Yeah, well I have an ATA CD-RW drive on Linux and cdrecord doens't support ATAPI devices.
Yes it does. Pass "hdc=ide-scsi" along to your kernel, being sure to replace hdc with wherever your CDRW drive is, and it'll be recognized as a generic scsi device. Generic scsi support, scsi emulation support, and scsi cdrom support must be turned on for this to work.
Allow me to relay the following from EHOWA (this is a slightly toned-down version):
What to do if you happen upon a peace rally, to teach them why force is sometimes needed:
1) Approach student talking about "peace" and saying there should be, "no retaliation."
2) Engage in brief conversation, ask if military force is appropriate.
3) When he says "No," ask, "Why not?"
4) Wait until he says something to the effect of, "Because that would just cause more innocent deaths, which would be awful and we should not cause more violence."
5) When he's in mid sentence, punch him in the face as hard as you can.
6) When he gets back up to up to punch you, point out that it would be a mistake and contrary to his values to strike you, because that would, "be awful and he should not cause more violence."
7) Wait until he agrees that he has pledged not to commit additional violence.
8) Punch him in the face again, harder this time.
Repeat steps 5 through 8 until they understand that sometimes it is necessary to hit back. Because if we don't, this is what the world will look like if the Taliban wins -- this and this and this and this.
It causes an increase in known incidents of crime. I.E. more crimes are found out this way. It doesn't necessarily increase the actual crime rate.
I suppose honest people dont mind their affairs being spied on
I consider myself to be an honest person, and I'll be damned if I'm going to give up my privacy. My privacy is very important to me...do not take it away. And no, I am not a criminal. I just value certain principles, one of them being privacy. Yes, I would mind being spied on.
While we're on the subject of AC adapters, here is how one works (I just had a lab practical yesterday in which I was required to build a 120 VAC -> 9 VDC converter):
The AC line is connected to two ends, one positive and one negative, of a transformer. Optionally, if the transformer is center-tapped, the center tap will go to the ground wire in the AC outlet. The transformer merely drops the AC voltage from 120 Vrms to a more manageable value, which is still AC.
On the other side of the transformer, both the positive and the negative terminals of the transformer are connected to diodes (I'm not particularly certain if the type is important, but I used 1N4007 diodes yesterday), which are then connected to the same point. This end of the transformer, which is nearly always center-tapped, has the center tap grounded. It is used as the ground reference on the DC supply.
A resistor is connected in series with where the diodes. For a 9V power supply, this resistance will be around 500 ohms.
What I have described so far is known as a full-wave rectifier. Think of its output as a sine wave with absolute values applied, and the peaks around the target voltage, 9V in this case. The effective voltage at this point is only 9/sqrt(2) = ~6.3 volts due to this.
To smooth out the waveform and keep the voltage constant, we add a capacitor in parallel with the output terminals. For an unregulated 9V DC power supply, a 10 uF capacitor will do the trick. We now have an *unregulated* 9V DC power supply, obtained from a wall socket.
There's no other way to put it. I went through the same experience a couple years ago with their 10 GB hard drives, RMAd it several times, etc. Not a single one of the hard drives they sent me worked. NOT A SINGLE ONE. And even worse is their customer service - I damn near had to take them to small claims court to get my money back.
I just copyrighted all the possible combinations of pulse dialing tones too... ahhahahahhah... you all owe me 0.05 cents per use... I'm rich!! I'm rich!!! ahaahhahahha
Just copyright all pulses, period. That way, for example, if someone causes a 500 Hz tone to be emitted, you'd be owed.05c * (500 Hz) = 25 cents per second. Not too bad if you ask me.
Read the article. Its eat a genetically altered potato, or eat a potato dosed in chemicals.
The choices almost make themselves!
Not exactly. I saw a study on a news journal show recently in which the effects of eating genetically altered food were carefully examined. One would expect there to be no difference, but there was actually quite a big difference. Namely, animals that ate the genetically altered food had a much higher incidence of inflamed stomach (or something close to that) than those that didn't. Mind you, this was in a highly controlled lab environment, so the only possible explanation was the variable in the experiment, namely whether they were eating altered food or not.
Genetically altered food CAN have adverse side effects. Not that it always does, but we should be very wary of tinkering with nature at such a low level.
I really believe we are going to use a nuke before this is all over to show everybody thet they mess with the USA on our own soil at their peril. Check out this from today's "talking heads" on TV (from www.drudgereport.com):
And with all the countries out there that have their own nukes -- especially Middle Eastern countries -- that will be an open invitation to start a worldwide nuclear war.
