I don't know about the OP, but I listen to music almost every day. I have an iRiver I use on my commute to and from work or if I'm going out, and I tend to listen to music while I'm at work. I can easily clock up 30+ hours of listening to music in a week, depending on exactly what I'm doing at work at the time.
Hell, even on my way home from a night out clubbing I'll be using my iRiver, although as the club I tend to go to kicks out at 7:30 am that's as much to keep me awake as being out of a desire to listen to even more music...
Windows Media Player also has this feature, and rates all "unrated" tracks at a default of three stars. Anything that gets played often gets bumped up, anything that's frequently skipped gets bumped down. Anything that you rate yourself is excluded from this auto-adjustment.
WWW? "I need to share this static information with several people in Berlin, one in England, a Professor in Boston and a married couple in Sydney.
As I understand it, the web was created to facillitate the sharing of academic information (papers, etc) between researchers. In that sense, you're half right, but the "married couple in Sydney" wouldn't have been on the inventers' minds.
Well, you're using a word that refers specifically to a woman's genitalia as a term of insult. That would tend to imply that there is something somehow wrong, dirty or otherwise distasteful about a woman's genitalia.
The same is true of using "dick" or "prick" as an insult, of course - there's the same implication about a man's genitalia.
However, the word's use is so common that it's true origins as an insult really don't matter any more. I don't see anything misogynist about calling someone a cunt, just as I don't see anything misandrist about calling someone a dick.
Misogyny is the hatred of women. You may be thinking of misanthropy, although that's the hatred of people in general, rather than just stupid, irrational ones.
Either through gravity, the intense heat of a fission explosion, or self sustaining reactions like that of our sun
Don't forget of course that while stellar reactions are self-sustaining, it's heating/compression due to gravitational collapse that actually gets them started. Theoretically, there's no reason why we can't get self-sustaining fusion reactions through a similar process, although we're not trying to use gravity (of course!).
I don't think we are close to getting a reliable fusion power plant or even fusion that breaks even (with out killing everyone for miles and miles) very soon.
I seemed to remember reading that one of the fusion labs had acieved breakeven, but now I come to google for it I can't find any links to back me up. I do know, however, that JET has at least come pretty close to it, if they've not yet achieved it.
Incidentally, at least as of 7 years ago, most fusion experiments involved using either high intensity, short-pulse lasers or intense magnetic fields to heat and compress the target material, neither of which is likely to kill anyone, let alone "everyone for miles and miles". I've been out of the field since then, however, so I can't swear that that's still the case; I can't imagine that too many people are using fission explosions to try to trigger fusion outside of weapons research, though.
Well, the cost to me personally is zero - I run free AV software (grisoft's) and a free third-party firewall. I have suffered zero infections and paid £0 in the process.
Incidentally, if and when the clueless, run as root because it's easier, download and install anything from anywhere masses move to Linux, so will the malware and virus writers, and said clueless masses will continue to screw their systems over with them.
Right now Linux (and OS X for that matter) isn't hit for two reasons:
1) It's a niche market, too small to really bother with 2) The users, on average, are far more clued up and less likely to get hit
Change those two things, and I guarantee the malcontents will follow.
1) It's spelt "moron", not "moran". 2) It's == it is. Its == belonging to it, therefore the apostrophe is incorrect. 3) "Policy" is not possessive, it is possessed (by Apple).
The vast majority of computer users live in poor countries
No, I think you'll find that the vast majority of computer users live in rich countries. The vast majority of *people* live in poor countries, but very very few of them have computers.
Meanwhile, GNU/Linux is already on my desktop and I couldn't really care less what Micro$oft does. I just use it because it is the best tool for my job. Period.
Your use of the term "Micro$oft" would appear to give the lie to your claim of using the best tool for the job. Or are your overtly anti-MS tendencies coincidental?
I mean, I may have abandoned Linux (specifically Mandrake 9) for XP, as that's the right tool for *my* job, but I don't feel the need to make reference to "open sores software".
paper is the new word, because papers sound academic, not like paid research
The output of paid research is generally also a paper, you know. "Paper" just refers to any report that is the outcome of scientific research.
On that point, however, I *do* agree with you - they are probably using it to lend an air of credibility that would otherwise be lacking.
