Casinos make a lot of money that can go into taxes or pay a lot of higher ups to keep the government out of placing any real rules on how a Casino must operate.
So as it is, the Casino gets to decide the payouts, whats legal for gambling and whats illegal inside their own house. House rules, you know how it goes.
So yeah, it's not allowed because the Casinos don't want it to be allowed. All a Casino has to do to keep you from getting your winnings is claim you cheated, and the Law will pretty much turn a blind eye. Of course, a Casino doesn't want to do that to everyone who wins, otherwise no one would visit the Casino.
So they crack down on the people who KNOW how to win.
Oh yeah - I don't have any sympathy for the Casinos they've always been stealing for as long as they've been around.
But two wrongs don't make a right, stealing from a Casino does not make you a good guy (Despite how much you may like Ocean's 11).
And making these guys sound like victims is more whats bothering me. They clearly played it like Con-men what with getting Casino technicians to alter the machines.
Well it's a LITTLE more complicated than that... FTFA:
In order to expose the glitch, a special "double-up" feature had to be internally activated. The men persuaded casino technicians to alter "soft" options on the machines, such as volume and screen brightness controls. Such perks aren't unusual for high-rollers, who can wager anywhere from a few hundred to thousands of dollars in one day.
One Meadows employee, who was not criminally charged or accused of wrongdoing, agreed to enable the double-up feature on the machine with the glitch.
Normally, such a feature would allow a player to risk doubling his winnings or potentially losing them all. The double-up feature isn't usually enabled on the machines in part because it's unpopular with most gamblers, who are unwilling to risk large amounts of money.
When the correct sequence of buttons was pushed, the machine displayed false double jackpots. No casino officials noticed because the bogus jackpots weren't being recorded in the machine's internal system.
Throughout April 2009, Mr. Kane frequented Las Vegas casinos, practicing his technique in a "test run," according to authorities, before calling his friend Mr. Nestor in Pennsylvania.
From May 1 to June 15 in 2009, agents said Mr. Nestor joined Mr. Kane in Las Vegas, where the duo allegedly cashed in phony jackpots "over and over again" and perfected a scheme to exploit the same glitch in casinos across the world.
So they noticed a glitch in the system - one that allowed them to get a Jackpot without it being reported or investigated. They then went worldwide with this to get as much money as they could before getting caught.
Now, don't get me wrong, a bug in the system shouldn't be the fault of the player, and definately shouldn't result in Criminal Charges, I'd even say taking back the winnings is a bit harsh though it depends on the scenario (obviously guys exploiting a flaw should give back all the money, a person experiencing the glitch once shouldn't have to give any of it back).
But claiming that they are completely innocent in this scheme sets a bad precedent. Oh, this website didn't secure their Logins for SQL injection, it's not MY fault the series of buttons I pressed resulted in me accessing their database records. Oh, metasploit showed me a new Microsoft zero day exploit, its not MY fault I got admin access to the webserver by simply pressing the correct keys!
TL;DR - Just because the Casino claims that the player won by a glitch doesn't mean the Casino is evil and the player is being ripped off. Yeah, it's not their fault there is a glitch, but if the player repeatedly exploits it instead of reporting it, you have to expect some sort of consequences.
Finally, the Canadians did not burn down the White House, the British did. In fact, it was a British brigade that had fought against Napoleon in Europe under the Duke of Wellington and was then dropped off by the Royal Navy via the Chesapeake. The American attempts to attack Canada never really got anywhere, but they did not go so badly that the Canadians could march through 500 miles of the interior of the US to get to Washington to burn it.
I hate to burst your bubble, but most of it is generally considered a "Canadian Attack" as Canada was still a British Colony at that point. Any Canadian troops were considered British and any British troops operating directly for Canada's interests would also be considered Canadian troops. You wouldn't deny that Canada fought in the World Wars, would you? Even though we were still intermingled with Great Britain?
Canada's laws still had to go through British checks and balances all the way till 1949 - and we didn't gain full access to our own constituion till 1982. We're an incredibly young Country, if you are going to claim that Canada didn't burn down the White House than you can say the 1976 Olympics held in Montreal weren't Canadian at all, but British.
