cop did not have to search your house to see you were breaking the law. You were doing it out in the open and s/he caught you redhanded. Case closed, mon frere.
Actually, you can publish the names of abortion doctors (The infamous Nuremburg Files website was brought back to life). You can also yell fire in a theatre. What you cannot do is incite a riot. People try to use this example to say it is a limit to freedom of speech and justify all kinds of nutter laws. But the point of the "fire in the theatre" thing is not that speech is not protected, but that certain actions are illegal which may involve speech.
If you were in a theatre, giving a preformance in which you yelled "fire" it would be absolutely legal. It is when you attempt to create a public disturbance and cause people to panic and riot that you step over the law. It is a very fine line, of course, and is almost always misused, but the line is there.
MOre to the point, didn't they libel Mr. Max by calling him a "smut peddler?" I mean it does not seem that is what he does, the quality of his work notwithstanding...
The libelouse even if true has been held up in court on numerous occasions, including this one. The case depends, in part, on how the information is presented.
This case has not been to court yet...
As a former student myself, I feel your pain. However, I recently befriended someone who was a little better at dealing with the system. Her school recently came up with a plan whereby they would get all education students to buy laptops. One of the components of this plan was that they mandated the purchase of this ~$900 laptop.
Since it was mandatory, the cost of the laptop went into the official need calculation for the students' financial aid and most students got that covered. In those cases where for some reason the normal available aid was not enough, there were emergency loans available.
So essentially getting stuff like this depends to some degree on your uni and their financial aid department, but it could be done (or at least it worked in this case). YMMV. I wish I had gone to a school that mandated that we got "free" laptops (yes these people will have to pay for it eventually, but until then it is "free money" right? woohoo!)
Of course as I write this I am trying to figure a plan to pay off my student loans before I die :P.
Actually some people did start a project that cached slashdot articles and started to publish links to the cache in articles. The result was a bunch of webmasters bitching and threatening to sue because the posters had not asked permission to mirror their content. Like the parent said, there really are litigious assholes out there who want to ruin it for everyone. Then again without such people we would have no need of a YRO section. :)
BeOS has always been about instant reaction to the user, no matter what else was going on. Although most programs (with the exception of Mozilla/Phoenix) load too quickly to be intercepted...
If BeOS stays true to it's roots as a media OS - musicians, video artists, animators and their ilk would switch from the ever more bloated, less free(DRM) windows. BeOS needs media, like media needs BeOS.
You know what, I like a lot of things about the BeOS, and I think that Linux could learn a lot from them. But I never understood this argument about BeOS's responsiveness and the claim that it is a "multimedia OS."
Yes, I found it responsive, useful, and user-friendly. There were even many free-as-in-beer (and as in speech in some cases) applications. But none of them seemed to be multimedia applications; neither did I see any for sale.
Maybe it is a Multimedia OS by 1990 standards, where pictures+sound with a CD drive means multimedia. But nowadays I would see a multimedia OS as a viable platform for creating and recording music, editing video, etc. I never saw a single application that would do these things. There is no animation software for BeOS, either.
So if the BeOS is really popular with multimedia firms, what in hell do they run on it? NetPositive?
This is not meant to be a troll. I really and truly would like to know because I want to like the BeOS, but I think it would be more useful with some applications that actually take advantage of the capabilities inherent in the OS. Unfortunately everyone who advocates the BeOS says it is great for multimedia creation, and neglects to mention a single application with which one could create multimedia which runs on the OS. AFAIK there are not any.
Whether you think society is too litigious is your opinion. But, to blame that on "lawyers" and not all the assholes who file the frivilous suits is not "insightful" at all.
Laywers run for congress and write the laws we decry. Lawyers become judges and accept these frivolous suits, then make judgements on them we decry. Lawyers accept people who make these frivolous suits as clients and craft the suits in question. Very often the clients are themselves lawyers or the law arm of SomeCompany.
If I come to a lawyer with a suit it is his/her job to decide whether it has merit before taking it. If the suit is brought before a judge it is his/her job to decide whether it has merit before taking it.
Tell me again why lawyers are not to blame here? Litigiousness has the property of generating more business for lawyers at the expense of society. In subverting the law in the way they have been, lawyers are being exceedingly selfish. They also promote the spirit of litigiousness by popularizing this service with barrages of tv ads and with their constant advice to companies to maintain a constant cycle of suing in every direction.
Lawyers aren't to blame? You are insightful for saying that? Whatever!
Not only that, but if you go to a decent bar or restaurant you can get Guinness served from the tap, as God Intended! ;)
By the way, if there's foam in that bra, you're probably getting less than you bargained on. Real women don't need or want padding. Although occasionally I'd bet they'd like hard shielding from octopi disguised as men.
Perhaps, but wouldn't this work better? Hmm maybe they should make bra and panties of a similar nature ;).
"Power over CAT5 is quite handy, 20m of network cable should be enough to get me out in the sun with cold beer." Get it to work over 54g and you've REALLY got something.
Tesla, is that you? :)
Therefore 'Windows is an operating system' is something that probably half the computer users out there don't have any serious comprehension of. This means that not only do a large number of people use Windows because they have it, they are unlikely to change it because they really don't know it 'exists' as a product. When they get a new computer, it comes preinstalled and they never really have to worry about it.
Windows is the computer. The Computer is your Friend. Therefore Windows is your friend. ;)
It's somewhat ironic the fact that while I've never been a big mac fan my self, I have always respected its relative ease of use, yet i'm finding more often then not, the kids are complaining cause it's not *windows*(tm) which I find to be an unacceptable complaint.
These kids today! [grumble, grumble!]