From the available information, the one implementation that did have many of its own unique vulnerabilities was Microsoft's Java implementation
Which is no longer supported or available from MS. Anyone who's using the MS JVM had better have a damn good reason, and even then they should be thinking long and hard about moving to a modern VM.
Well, yes, windows runs on 90% of desktops, I would say.net runs on 15% of that figure.
Now now - you've just spent a few paragraphs ripping in to FUD that's thinly disguised as research, only to trot out your own bullshit statistic. Source for that 15% figure, if you please.
Tell me, what is it about Unix and other similar systems that prevents a malicious executable from wreaking havoc on the machine when run by a user in possession of the root password?
Don't tell me about having to use chmod, or file system permissions, or anything like that; I know all that. I am talking about a user, with the root password, a desire to run this cool-sounding app he's just downloaded, and enough knowledge to chmod +x file && sudo./file to do it. (Or, more likely, a user with the root password who's gotten so sick of logging out and back in or using su or sudo that he just runs as root the whole damn time anyway)
A significant number of viruses are distributed with names along the lines of "cute picture of puppies.jpg.pif" too.
How do you flag one as potentially dodgy (which it is) without getting false positives for the other?
Re:...the same features we delivered seven years a
on
Windows 95 Turns 10
·
· Score: 1
I hate it when I see a huge generic class included by default on every page of a web application, even though some pages may only use 1 (or even NONE) of the functions within that class.
That's bad programming (and bad OO!), not a fault of OO. You can write a crap, badly architected mess no matter what technology or design paradigm you choose to employ. If OO is at fault in that, it's only because some people see it as a silver bullet, and take the opportunity to stop thinking.
I remember WinQuake. In fact, I *don't* remember having to switch to DOS to play Quake, but then I did come to Quake relatively late.
I do remember when GLQuake was first released - a house mate of mine had a then top of the line Pentium Pro 200 with an almost unheard of 64MB of RAM. He had Quake, and so installed GLQuake and fired it up.
It was breathtakingly gorgeous......and, as he had no 3d accelerator, breathtakingly slow. Literally one frame every couple of seconds or so; we didn't get past the first couple of seconds of the demo where you round a corner and chuck a grenade at a group of zombies, let alone play it.
We are? I was under the impression that the media were taking a pretty harsh line over the whole affair - certainly there have been calls for Sir Ian Blair's resignation over it.
Yes, a lot of people seem to take the attitude that it's an inevitable consequence of waging an effective war against terror (or somesuch bullshit), but that doesn't mean that we all do.
We are not raised to respect and embrace our government
I can only assume that you've never spoken to a Brit on the subject, let alone been here. In no way are we "raised to respect and embrace our government".
Just look at the treatment anything controversial gets at the hands of the media - immigration, id cards, the Iraq war, etc - and you'll see anything but respect and embracing of the government.
But strangely enough when they shot one of the 'identified' terrorists it turned out that he wasn't one after all.
He was not identified as being one of the failed suicide bombers. He was seen coming out of a house that the police had under surveilence as it was known to have connections to the failed suicide bombers.
Yes, they shot him. Yes, they fucked up big time. No, at no time has it been claimed that he was positively identified as one of the four failed bombers who were caught on CCTV.
Even stranger is the fact that apparently all cameras where off during this little incident...
The police claim that no footage was available from the cameras. Several newspapers have since disputed that claim. Metronet (the company responsible for those cameras) have issued a statement saying that they are not aware of there being any problems with them. Pictures of the man lying dead on the floor of the Tube carriage have been printed in most UK newspapers, shown on TV, etc.
You can google for your own sources, but here are a couple to get you started: Yahoo news and the Times
Don't get me wrong, I am in no way defending the actions of the police; as I say above, they fucked up big time. An innocent life lost is a tragedy no matter which "side" is responsible for it. However, your claims are simply wrong and are in no way insightful.
Good point. Suicide bombers don't leave ANY evidence behind that might clue people into their identity.
Except their body.
Did you see the pictures of the aftermath of the bombings? The Tube carriages bus were total wrecks. The side of the top deck of the bus was peeled away like someone had used a tin opener on it. There were body parts strewn over a reasonably large area. I really don't think that making a positive id of the bombers based on their physical remains is going to be half as easy as you seem to think it is.