I intended to flip this coin... is the outcome not random?
I believe tibman was asking if it ever seems out of the blue to you specifically, as in you were not expecting a phone call, but received one anyways, specifically from slashdotters.
If you don't want to answer the question, than just say you don't want to answer the question. Otherwise it comes off a bit... cowardly.
But meanings change and *in this case* there is no valid reason to have that word a part of the story. It adds nothing and only detracts from the real message. I see nothing wrong with removing it, and no I don't see that as censorship.
Okay - If it was used to properly reflect the language of the times, then removing it from the story will inaccurately depict history, thereby skewing our view of it.
Either way you look at it, removing the word, for any reason, isn't justified. If the real message is to tell the story, let the word help tell the story. If the real message is to offend people, let it offend people.
This is probably a good reason to prefer parentheses over commas for parenthetical phrases, but for some reason I've never really understood this tends to be discouraged in formal writing. Rewriting the sentence using this punctuation style, it's perfectly clear:
The botnet (dubbed "Kneber" by Alex Cox, principal research analyst at NetWitness) was behind a campaign of fake Christmas e-mails waged two weeks ago against government workers.
Yes, exactly.
When you are talking to a programmer, and this site is literred with them, we eventually start to view the English language syntactically like we would any programming language.
Having a subordinate clause inside a parenthetical clause works fine when they don't use the same identifier. Otherwise they appear mismatched or unclosed.
The botnet, dubbed "Kneber" by Alex Cox, principal research analyst at NetWitness, was behind a campaign of fake Christmas e-mails waged two weeks ago against government workers.
I'm pretty sure they are saying the Botnet was behind a campaign of fake Christmas emails waged two weeks ago, but when you feel the need to interject information twice with commas it gets confusing.
At first glance I thought they might be saying Alex Cox, the principal research analyst, was beind a campaign of fake Christmas emails. To which I thought "Well thats odd, why doesn't the summary say he's been arrested an charged then?"
Even things like having sports teams to love and hate instead of making a big deal of nationality are good things I suppose. They keep the dumb people distracted with shiny things so they have less time to hate other kinds of "different".
That reminded me of something I saw on Television the other day. At the bar, watching the Canada vs Russia World Juniors Hockey Game (being a somewhat nationalistic Canadian its pretty much manditory to watch the big hockey games).
Some Canadian Fan held up a sign they made that said something along the lines of "Canada vs Russia Ice Hockey: The original Cold War!" which got a small chuckle out of me.
And then I thought about it for a little while. I think it's great that the international community has these kinds of sporting events, because as you said, it allows us to vent our frustrations on a meaningless game (from a political perspective) - instead of taking it out on our foreign relations. It's gotten to such a point, where Canada and Russia might have been rivals during the actual Cold War, but now we all can kind of poke fun at the whole thing.
I think Elrous might have been trying to insight the idea that perhaps Canada and Russia or Canada and the US would have better relations if they just forgot the Cold War had happened, or something along those lines. While it might sound novel at first I think he's missing the underlying foundation of the history lessons learned. Think about that little red phone in the Oval Office, that goes straight to Moscow. Would that be around if it weren't for the Cold War, and would it have any relevance if we just forgot it happened? Isn't that phone a sign that learning from history helps improve relations around the world moreso than forgetting they happened?
Perhaps we would be better served by making the very *concept* of genocide or war simply inconceivable.
You can't make a concept inconceivable. That's like the definition of it. By taking off the word Genocide from the idea of purging a race from existance doesn't change the fact that there are some people, in power today, who are still exercising the idea that they can just purge people they don't like.
Saying "We've been better than that" is just being naive and will only lead to being abused by something you couldn't see coming because you didn't know the warning signs.
They start by telling themselves "I am a good person, I can do better" even if they know deep-down that they're lying to themselves. And, quite often, the lie actually BECOMES the reality. Convincing yourself that you're a better person can actually MAKE you better. Why not apply the same principle to society as a whole?
I'm not being a troll here, I'm asking a serious question. Wouldn't we be better off for it?
