I'm pretty sure he's wrong here. We are moving towards a dystopia where jobs have to be created out of thin air, and it's been occurring for the last decade as we move toward a Brazil-like state of being. Take the financial industry, first there was the business side and compliance, but who watches compliance? Now we have internal audit watching compliance, risk management, regulatory management, business supervision, financial risk, etc. etc. Watchers watching watchers watching watchers. As the governments pass more and more regulations, this will only get worse. And the people in their positions, afraid of losing their jobs, will blind themselves to how futile and meaningless their existence really is.
Also, governments use social networks for control. He's got to be blind to think social networks are liberating.
Actually, I'm going to get one of these.... not for any of the reasons mentioned above, but because the native chromecast does not support WPA2 enterpise. For this reason, I had to add a WPA2 PSK AP to my network just for the chromecast. A wired connection would preclude this work around.
I totally concur, I live in New York and have never picked up a metro. While I would regret giving money to that Socialist Rag, the New York Times; it would be money much better spent and they would come much closer to their goal of increasing awareness of OoO. The only people who I see with the Metro are Bums (their target audience???) who pick them up for free and try to sell them to tourists who don't know any better.
Actually both statements are accurate. If the diver rises while exhaling, the increase in air volume due to reduced pressure IS released, however, if you HOLD your breath, you will suffer from what those of us in the biz refer to as "Lung Pop"
In other related news; brought to light by The Open Group's action toward Apple's use of the word Unix, Unisys has decided to sue Apple Computer Corp. for $1 billion for using their proprietary GIF format on their UNIX website without paying proper royalties.
I just noticed they added a link to the opinion! Either the lawyer for St. Louis must have been completely incompetent, or the drafting of the ordinance must have been so poor as to make it impossible to hold up to constitutional scrutiny. I can't believe they actually tried to eek out an "obscene as to minors" argument. bizzare.
Obscenity is a 3 prong test:
1) Must be patantly offensive to local community standards (this is also the definition of indecent)
2) Must appeal to the prurient interest (i.e. the sexual component)
3) must lack any scientific, literary or social value.
There is no such thing as "obscene to minors" obscenity is obscenity if it fits into this test. In order to to regulate distribution to minors, the material only needs to be classified as indecent. (i.e., the first prong). This was the (just) basis behind the CDA (which was not struck down for the same reason, but was struck down for not being technically feasible, overly broad (i.e., affected too many people outside of the intended class), and some language was construed as too vague.) I'm pretty sure I'm not missing the point, I just want to actually read the opinion since the media did such a "fabulous" job summarizing the issues!
Reason I'm asking is that from the press article, it appears that Judge Limbaugh doesn't know what he is talking out. The article says that Limbaugh stated that the ordinance does not hold up to constitutional scrutiny for first amendment reasons, while he does say that obscenity is one exception to first amendment freedoms. This is all true, but nowhere in the article does it discuss the legal definition of indecent, and how indecent material, while it still falls within the rubrick of first amendment freedoms, can be specifically regulated when dealing with minors. This is why minors are not allowed in Topless Bars, regardless of whether alcohol is served, and why the FCC can regulate when indecent materials can be shown on television (from 10:00pm to 6:00am). Makes no sense to me. I'm not saying I'm not happy that the kids can buy their video games now, I just don't understand the rationale, legally.
Just an FYI, the protocol for digital output over coax or optical that the creative speakers as was as audigy and audigy2, etc. all use 5.1 PCM. This is separate and distinct from linear PCM and AC-3. 5.1 PCM is an older protocol that was used on early discreet surround sound systems. Dolby then came along with AC-3 which became the industry standard. There are probably licensing issues which is why creative chose not to use AC-3. All surround sound GENERATED BY THE PC will be sent in this format, which is why, when you hook your audigy up to your surround stereo you will most likely only get the front two channels (your stereo will interpret the signal to be linear PCM because it doesn't understand 5.1 PCM) You will be able to play digital surround dvds, because the signal is not created by the computer, but rather simply passed from the dvd through the SPDIF connector into your stereo where it is decoded into the 6 separate channels. As I mentioned earlier all the Creative speaker systems can understand 5.1 PCM, so they will work properly with the audigy2. In addition, you may find that a few very old and/or very expensive surround sound receivers can handle 5.1 PCM (very old as in before AC-3 became the standard and very expensive as in you pay enough, you'll get something that can handle every type of digital format under the sun) ANyway, just thought that was of interest to some.