Nice coming from someone in a so called Christan country. What was that line in the bible, something about "thou shall not judge", but hey lets just ignore that and go and kill as many people as possible in the middle east, that will fix the problem.
The same Bible also contains a passage advocating "an eye for an eye" in terms of punishment for crime.
Doesn't bother me in the least because I really dont have anything to hide.
This is the big debate when it comes to privacy. The assumption that "if you take steps to enhance/enforce your privacy, you must have something to hide" is an extremely dangerous one. The government will abuse this every chance they get, and I for one will not tolerate unwarranted breaches of my privacy. Heck, I even refuse to give my professors my SSN/SID# when they ask for it on assignments that are being handed in.
Something must be said for the "pro" side of this, however. As we are seeing with the WTC investigation, governmental interception of private communications can have its benefits, such as helping to identify those who are responsible for such a terrible incident. In a situation such as this, most everybody would want the government to do whatever needs to be done to track down those responsible.
But where do you draw the line? Do you just let the government have unlimited power to eavesdrop on anything, without regard to privacy (i.e. without regard to the Fourth Amendment)? Although this seems to be the way we're leaning, I as well as many many others would not be willing to take this. OTOH, do you strictly forbid any eavesdropping, or forbid any eavesdropping unless the government had a *very very good* reason? Perhaps this would be too restrictive towards the government.
Going into Afghanistan and killing Bin Laden will not solve anything, and there will be a huge temptation to stop there. We risk turning him into a martyr for his cause, and prompting his supporters to attack again.
What's scary is how highly he is regarded by some. I watched an interview with one of his supporters a few weeks ago, long before the WTC incident, and one of the questions was how certain groups view bin Laden. The answer:
I wonder if the DMCA would apply. My words were copyrighted, and I used encryption to protect that copyright. By breaking it, you are breaking the law to get the "evidence". Hmmm...that might be enough to get the case thrown out.
Nope. Two reasons:
1. The DMCA was made for the big boys (RIAA/MPAA/...). Since their money paid for it, it is theirs. They get to say who can use it and who can't, and there's no way they'd let Joe Consumer use it. Sadly, this is the state we are in.
2. It likely wouldn't apply to the government anyway.
This one would be horrifically hard to enforce. This is just a wild guess, but say that there are 5 million computer users out there that will refuse to install this BS on their systems (actually, there will probably be a lot more). Are the Feds really going to go out and raid 5 million people, just for the sake of enforcing Yet Another Purchased Law? Granted, the way we're going, it could happen one of these days, but the Feds need to wake up and realize how absurd the laws are that they're being bribed^H^H^H^H^H^Hlobbied to pass.
Also, considering the United States government is (right now) boycotting the UN's World Conference Against Racism, it's not an entirely unreasonable charge to level against said government at the moment
There's a reason why they're boycotting that though. As you may have heard, this convention denounces Israel as a racist state (I don't remember the specifics, but that's the main part of it). The US representatives do not agree with this, and they feel strongly enough about the issue that they are willing to boycott the convention. Some other countries are boycotting the convention too because of this, IIRC. I don't know a whole lot about Israel, but I've heard much worse about other countries as far as how they treat outsiders.
Note that you immediately assumed that the raid was probably conducted because of the target's "[p0rn || warez || etc.]" and not because of their "[race || religion || etc.]
Point taken. But the FBI doesn't just choose who to raid at random...do they? *Something* had to have been going on there to get the FBI's attention. As you said, more research is in order here.
Slashdot Mirror
This is not MS trying to inflict a toll on development -- this is MS trying to make money by selling a service
Fair enough, but was the company you were working for going to charge $500 every time they authenticated a financial transaction? I think not.
If they can smack Microsoft around for making Frontpage, then I'm all for it. If I was IBM, I'd do it just to see MSFT squirm...
Scary thought, but doesn't MSFT have a habit of buying out the companies that make them squirm?
The company is still alive, apparently, but not doing much anymore.
Just goes to show you what happens when a company tries to make its living by suing people.
Yeah, well I have an ATA CD-RW drive on Linux and cdrecord doens't support ATAPI devices.
Yes it does. Pass "hdc=ide-scsi" along to your kernel, being sure to replace hdc with wherever your CDRW drive is, and it'll be recognized as a generic scsi device. Generic scsi support, scsi emulation support, and scsi cdrom support must be turned on for this to work.