The problem is that there are also a lot of people who start by telling themselves "I am a good person. I am doing the best I can" - all the while slugging back some McD's and tossing that non-biodegradable cup out the window into a grassy field. Or "I am such a good person. I'm better than those filthy n*gger thieves". Not trolling - there are people who believe that stuff. Believing in self-delusion often leads to arrogance.
In order to be a better person you need to have some reference to be better of. Forgetting genocide, racism, sexism, rapings, killings, wars, etc - tossing all that aside just leaves it open to happen again. Without knowing it happened, and the consequences associated with it, there is no reason it won't just continue. This is like history 101, those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it.
Honestly they need to put it back in there. Who is being offended by this word? African Americans? Let me put it this way: By leaving it in there you help propogate the story of how your people were treated during those times. How will our children know the N word offends you if we don't give the N word it's proper context?
That's presuming the original goal was to care about your users, but when you're an indie developer, you have no users to care about.
There's nothing wrong with you hosting a forum for users to post on. That's where the help and support can be from other players sometimes, where people can often make bug reports without the need of a fancy bug reporting system. Those are typically the ones the developer should be reading.
If you are a game developer, and you are running short of fresh ideas for your game, I have to wonder why you got into game creation in the first place. Honestly more developers, large shops included, need to focus more on making a great game thats fun instead of trying to give people what they want. People don't know what they want. If they got exactly what they wanted, they would never feel the surprise of something great.
If the maintainer of the tool is to be believed, MS has known of this flaw for almost six months and done nothing
In all fairness, bugreport@microsoft.com is just an Exchange mailbox that forwards to gates@microsoft.com, which Bill lost the password to years ago and simply started up bgates@microsoft.com, and forwarded the old address to the new one, and then because his wife was a little untrustworthy she secretly went into Active Directory one day and created an account, Jay Smith, and forwarded Bills new account to jsmith@micrsoft.com and she checks that every other week or so, and of course Bill is no longer really with Microsoft, just a shareholder, so whenever she comes across a bug report she forwards it now to the new actual address, support@microsoft.com, which is actually a mailbox that no one checks regulary but they have an application designed to take in new emails and generate work tickets based on the requests, though it only does the generating of emails once a day. Then of course the IT Manager gets hundreds of these unassigned tickets a day, and he has to sift through them and designate them to the proper Microsoft Technicians who will then fix the bug, however the subject field in the application was only a few characters long and all the Manager could see was "FWD:FWD:FWD:FWD:..." and thought it was another chain message, so he put it in the junk folder.
So really - while I believe the maintainer of the tool probably did try to inform MS of the flaw - I think he might have chosen the wrong email address.
If I want to purchase services from a provider available to me that prioritizes YouTube and Netflix over Torrent traffic, why the heck shouldn't I be able to?
What happens when the only provider in your area is one who prioritizes Torrent Traffic over Netflix and Youtube?
Try to see it from everyone elses perspective - when you've only got 1 or 2 choices, there is no real choice. If both of them choose to prioritize traffic, against your interests, you are left with no alternatives. Too bad, so sad, a neutral net was fun while it lasted? Why are we having such trouble keeping it that way?
If you are going to retort with some statement proclaiming the positives of Capitalism, this is one situation where a Free Market doesn't apply: it is virtually impossible for anyone to produce a competing product: They've monopolized the net. They own the wires. Which wasn't even built by them, it was built with taxpayer money. They paid a pultry sum, assumed control, and avoid spending any money to upgrade it and instead gouge customers.
No really, do you think this would be an issue if everything worked the way you are envisioning it through your rose coloured glasses? If I could just start up an ISP with no traffic shaping, shifting, blocking, prioritizing, etc etc - I would make a TON of money from all the people willing to buy that service, more than half of Slashdot viewers I'm sure.
The problem is - that's not possible. Even if I went and managed to set up this giant multinational organization with buildings all across the globe housing tons of servers, I can't just "plug myself into" the net. I'd still have to run through the backbones of giants like Comcast and their rules will always apply to their equipment.
I thought it was the number of transistors in a chip will double (or more, due to major breakthroughs) every 2 years, which means whatever they had 2 years ago would need to have been doubled. Which, when people asked if Intel would have 1 billion transistors on a 1 inch chip by 2010 - they said "Already done it!"