No, it only told them what they looked like.
Yes, that's what the OP said. Armed with the photos the police could (and did) mount a public appeal for information (it was all over the media for several days). They got that information, and they got the men.
Yes, you could do that with a good shot of a corpse's face, but as explained above, that may not be possible.
You're being lied to. Wake up.
No, you're being paranoid. I have seen the images of the failed bombers with my own two eyes. They most definitely were used in an appeal for information, and the police most definitely did arrest them. Unless, of course, you genuinely believe that every newspaper and TV and radio news broadcast in the UK is lying to us, in which case I think CCTV is the least of your worries.
There is a deep deated cultural belief that mathematics isn't important
That's hardly unique to the States, and it's hardly a new thing. A lot of my classmates thought that way in my teens, 15-odd years ago (and Christ I feel old saying that!)
I'm not just talking about the under-achievers, either - some of the smarter kids simply didn't see maths as being important. To a certain extent, they're right - I can't think of a single time I've had to use algebra or calculus in order to solve an everyday problem.
Don't get me wrong, I have a degree in physics, but to the average person on the street, anything much beyond addition, multiplication, subtraction and division is simply over-kill. (Unless you happen to believe in learning for the sheer pleasure of it, which I do, but many people don't)
Snoozing while 120db fighter jets are rolling by 25 feet away is definately doable.
Well, that beats me, but I did once fall asleep within a couple of metres of a sound system in a night club. That was after taking half a gram or so of speed, too - boy did I get ripped off...
I was under the impression that sleep is only required by the brain, and that the rest of the body only requires rest. Do you have any sources to support your assertion? (I don't have any to support mine to hand, but I might be able to dig some out later)
Not for me. The issue isn't that I stay glued to my PC, gaming or surfing or whatever; the issue is that I simply neither want nor feel the need to go to bed until significantly later than I should.
Without a PC, I'd just stay up watching TV, or reading, or doing something else (and on occasion, I do just that).
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about the OP, but I listen to music almost every day. I have an iRiver I use on my commute to and from work or if I'm going out, and I tend to listen to music while I'm at work. I can easily clock up 30+ hours of listening to music in a week, depending on exactly what I'm doing at work at the time.
Hell, even on my way home from a night out clubbing I'll be using my iRiver, although as the club I tend to go to kicks out at 7:30 am that's as much to keep me awake as being out of a desire to listen to even more music...
Windows Media Player also has this feature, and rates all "unrated" tracks at a default of three stars. Anything that gets played often gets bumped up, anything that's frequently skipped gets bumped down. Anything that you rate yourself is excluded from this auto-adjustment.
WWW? "I need to share this static information with several people in Berlin, one in England, a Professor in Boston and a married couple in Sydney.
As I understand it, the web was created to facillitate the sharing of academic information (papers, etc) between researchers. In that sense, you're half right, but the "married couple in Sydney" wouldn't have been on the inventers' minds.
Well, you're using a word that refers specifically to a woman's genitalia as a term of insult. That would tend to imply that there is something somehow wrong, dirty or otherwise distasteful about a woman's genitalia.
The same is true of using "dick" or "prick" as an insult, of course - there's the same implication about a man's genitalia.
However, the word's use is so common that it's true origins as an insult really don't matter any more. I don't see anything misogynist about calling someone a cunt, just as I don't see anything misandrist about calling someone a dick.
Misogyny is the hatred of women. You may be thinking of misanthropy, although that's the hatred of people in general, rather than just stupid, irrational ones.
Either through gravity, the intense heat of a fission explosion, or self sustaining reactions like that of our sun
Don't forget of course that while stellar reactions are self-sustaining, it's heating/compression due to gravitational collapse that actually gets them started. Theoretically, there's no reason why we can't get self-sustaining fusion reactions through a similar process, although we're not trying to use gravity (of course!).
I don't think we are close to getting a reliable fusion power plant or even fusion that breaks even (with out killing everyone for miles and miles) very soon.
I seemed to remember reading that one of the fusion labs had acieved breakeven, but now I come to google for it I can't find any links to back me up. I do know, however, that JET has at least come pretty close to it, if they've not yet achieved it.