I have no idea why they issued a press release on the and why a motion for summary judgment is newsworthy... EVERYBODY asks for summary judgment, no matter how unlikely it seems that it will be granted. It's a matter of course in litigation. It's rarely granted, but ya gotta try, just in case it is.
I find it amusing that the author chooses to berate the website owners who choose to support only IE, "thus excluding 25% of their potential customers", while at the same time he says it's a waste of money to have backward compatability. If web sites were not backward compatable, they would be "excluding X% of their customers" who didn't run the latest version of the browser, or couldn't due to legacy hardware restrictions, etc.
You know, I was thinking.... maybe it's within their agenda to release poor insecure applications. Everyone hates M$, and so goes out of their way to find security flaws in their programs... so they don't have to.
Think about how much money they save not having to security test their products, cuz they know that the moment it's released, it's gonna be pounded on by all the Microsoft haters. Sure, they pay the coders to fix the problems that are released in the press and submitted to them, but testing is a HUGE expense for software companies.
They have a huge market share, and are pretty locked in to the corporate desktop... do you know how much proprietary middleware there is in the corporate world for MS Word and Excel?? And large corporations, where M$ gets most of the cash, never upgrade right away, they wait until the kinks are worked out (usually a couple years - Certain parts of the NASD was still using Windows 95 in 2000!). Thus all the individual users and hackers have already pounded the crap out of the software for them.
All I'm saying is, it may be purposeful? Thoughts??
This is a bit off topic, but regarding the RIAA and DoS attacks, and the recent/. article about the RIAA trying indemnify themselves from damages resulting from hacking into computers.. I query whether anyone has been out on Gnutella lately and noticed all the 1k files, the names of which exactly match the query entered. I always assumed that these were viruses, porn site ads, etc. I wonder if the RIAA have gnutella servers out there trying to cripple, create security breaches, etc on the machines of people violating copyright by trading mp3s, movies, etc. Does anyone wanna load up gnut and do some detective work???
I know this may sound really strange... but I don't really like either KDE or Gnome. I find that they are both huge, have a lot of bugs, slow down my machine significantly, and pretty much reduce the strengths of linux down to where it looks, feels and acts like M$ Windows. (although I have to admit that KDE seemed a little better to me than Gnome in the areas of functionality, efficiency, stability) I use Afterstep and have abosultely no problems. It's really fast, beautiful, easy to configure, has great features, and is very intuitive (at least to me).
What I am trying to say here, is everyone is talking like there are only two desktop choices for linux, there are a lot more out there in constant development that should not be overlooked and considered when choosing your desktop. I understand that this is a debate between two desktops which very similar goals and objectives, but remember that your goals and objectives may not mirror those of either the gnome or kde teams.
Considering the facts that: 1) to date, linux has been most financially profitable with corporations as a server operating system, 2) Corel has been investing a large amount of resources in enhancing linux as a desktop OS, and 3) a large percentage of the targeted community is non-corporate and used to getting office applications (e.g., WordPerfect Personal Edition, Star Office, KOffice, and the Gnome Office Suite) for little or no cost; is there any concern that the WordPerfect Office 2000 suite for linux will be financially unsuccessful due to the fact that personal users of linux, used to getting software for free, will be unable/unwilling to spend hundreds of dollars on an office suite? (that being said, I plan on buying it:D )
Hey, speaking of honorary degrees, does anyone else get those annoying spam e-mails selling "prestigious degrees based on life experiences" from non-accredited universities. I've gotten at least 20 of those e-mails in the past 6 months. Four years of college, three years of graduate school, and they think I need more degrees?!?! argh. Actually, I was kinda thinking about going for that L.L.M. hmmmmmmm.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm pretty sure he's wrong here. We are moving towards a dystopia where jobs have to be created out of thin air, and it's been occurring for the last decade as we move toward a Brazil-like state of being. Take the financial industry, first there was the business side and compliance, but who watches compliance? Now we have internal audit watching compliance, risk management, regulatory management, business supervision, financial risk, etc. etc. Watchers watching watchers watching watchers. As the governments pass more and more regulations, this will only get worse. And the people in their positions, afraid of losing their jobs, will blind themselves to how futile and meaningless their existence really is.