Someone at NASA isn't making an interesting or valid criticism, they are demonstrating their own lack of humour.
Well perhaps you one of the few people who chuckled when person A says "The Neutrinos are boiling the core of the Earth" and Person B says "That's Impossible!" because you or I were actually smart enough to know that yes it IS impossible. Of course the nice computer graphics they show didn't help either.
They were playing off this already existing ridiculous prophecy that a lot of stupid people believe(d) in order to bolster sales. Day after tomorrow? Same premise, absolutely fine. Tieing it into 2012? They are obviously just aiding in the spread of misinformation. It takes what would have been a good fun disaster movie and made me hate it because I know somewhere, some people walked out of the theatre going "Oh crap, I better stock up the bunker".
The criticism didn't have to be in the movie for it's absurdness in disaster movies, there's a bunch of those and most people enjoy them in good fun. It's when a disaster movie tries to tie itself into some actual physics (Oh no neutrinos!) to explain the problem. It's one thing if they just said the core of the Earth was boiling. I'd be able to take that with a grain of salt. But when they try to tie that into a solar event, with a date that it's expected, its going too far. Godzilla? Yeah I think they explain it as Nuclear Radiation, right? But they don't go and say how the radiation is affecting each individual cell and that it's because a certain species of Lizard with a certain diet is the only one to feel this adverse reaction.
There's a point at which Fantasy TRIES to be science fiction - and THATS where its absurd.
Slashdot Mirror
Casinos make a lot of money that can go into taxes or pay a lot of higher ups to keep the government out of placing any real rules on how a Casino must operate.
So as it is, the Casino gets to decide the payouts, whats legal for gambling and whats illegal inside their own house. House rules, you know how it goes.
So yeah, it's not allowed because the Casinos don't want it to be allowed. All a Casino has to do to keep you from getting your winnings is claim you cheated, and the Law will pretty much turn a blind eye. Of course, a Casino doesn't want to do that to everyone who wins, otherwise no one would visit the Casino.
So they crack down on the people who KNOW how to win.
Oh yeah - I don't have any sympathy for the Casinos they've always been stealing for as long as they've been around.
But two wrongs don't make a right, stealing from a Casino does not make you a good guy (Despite how much you may like Ocean's 11).
And making these guys sound like victims is more whats bothering me. They clearly played it like Con-men what with getting Casino technicians to alter the machines.
Well it's a LITTLE more complicated than that... FTFA:
In order to expose the glitch, a special "double-up" feature had to be internally activated. The men persuaded casino technicians to alter "soft" options on the machines, such as volume and screen brightness controls. Such perks aren't unusual for high-rollers, who can wager anywhere from a few hundred to thousands of dollars in one day.
One Meadows employee, who was not criminally charged or accused of wrongdoing, agreed to enable the double-up feature on the machine with the glitch.
Normally, such a feature would allow a player to risk doubling his winnings or potentially losing them all. The double-up feature isn't usually enabled on the machines in part because it's unpopular with most gamblers, who are unwilling to risk large amounts of money.
When the correct sequence of buttons was pushed, the machine displayed false double jackpots. No casino officials noticed because the bogus jackpots weren't being recorded in the machine's internal system.
Throughout April 2009, Mr. Kane frequented Las Vegas casinos, practicing his technique in a "test run," according to authorities, before calling his friend Mr. Nestor in Pennsylvania.
From May 1 to June 15 in 2009, agents said Mr. Nestor joined Mr. Kane in Las Vegas, where the duo allegedly cashed in phony jackpots "over and over again" and perfected a scheme to exploit the same glitch in casinos across the world.
So they noticed a glitch in the system - one that allowed them to get a Jackpot without it being reported or investigated. They then went worldwide with this to get as much money as they could before getting caught.
Now, don't get me wrong, a bug in the system shouldn't be the fault of the player, and definately shouldn't result in Criminal Charges, I'd even say taking back the winnings is a bit harsh though it depends on the scenario (obviously guys exploiting a flaw should give back all the money, a person experiencing the glitch once shouldn't have to give any of it back).