Allow me to relay the following from EHOWA (this is a slightly toned-down version):
What to do if you happen upon a peace rally, to teach them why force is sometimes needed:
1) Approach student talking about "peace" and saying there should be, "no retaliation."
2) Engage in brief conversation, ask if military force is appropriate.
3) When he says "No," ask, "Why not?"
4) Wait until he says something to the effect of, "Because that would just cause more innocent deaths, which would be awful and we should not cause more violence."
5) When he's in mid sentence, punch him in the face as hard as you can.
6) When he gets back up to up to punch you, point out that it would be a mistake and contrary to his values to strike you, because that would, "be awful and he should not cause more violence."
7) Wait until he agrees that he has pledged not to commit additional violence.
8) Punch him in the face again, harder this time.
Repeat steps 5 through 8 until they understand that sometimes it is necessary to hit back. Because if we don't, this is what the world will look like if the Taliban wins -- this and this and this and this.
Surveillance causes an increase in crime
It causes an increase in known incidents of crime. I.E. more crimes are found out this way. It doesn't necessarily increase the actual crime rate.
I suppose honest people dont mind their affairs being spied on
I consider myself to be an honest person, and I'll be damned if I'm going to give up my privacy. My privacy is very important to me...do not take it away. And no, I am not a criminal. I just value certain principles, one of them being privacy. Yes, I would mind being spied on.
While we're on the subject of AC adapters, here is how one works (I just had a lab practical yesterday in which I was required to build a 120 VAC -> 9 VDC converter):
The AC line is connected to two ends, one positive and one negative, of a transformer. Optionally, if the transformer is center-tapped, the center tap will go to the ground wire in the AC outlet. The transformer merely drops the AC voltage from 120 Vrms to a more manageable value, which is still AC.
On the other side of the transformer, both the positive and the negative terminals of the transformer are connected to diodes (I'm not particularly certain if the type is important, but I used 1N4007 diodes yesterday), which are then connected to the same point. This end of the transformer, which is nearly always center-tapped, has the center tap grounded. It is used as the ground reference on the DC supply.
A resistor is connected in series with where the diodes. For a 9V power supply, this resistance will be around 500 ohms.
What I have described so far is known as a full-wave rectifier. Think of its output as a sine wave with absolute values applied, and the peaks around the target voltage, 9V in this case. The effective voltage at this point is only 9/sqrt(2) = ~6.3 volts due to this.
To smooth out the waveform and keep the voltage constant, we add a capacitor in parallel with the output terminals. For an unregulated 9V DC power supply, a 10 uF capacitor will do the trick. We now have an *unregulated* 9V DC power supply, obtained from a wall socket.
There's no other way to put it. I went through the same experience a couple years ago with their 10 GB hard drives, RMAd it several times, etc. Not a single one of the hard drives they sent me worked. NOT A SINGLE ONE. And even worse is their customer service - I damn near had to take them to small claims court to get my money back.
I just copyrighted all the possible combinations of pulse dialing tones too... ahhahahahhah... you all owe me 0.05 cents per use... I'm rich!! I'm rich!!! ahaahhahahha
.05c * (500 Hz) = 25 cents per second. Not too bad if you ask me.
Just copyright all pulses, period. That way, for example, if someone causes a 500 Hz tone to be emitted, you'd be owed
Giving the finger could run fsck on your active partition...the words are close enough...
Anyone that doubts Microsoft's coding abilities should check out this book.
*hint of sarcasm*
from the penny-pincher dept.
Well, now that we have successfully Slashdotted his site...
Dual processor machines arn't working in series, they're working in parallel. So, the computeing power is not simply added together.
So they're like resistors (in that they add in series but not in parallel)?
Rt = (R1 * R2) / (R1 + R2), so it would run at (2.2 * 2.2) / (2.2 + 2.2) = 4.84 / 4.4 = 1.1 GHz. Damn.
Classic Quake + Software Mode + 4.4GHz = How many hundred fps?
Just think of how bad the bottleneck would be at the video card. Heck, with a config like this, software mode would be better than hardware mode.
McDonald's isn't organic food?
McDonald's isn't food, period.
Read the article. Its eat a genetically altered potato, or eat a potato dosed in chemicals.
The choices almost make themselves!