Incidentally, at least as of 7 years ago, most fusion experiments involved using either high intensity, short-pulse lasers or intense magnetic fields to heat and compress the target material, neither of which is likely to kill anyone, let alone "everyone for miles and miles". I've been out of the field since then, however, so I can't swear that that's still the case; I can't imagine that too many people are using fission explosions to try to trigger fusion outside of weapons research, though.
Well, the cost to me personally is zero - I run free AV software (grisoft's) and a free third-party firewall. I have suffered zero infections and paid £0 in the process.
Incidentally, if and when the clueless, run as root because it's easier, download and install anything from anywhere masses move to Linux, so will the malware and virus writers, and said clueless masses will continue to screw their systems over with them.
Right now Linux (and OS X for that matter) isn't hit for two reasons:
1) It's a niche market, too small to really bother with
2) The users, on average, are far more clued up and less likely to get hit
Change those two things, and I guarantee the malcontents will follow.
for normal nouns, you just toss on an "'s" to make it possessive.
Yes, but "it" is a pronoun, not a noun, and the rules for nouns don't apply.
1) It's spelt "moron", not "moran".
2) It's == it is. Its == belonging to it, therefore the apostrophe is incorrect.
3) "Policy" is not possessive, it is possessed (by Apple).
The vast majority of computer users live in poor countries
No, I think you'll find that the vast majority of computer users live in rich countries. The vast majority of *people* live in poor countries, but very very few of them have computers.
Meanwhile, GNU/Linux is already on my desktop and I couldn't really care less what Micro$oft does. I just use it because it is the best tool for my job. Period.
Your use of the term "Micro$oft" would appear to give the lie to your claim of using the best tool for the job. Or are your overtly anti-MS tendencies coincidental?
I mean, I may have abandoned Linux (specifically Mandrake 9) for XP, as that's the right tool for *my* job, but I don't feel the need to make reference to "open sores software".
paper is the new word, because papers sound academic, not like paid research
.net runs on 15% of that figure.
The output of paid research is generally also a paper, you know. "Paper" just refers to any report that is the outcome of scientific research.
On that point, however, I *do* agree with you - they are probably using it to lend an air of credibility that would otherwise be lacking.
From the available information, the one implementation that did have many of its own
unique vulnerabilities was Microsoft's Java implementation
Which is no longer supported or available from MS. Anyone who's using the MS JVM had better have a damn good reason, and even then they should be thinking long and hard about moving to a modern VM.
Well, yes, windows runs on 90% of desktops, I would say
Now now - you've just spent a few paragraphs ripping in to FUD that's thinly disguised as research, only to trot out your own bullshit statistic. Source for that 15% figure, if you please.
No film at 11, you've all seen it before a hundred times...
Seriously, is this really newsworthy?
You don't know anything about users, do you?
./file to do it. (Or, more likely, a user with the root password who's gotten so sick of logging out and back in or using su or sudo that he just runs as root the whole damn time anyway)
Tell me, what is it about Unix and other similar systems that prevents a malicious executable from wreaking havoc on the machine when run by a user in possession of the root password?
Don't tell me about having to use chmod, or file system permissions, or anything like that; I know all that. I am talking about a user, with the root password, a desire to run this cool-sounding app he's just downloaded, and enough knowledge to chmod +x file && sudo
A significant number of viruses are distributed with names along the lines of "cute picture of puppies.jpg.pif" too.
How do you flag one as potentially dodgy (which it is) without getting false positives for the other?
I hate it when I see a huge generic class included by default on every page of a web application, even though some pages may only use 1 (or even NONE) of the functions within that class.
That's bad programming (and bad OO!), not a fault of OO. You can write a crap, badly architected mess no matter what technology or design paradigm you choose to employ. If OO is at fault in that, it's only because some people see it as a silver bullet, and take the opportunity to stop thinking.
I remember WinQuake. In fact, I *don't* remember having to switch to DOS to play Quake, but then I did come to Quake relatively late.
...and, as he had no 3d accelerator, breathtakingly slow. Literally one frame every couple of seconds or so; we didn't get past the first couple of seconds of the demo where you round a corner and chuck a grenade at a group of zombies, let alone play it.