But claiming that they are completely innocent in this scheme sets a bad precedent. Oh, this website didn't secure their Logins for SQL injection, it's not MY fault the series of buttons I pressed resulted in me accessing their database records. Oh, metasploit showed me a new Microsoft zero day exploit, its not MY fault I got admin access to the webserver by simply pressing the correct keys!
TL;DR - Just because the Casino claims that the player won by a glitch doesn't mean the Casino is evil and the player is being ripped off. Yeah, it's not their fault there is a glitch, but if the player repeatedly exploits it instead of reporting it, you have to expect some sort of consequences.
Finally, the Canadians did not burn down the White House, the British did. In fact, it was a British brigade that had fought against Napoleon in Europe under the Duke of Wellington and was then dropped off by the Royal Navy via the Chesapeake. The American attempts to attack Canada never really got anywhere, but they did not go so badly that the Canadians could march through 500 miles of the interior of the US to get to Washington to burn it.
I hate to burst your bubble, but most of it is generally considered a "Canadian Attack" as Canada was still a British Colony at that point. Any Canadian troops were considered British and any British troops operating directly for Canada's interests would also be considered Canadian troops. You wouldn't deny that Canada fought in the World Wars, would you? Even though we were still intermingled with Great Britain?
Canada's laws still had to go through British checks and balances all the way till 1949 - and we didn't gain full access to our own constituion till 1982. We're an incredibly young Country, if you are going to claim that Canada didn't burn down the White House than you can say the 1976 Olympics held in Montreal weren't Canadian at all, but British.
That article doesn't debunk his in-laws story though.
an intended act can never be random.
Why not?
I intended to flip this coin... is the outcome not random?
I believe tibman was asking if it ever seems out of the blue to you specifically, as in you were not expecting a phone call, but received one anyways, specifically from slashdotters.
If you don't want to answer the question, than just say you don't want to answer the question. Otherwise it comes off a bit... cowardly.
And anyone who spends their time reading slashdot instead of working the shelter downtown is... what?
But meanings change and *in this case* there is no valid reason to have that word a part of the story. It adds nothing and only detracts from the real message. I see nothing wrong with removing it, and no I don't see that as censorship.
Okay - If it was used to properly reflect the language of the times, then removing it from the story will inaccurately depict history, thereby skewing our view of it.
Either way you look at it, removing the word, for any reason, isn't justified. If the real message is to tell the story, let the word help tell the story. If the real message is to offend people, let it offend people.
How many /. users do you think have extra money to spend on this?
If you aren't an underpaid IT worker than you are a student in debt. We don't have any extra money to spend, we're already starving as it is.
Unless you are a Linux Guru, who gets to demand any price he wants for his services and sleeps on piles of money.
So I only need to find 5 million geeks-like-me worldwide who think this is a cool enough idea to donate 100 bucks
Good luck with that.
This is probably a good reason to prefer parentheses over commas for parenthetical phrases, but for some reason I've never really understood this tends to be discouraged in formal writing. Rewriting the sentence using this punctuation style, it's perfectly clear:
The botnet (dubbed "Kneber" by Alex Cox, principal research analyst at NetWitness) was behind a campaign of fake Christmas e-mails waged two weeks ago against government workers.
Yes, exactly.
When you are talking to a programmer, and this site is literred with them, we eventually start to view the English language syntactically like we would any programming language.
Having a subordinate clause inside a parenthetical clause works fine when they don't use the same identifier. Otherwise they appear mismatched or unclosed.
You're supposed to wait at least a week or two before duping something, Taco.
You know the site is going downhill when the editors can't even follow the proper rules for duping articles.
The botnet, dubbed "Kneber" by Alex Cox, principal research analyst at NetWitness, was behind a campaign of fake Christmas e-mails waged two weeks ago against government workers.
I'm pretty sure they are saying the Botnet was behind a campaign of fake Christmas emails waged two weeks ago, but when you feel the need to interject information twice with commas it gets confusing.
At first glance I thought they might be saying Alex Cox, the principal research analyst, was beind a campaign of fake Christmas emails. To which I thought "Well thats odd, why doesn't the summary say he's been arrested an charged then?"
That's the thing though - I've never felt the need for 1 single repository to look for applications. That's what the internet has done for me.