Not exactly. I saw a study on a news journal show recently in which the effects of eating genetically altered food were carefully examined. One would expect there to be no difference, but there was actually quite a big difference. Namely, animals that ate the genetically altered food had a much higher incidence of inflamed stomach (or something close to that) than those that didn't. Mind you, this was in a highly controlled lab environment, so the only possible explanation was the variable in the experiment, namely whether they were eating altered food or not.
Genetically altered food CAN have adverse side effects. Not that it always does, but we should be very wary of tinkering with nature at such a low level.
I really believe we are going to use a nuke before this is all over to show everybody thet they mess with the USA on our own soil at their peril. Check out this from today's "talking heads" on TV (from www.drudgereport.com):
And with all the countries out there that have their own nukes -- especially Middle Eastern countries -- that will be an open invitation to start a worldwide nuclear war.
Nice coming from someone in a so called Christan country. What was that line in the bible, something about "thou shall not judge", but hey lets just ignore that and go and kill as many people as possible in the middle east, that will fix the problem.
The same Bible also contains a passage advocating "an eye for an eye" in terms of punishment for crime.
What ever happened to We the people, for the people, by the people?
s/people/$$$ and you'll have your answer.
Doesn't bother me in the least because I really dont have anything to hide.
This is the big debate when it comes to privacy. The assumption that "if you take steps to enhance/enforce your privacy, you must have something to hide" is an extremely dangerous one. The government will abuse this every chance they get, and I for one will not tolerate unwarranted breaches of my privacy. Heck, I even refuse to give my professors my SSN/SID# when they ask for it on assignments that are being handed in.
Something must be said for the "pro" side of this, however. As we are seeing with the WTC investigation, governmental interception of private communications can have its benefits, such as helping to identify those who are responsible for such a terrible incident. In a situation such as this, most everybody would want the government to do whatever needs to be done to track down those responsible.
But where do you draw the line? Do you just let the government have unlimited power to eavesdrop on anything, without regard to privacy (i.e. without regard to the Fourth Amendment)? Although this seems to be the way we're leaning, I as well as many many others would not be willing to take this. OTOH, do you strictly forbid any eavesdropping, or forbid any eavesdropping unless the government had a *very very good* reason? Perhaps this would be too restrictive towards the government.
Going into Afghanistan and killing Bin Laden will not solve anything, and there will be a huge temptation to stop there. We risk turning him into a martyr for his cause, and prompting his supporters to attack again.
What's scary is how highly he is regarded by some. I watched an interview with one of his supporters a few weeks ago, long before the WTC incident, and one of the questions was how certain groups view bin Laden. The answer:
"How do Americans view Abraham Lincoln?"
I wonder if the DMCA would apply. My words were copyrighted, and I used encryption to protect that copyright. By breaking it, you are breaking the law to get the "evidence". Hmmm...that might be enough to get the case thrown out.
Nope. Two reasons:
1. The DMCA was made for the big boys (RIAA/MPAA/...). Since their money paid for it, it is theirs. They get to say who can use it and who can't, and there's no way they'd let Joe Consumer use it. Sadly, this is the state we are in.
2. It likely wouldn't apply to the government anyway.
Forget Microsoft. Fear AOL.
Or just wait until they merge (and then you'll REALLY have something to fear).
This one would be horrifically hard to enforce. This is just a wild guess, but say that there are 5 million computer users out there that will refuse to install this BS on their systems (actually, there will probably be a lot more). Are the Feds really going to go out and raid 5 million people, just for the sake of enforcing Yet Another Purchased Law? Granted, the way we're going, it could happen one of these days, but the Feds need to wake up and realize how absurd the laws are that they're being bribed^H^H^H^H^H^Hlobbied to pass.
Also, considering the United States government is (right now) boycotting the UN's World Conference Against Racism, it's not an entirely unreasonable charge to level against said government at the moment
There's a reason why they're boycotting that though. As you may have heard, this convention denounces Israel as a racist state (I don't remember the specifics, but that's the main part of it). The US representatives do not agree with this, and they feel strongly enough about the issue that they are willing to boycott the convention. Some other countries are boycotting the convention too because of this, IIRC. I don't know a whole lot about Israel, but I've heard much worse about other countries as far as how they treat outsiders.
Note that you immediately assumed that the raid was probably conducted because of the target's "[p0rn || warez || etc.]" and not because of their "[race || religion || etc.]
Point taken. But the FBI doesn't just choose who to raid at random...do they? *Something* had to have been going on there to get the FBI's attention. As you said, more research is in order here.