Also, governments use social networks for control. He's got to be blind to think social networks are liberating.
That's unbelievable...
I agree with everything you've said (except I don't really think his UID is very low).
Actually, I'm going to get one of these.... not for any of the reasons mentioned above, but because the native chromecast does not support WPA2 enterpise. For this reason, I had to add a WPA2 PSK AP to my network just for the chromecast. A wired connection would preclude this work around.
Otherwise you end up trying to cram extra requirement into a tool which wasn't designed for it.
Ironic, considering this statement was made in a systemd thread....
I totally concur, I live in New York and have never picked up a metro. While I would regret giving money to that Socialist Rag, the New York Times; it would be money much better spent and they would come much closer to their goal of increasing awareness of OoO. The only people who I see with the Metro are Bums (their target audience???) who pick them up for free and try to sell them to tourists who don't know any better.
Actually both statements are accurate. If the diver rises while exhaling, the increase in air volume due to reduced pressure IS released, however, if you HOLD your breath, you will suffer from what those of us in the biz refer to as "Lung Pop"
They could merge with a Japanese Telco and call themselves Sco-Do-Co-Mo!
Thank god, it's about time! The current Ipods are so bulky and unwieldly, I can't believe apple even introduced them!
In other related news; brought to light by The Open Group's action toward Apple's use of the word Unix, Unisys has decided to sue Apple Computer Corp. for $1 billion for using their proprietary GIF format on their UNIX website without paying proper royalties.
I just noticed they added a link to the opinion! Either the lawyer for St. Louis must have been completely incompetent, or the drafting of the ordinance must have been so poor as to make it impossible to hold up to constitutional scrutiny. I can't believe they actually tried to eek out an "obscene as to minors" argument. bizzare.
Obscenity is a 3 prong test:
1) Must be patantly offensive to local community standards (this is also the definition of indecent)
2) Must appeal to the prurient interest (i.e. the sexual component)
3) must lack any scientific, literary or social value.
There is no such thing as "obscene to minors" obscenity is obscenity if it fits into this test. In order to to regulate distribution to minors, the material only needs to be classified as indecent. (i.e., the first prong). This was the (just) basis behind the CDA (which was not struck down for the same reason, but was struck down for not being technically feasible, overly broad (i.e., affected too many people outside of the intended class), and some language was construed as too vague.) I'm pretty sure I'm not missing the point, I just want to actually read the opinion since the media did such a "fabulous" job summarizing the issues!
Reason I'm asking is that from the press article, it appears that Judge Limbaugh doesn't know what he is talking out. The article says that Limbaugh stated that the ordinance does not hold up to constitutional scrutiny for first amendment reasons, while he does say that obscenity is one exception to first amendment freedoms. This is all true, but nowhere in the article does it discuss the legal definition of indecent, and how indecent material, while it still falls within the rubrick of first amendment freedoms, can be specifically regulated when dealing with minors. This is why minors are not allowed in Topless Bars, regardless of whether alcohol is served, and why the FCC can regulate when indecent materials can be shown on television (from 10:00pm to 6:00am). Makes no sense to me. I'm not saying I'm not happy that the kids can buy their video games now, I just don't understand the rationale, legally.
Just an FYI, the protocol for digital output over coax or optical that the creative speakers as was as audigy and audigy2, etc. all use 5.1 PCM. This is separate and distinct from linear PCM and AC-3. 5.1 PCM is an older protocol that was used on early discreet surround sound systems. Dolby then came along with AC-3 which became the industry standard. There are probably licensing issues which is why creative chose not to use AC-3. All surround sound GENERATED BY THE PC will be sent in this format, which is why, when you hook your audigy up to your surround stereo you will most likely only get the front two channels (your stereo will interpret the signal to be linear PCM because it doesn't understand 5.1 PCM) You will be able to play digital surround dvds, because the signal is not created by the computer, but rather simply passed from the dvd through the SPDIF connector into your stereo where it is decoded into the 6 separate channels. As I mentioned earlier all the Creative speaker systems can understand 5.1 PCM, so they will work properly with the audigy2. In addition, you may find that a few very old and/or very expensive surround sound receivers can handle 5.1 PCM (very old as in before AC-3 became the standard and very expensive as in you pay enough, you'll get something that can handle every type of digital format under the sun) ANyway, just thought that was of interest to some.
l8a,
th0th
I have no idea why they issued a press release on the and why a motion for summary judgment is newsworthy... EVERYBODY asks for summary judgment, no matter how unlikely it seems that it will be granted. It's a matter of course in litigation. It's rarely granted, but ya gotta try, just in case it is.