Whenever I want to do something, I Google "How to Do X" where X is what I want to do.
Then if it's available in an application, it'll be listed there.
As for the idea of just impulse App shopping, thats not something I use my PC for.
Even things like having sports teams to love and hate instead of making a big deal of nationality are good things I suppose. They keep the dumb people distracted with shiny things so they have less time to hate other kinds of "different".
That reminded me of something I saw on Television the other day. At the bar, watching the Canada vs Russia World Juniors Hockey Game (being a somewhat nationalistic Canadian its pretty much manditory to watch the big hockey games).
Some Canadian Fan held up a sign they made that said something along the lines of "Canada vs Russia Ice Hockey: The original Cold War!" which got a small chuckle out of me.
And then I thought about it for a little while. I think it's great that the international community has these kinds of sporting events, because as you said, it allows us to vent our frustrations on a meaningless game (from a political perspective) - instead of taking it out on our foreign relations. It's gotten to such a point, where Canada and Russia might have been rivals during the actual Cold War, but now we all can kind of poke fun at the whole thing.
I think Elrous might have been trying to insight the idea that perhaps Canada and Russia or Canada and the US would have better relations if they just forgot the Cold War had happened, or something along those lines. While it might sound novel at first I think he's missing the underlying foundation of the history lessons learned. Think about that little red phone in the Oval Office, that goes straight to Moscow. Would that be around if it weren't for the Cold War, and would it have any relevance if we just forgot it happened? Isn't that phone a sign that learning from history helps improve relations around the world moreso than forgetting they happened?
Perhaps we would be better served by making the very *concept* of genocide or war simply inconceivable.
You can't make a concept inconceivable. That's like the definition of it. By taking off the word Genocide from the idea of purging a race from existance doesn't change the fact that there are some people, in power today, who are still exercising the idea that they can just purge people they don't like.
Saying "We've been better than that" is just being naive and will only lead to being abused by something you couldn't see coming because you didn't know the warning signs.
They start by telling themselves "I am a good person, I can do better" even if they know deep-down that they're lying to themselves. And, quite often, the lie actually BECOMES the reality. Convincing yourself that you're a better person can actually MAKE you better. Why not apply the same principle to society as a whole?
I'm not being a troll here, I'm asking a serious question. Wouldn't we be better off for it?
The problem is that there are also a lot of people who start by telling themselves "I am a good person. I am doing the best I can" - all the while slugging back some McD's and tossing that non-biodegradable cup out the window into a grassy field. Or "I am such a good person. I'm better than those filthy n*gger thieves". Not trolling - there are people who believe that stuff. Believing in self-delusion often leads to arrogance.
In order to be a better person you need to have some reference to be better of. Forgetting genocide, racism, sexism, rapings, killings, wars, etc - tossing all that aside just leaves it open to happen again. Without knowing it happened, and the consequences associated with it, there is no reason it won't just continue. This is like history 101, those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it.
Honestly they need to put it back in there. Who is being offended by this word? African Americans? Let me put it this way: By leaving it in there you help propogate the story of how your people were treated during those times. How will our children know the N word offends you if we don't give the N word it's proper context?
It's an interesting move, and it brings us one step closer to the end of the "PC era."
Does it?
As far as I know, it does nothing new besides offering Mac users a shortcut.
Before, you'd have to Open Up Google and type in "Mac Apps" and then sift through the top 20 ranked pages! The horror!
That's presuming the original goal was to care about your users, but when you're an indie developer, you have no users to care about.
There's nothing wrong with you hosting a forum for users to post on. That's where the help and support can be from other players sometimes, where people can often make bug reports without the need of a fancy bug reporting system. Those are typically the ones the developer should be reading.
If you are a game developer, and you are running short of fresh ideas for your game, I have to wonder why you got into game creation in the first place. Honestly more developers, large shops included, need to focus more on making a great game thats fun instead of trying to give people what they want. People don't know what they want. If they got exactly what they wanted, they would never feel the surprise of something great.