I do remember when GLQuake was first released - a house mate of mine had a then top of the line Pentium Pro 200 with an almost unheard of 64MB of RAM. He had Quake, and so installed GLQuake and fired it up.
It was breathtakingly gorgeous...
We are? I was under the impression that the media were taking a pretty harsh line over the whole affair - certainly there have been calls for Sir Ian Blair's resignation over it.
Yes, a lot of people seem to take the attitude that it's an inevitable consequence of waging an effective war against terror (or somesuch bullshit), but that doesn't mean that we all do.
We are not raised to respect and embrace our government
I can only assume that you've never spoken to a Brit on the subject, let alone been here. In no way are we "raised to respect and embrace our government".
Just look at the treatment anything controversial gets at the hands of the media - immigration, id cards, the Iraq war, etc - and you'll see anything but respect and embracing of the government.
But strangely enough when they shot one of the 'identified' terrorists it turned out that he wasn't one after all.
He was not identified as being one of the failed suicide bombers. He was seen coming out of a house that the police had under surveilence as it was known to have connections to the failed suicide bombers.
Yes, they shot him. Yes, they fucked up big time. No, at no time has it been claimed that he was positively identified as one of the four failed bombers who were caught on CCTV.
Even stranger is the fact that apparently all cameras where off during this little incident...
The police claim that no footage was available from the cameras. Several newspapers have since disputed that claim. Metronet (the company responsible for those cameras) have issued a statement saying that they are not aware of there being any problems with them. Pictures of the man lying dead on the floor of the Tube carriage have been printed in most UK newspapers, shown on TV, etc.
You can google for your own sources, but here are a couple to get you started: Yahoo news and the Times
Don't get me wrong, I am in no way defending the actions of the police; as I say above, they fucked up big time. An innocent life lost is a tragedy no matter which "side" is responsible for it. However, your claims are simply wrong and are in no way insightful.
Good point. Suicide bombers don't leave ANY evidence behind that might clue people into their identity.
Except their body.
Did you see the pictures of the aftermath of the bombings? The Tube carriages bus were total wrecks. The side of the top deck of the bus was peeled away like someone had used a tin opener on it. There were body parts strewn over a reasonably large area. I really don't think that making a positive id of the bombers based on their physical remains is going to be half as easy as you seem to think it is.
No, it only told them what they looked like.
Yes, that's what the OP said. Armed with the photos the police could (and did) mount a public appeal for information (it was all over the media for several days). They got that information, and they got the men.
Yes, you could do that with a good shot of a corpse's face, but as explained above, that may not be possible.
You're being lied to. Wake up.
No, you're being paranoid. I have seen the images of the failed bombers with my own two eyes. They most definitely were used in an appeal for information, and the police most definitely did arrest them. Unless, of course, you genuinely believe that every newspaper and TV and radio news broadcast in the UK is lying to us, in which case I think CCTV is the least of your worries.
There is a deep deated cultural belief that mathematics isn't important
That's hardly unique to the States, and it's hardly a new thing. A lot of my classmates thought that way in my teens, 15-odd years ago (and Christ I feel old saying that!)
I'm not just talking about the under-achievers, either - some of the smarter kids simply didn't see maths as being important. To a certain extent, they're right - I can't think of a single time I've had to use algebra or calculus in order to solve an everyday problem.
Don't get me wrong, I have a degree in physics, but to the average person on the street, anything much beyond addition, multiplication, subtraction and division is simply over-kill. (Unless you happen to believe in learning for the sheer pleasure of it, which I do, but many people don't)
Snoozing while 120db fighter jets are rolling by 25 feet away is definately doable.
Well, that beats me, but I did once fall asleep within a couple of metres of a sound system in a night club. That was after taking half a gram or so of speed, too - boy did I get ripped off...
I was under the impression that sleep is only required by the brain, and that the rest of the body only requires rest. Do you have any sources to support your assertion? (I don't have any to support mine to hand, but I might be able to dig some out later)
Not for me. The issue isn't that I stay glued to my PC, gaming or surfing or whatever; the issue is that I simply neither want nor feel the need to go to bed until significantly later than I should.
Without a PC, I'd just stay up watching TV, or reading, or doing something else (and on occasion, I do just that).