I find it amusing that the author chooses to berate the website owners who choose to support only IE, "thus excluding 25% of their potential customers", while at the same time he says it's a waste of money to have backward compatability. If web sites were not backward compatable, they would be "excluding X% of their customers" who didn't run the latest version of the browser, or couldn't due to legacy hardware restrictions, etc.
th0th
You know, I was thinking.... maybe it's within their agenda to release poor insecure applications. Everyone hates M$, and so goes out of their way to find security flaws in their programs... so they don't have to.
Think about how much money they save not having to security test their products, cuz they know that the moment it's released, it's gonna be pounded on by all the Microsoft haters. Sure, they pay the coders to fix the problems that are released in the press and submitted to them, but testing is a HUGE expense for software companies.
They have a huge market share, and are pretty locked in to the corporate desktop... do you know how much proprietary middleware there is in the corporate world for MS Word and Excel?? And large corporations, where M$ gets most of the cash, never upgrade right away, they wait until the kinks are worked out (usually a couple years - Certain parts of the NASD was still using Windows 95 in 2000!). Thus all the individual users and hackers have already pounded the crap out of the software for them.
All I'm saying is, it may be purposeful? Thoughts??
This is pretty funny
This is a bit off topic, but regarding the RIAA and DoS attacks, and the recent /. article about the RIAA trying indemnify themselves from damages resulting from hacking into computers.. I query whether anyone has been out on Gnutella lately and noticed all the 1k files, the names of which exactly match the query entered. I always assumed that these were viruses, porn site ads, etc. I wonder if the RIAA have gnutella servers out there trying to cripple, create security breaches, etc on the machines of people violating copyright by trading mp3s, movies, etc. Does anyone wanna load up gnut and do some detective work???
Hmmmm, sounds like we may have a conspiracy on our hands.... I wonder if there may have been some money flowing from Billy boy to the bushes?
I know this may sound really strange... but I don't really like either KDE or Gnome. I find that they are both huge, have a lot of bugs, slow down my machine significantly, and pretty much reduce the strengths of linux down to where it looks, feels and acts like M$ Windows. (although I have to admit that KDE seemed a little better to me than Gnome in the areas of functionality, efficiency, stability) I use Afterstep and have abosultely no problems. It's really fast, beautiful, easy to configure, has great features, and is very intuitive (at least to me).
What I am trying to say here, is everyone is talking like there are only two desktop choices for linux, there are a lot more out there in constant development that should not be overlooked and considered when choosing your desktop. I understand that this is a debate between two desktops which very similar goals and objectives, but remember that your goals and objectives may not mirror those of either the gnome or kde teams.
K
That's funny, I thought it was 42?
Considering the facts that: 1) to date, linux has been most financially profitable with corporations as a server operating system, 2) Corel has been investing a large amount of resources in enhancing linux as a desktop OS, and 3) a large percentage of the targeted community is non-corporate and used to getting office applications (e.g., WordPerfect Personal Edition, Star Office, KOffice, and the Gnome Office Suite) for little or no cost; is there any concern that the WordPerfect Office 2000 suite for linux will be financially unsuccessful due to the fact that personal users of linux, used to getting software for free, will be unable/unwilling to spend hundreds of dollars on an office suite? (that being said, I plan on buying it :D )
He prolly means he's running the linux box as a samba or Netware file server in his corporate intranet. Then there's no need to run IPv4. =)
Hey, speaking of honorary degrees, does anyone else get those annoying spam e-mails selling "prestigious degrees based on life experiences" from non-accredited universities. I've gotten at least 20 of those e-mails in the past 6 months.
Four years of college, three years of graduate school, and they think I need more degrees?!?! argh. Actually, I was kinda thinking about going for that L.L.M. hmmmmmmm.