If the maintainer of the tool is to be believed, MS has known of this flaw for almost six months and done nothing
In all fairness, bugreport@microsoft.com is just an Exchange mailbox that forwards to gates@microsoft.com, which Bill lost the password to years ago and simply started up bgates@microsoft.com, and forwarded the old address to the new one, and then because his wife was a little untrustworthy she secretly went into Active Directory one day and created an account, Jay Smith, and forwarded Bills new account to jsmith@micrsoft.com and she checks that every other week or so, and of course Bill is no longer really with Microsoft, just a shareholder, so whenever she comes across a bug report she forwards it now to the new actual address, support@microsoft.com, which is actually a mailbox that no one checks regulary but they have an application designed to take in new emails and generate work tickets based on the requests, though it only does the generating of emails once a day. Then of course the IT Manager gets hundreds of these unassigned tickets a day, and he has to sift through them and designate them to the proper Microsoft Technicians who will then fix the bug, however the subject field in the application was only a few characters long and all the Manager could see was "FWD:FWD:FWD:FWD:..." and thought it was another chain message, so he put it in the junk folder.
So really - while I believe the maintainer of the tool probably did try to inform MS of the flaw - I think he might have chosen the wrong email address.
Make sure its the Gold plated ones with Copper wiring.
If I want to purchase services from a provider available to me that prioritizes YouTube and Netflix over Torrent traffic, why the heck shouldn't I be able to?
What happens when the only provider in your area is one who prioritizes Torrent Traffic over Netflix and Youtube?
Try to see it from everyone elses perspective - when you've only got 1 or 2 choices, there is no real choice. If both of them choose to prioritize traffic, against your interests, you are left with no alternatives. Too bad, so sad, a neutral net was fun while it lasted? Why are we having such trouble keeping it that way?
If you are going to retort with some statement proclaiming the positives of Capitalism, this is one situation where a Free Market doesn't apply: it is virtually impossible for anyone to produce a competing product: They've monopolized the net. They own the wires. Which wasn't even built by them, it was built with taxpayer money. They paid a pultry sum, assumed control, and avoid spending any money to upgrade it and instead gouge customers.
No really, do you think this would be an issue if everything worked the way you are envisioning it through your rose coloured glasses? If I could just start up an ISP with no traffic shaping, shifting, blocking, prioritizing, etc etc - I would make a TON of money from all the people willing to buy that service, more than half of Slashdot viewers I'm sure.
The problem is - that's not possible. Even if I went and managed to set up this giant multinational organization with buildings all across the globe housing tons of servers, I can't just "plug myself into" the net. I'd still have to run through the backbones of giants like Comcast and their rules will always apply to their equipment.
I thought it was the number of transistors in a chip will double (or more, due to major breakthroughs) every 2 years, which means whatever they had 2 years ago would need to have been doubled. Which, when people asked if Intel would have 1 billion transistors on a 1 inch chip by 2010 - they said "Already done it!"
I don't wish for impossible things.
Someone at NASA isn't making an interesting or valid criticism, they are demonstrating their own lack of humour.
Well perhaps you one of the few people who chuckled when person A says "The Neutrinos are boiling the core of the Earth" and Person B says "That's Impossible!" because you or I were actually smart enough to know that yes it IS impossible. Of course the nice computer graphics they show didn't help either.
They were playing off this already existing ridiculous prophecy that a lot of stupid people believe(d) in order to bolster sales. Day after tomorrow? Same premise, absolutely fine. Tieing it into 2012? They are obviously just aiding in the spread of misinformation. It takes what would have been a good fun disaster movie and made me hate it because I know somewhere, some people walked out of the theatre going "Oh crap, I better stock up the bunker".
The criticism didn't have to be in the movie for it's absurdness in disaster movies, there's a bunch of those and most people enjoy them in good fun. It's when a disaster movie tries to tie itself into some actual physics (Oh no neutrinos!) to explain the problem. It's one thing if they just said the core of the Earth was boiling. I'd be able to take that with a grain of salt. But when they try to tie that into a solar event, with a date that it's expected, its going too far. Godzilla? Yeah I think they explain it as Nuclear Radiation, right? But they don't go and say how the radiation is affecting each individual cell and that it's because a certain species of Lizard with a certain diet is the only one to feel this adverse reaction.
There's a point at which Fantasy TRIES to be science fiction - and THATS where its absurd.