Maybe you should point them to the poster whose sig said "When I was younger, I wrote games in basic on a 4.7mhz processor with 128k of memory and I was grateful." Actually I remmeber doing that myself because my high school used ancient computers for its programming classes and top-of-the-line 286's for its typing class. We used DOS 1.x and GWBASIC or BASICA. Ah, the good old days. And I really did walk 7 miles to school once and it was uphill both ways (but I did *not* make a habit of it!) :)
Why are you attacking the choir? The poster was quoting a (presumably western) poster who said westerners were lazy. The poster (as an Indian) pointed out that most of the computing innovation came from the western world. Perhaps you and the others who saw a post from an Indian that happened to contain the words "Lazy Westerners" but failed to notice they were in italics with a refutation below in normal type are indeed Lazy Westerners yourselves ;).
IAALW :)
Considering the CIA didn't even know the location of the Chinese Embasssy in Belgrade during the recent bombing of Serbia (despite that location being publically available for over 5 years), I wouldn't be placing too much faith in anything the CIA has to say.
It depends on who you mean by "they." There were people in the CIA who knew where the embassy was, but the people whose responsibility it was to identify targets for the bombing in question were using an old map. As for the Factbook, I think data like population come from the country in question, in the form of census reports and such, so the data may be innacurate. IIRC they say something to this effect in the factbook.
IANACIAA ;)
Yeah, like pirating software from MS ever kept them awake nights... To them, Windows is already free.
Yes, but so are the viruses, security problems, and crashes. Pirated Windows is only free if your time is worthless.
Actually, it DOES work. $100 for the full suit of Matlab applications, for example, is MUCH less expensive than the $5000 or so you would have to pay to buy a commercial licence. Also, schools require students to purchase software like this. In order to be in Engineering at Virginia Tech, for example, students must have Inventor, Matlab, Windows XP, Acrobat, CAD and a whole host of other software. The package costs about $900, but commercial licenses for similar software would be well over $100,000.
And for the previous poster's information, if the student does not have this $900, well, this is what financial aid is for.
I was informing the parent to which I was responding to that Linux is an OS and therefore cannot be smeared. You quoted this and told me I was wrong. But then you cited SCO slandering RMS, IBM, etc. Nowhere in your little tirade did you inform me how SCO slandered Linux; probably because that is impossible. An OS cannot be slandered. I was informing the parent to my post of what the word slander means. Since you told me I was wrong in your first sentence but gave no supporting evidence of this (although none exists because Linux is not a person in any legal sense) I decided not to read the rest of what you posted. Have a good day and when you decide someone is wrong - try to refute what they actually said instead of what you wished they had said.
The problem is that slandering Linux, especially in the way they have done, is indeed slandering Linus. That was part of my point. Something I left out was that both in many posts and in SCO's documents they seem to have used the word Linux when they meant to say Linus. This does not help matters.
That's such bullshit. Pure PR. So MS releases a new version of their software which breaks other applications (no surprise there) and they get to claim it's because it's more SECURE?!? And you BUY this?
Why not? If applications rely on lax security to work, they will be broken when security is made tighter. That is a simple fact. Likewise, users can do less things in more secure environments specifically because making the environment more secure requires telling the user no sometimes.
In the MS world, programming to rely on bugs, undocumented features, and security flaws has always been rampant. MS did a good job of getting everybody and their brother to develop for their platform, but that also meant getting a lot of bad programmers. Unfortunately, rather than design the OS to prevent bad programs from compromising security, they have continually allowed bugs and security flaws to remain where application developers relied on them. If they do otherwise, they get the problem of being told they are "breaking compatability with competitors."
Theo and Linus do not have this problem. They can break compatability anytime they feel like and say "tough noogies, you were writing it wrong anyway" or "well we had to change this to end up with a better kernel. rewrite your code like the rest of us are having to." Personally, I think Microsoft should have stopped this practice back in the bad old days when it started. They also should have learned themselves to write better code and used some of the pull they gained with universities to see that future coders learned the right way as well. They claim to be learning this at last; we shall see if that is true.
To bad Larry's claims of being Unbreakable? were squashed.
erm.. that was the poster's point...
The concept pre-dates open source development. They did have peer reviews in the days of the mainframe.
This was before my time, but I had understood that during the mainframe days people did share code with one another. There are some who would claim code was always shared until the day Microsoft invented "piracy" (starting with the nasty letter Bill Gates wrote the Home Brew Computer Club for copying the paper tape of the MS Basic Interpreter for Altair), though I would imagine it is not so cut and dried as all that. Still old timers have claimed on the net that mainframe programmers regularly shared code back in the day. Isn't that what open source development is about? Is this story apocryphal?
For me, this is an important hack not only because it holds the promise of possible increased performance/gas milage, but also because of the attempt to sneak WinCE into cars and not tell us which ones run it. Cars running Windows are unsafe and do not deserve to be on the road. I would prefer the realtime systems that have heretofore been used but if it is WinCE or something I hack then I would prefer to proudly display a "This Truck Powered By Linux!" bumper sticker :).
I think the article describes a system which is not linux (I have been puzzling thorugh it to figure out if I can get this kit and try it out) but if we can do this then embedded realtime linux is a possibility too.
What did you expect? Car-savvy slashdot nerds? Hey moderator assholes! How about you try and learn about the subject before you start modding crap offtopic when it is topical and funny (and then the submitter even provides a link to prove it!)
What am I saying? moderators that can click links? NEVER! Trolls will roast their stomachs in hell!
"One wonders," thought rifter, "whether Marvin runs WinCE." ;)
Well, I thought it was appropriate :P. Especially if you pronounce it the way I do.