slashdot is now running accolades for DRM crippled movie downloads?
Of course not! They're runing accolades for overpriced DRM crippled movie downloads. For example, compare the download of Walk the Line for $20.00 with a 2-DVD special edition for about the same price.
Attention editors! Please ignore breathless announcements of downloadable media services except in those very rare cases where economic reality is acknowledged.
Basically the FTC is saying that Xanga needs to make sure the kids are smart enough to lie in 2 different places (both by checking the box saying that they are over 13 and entering a fake date of birth), and because they didn't do that they should have to pay a fine.
In other words, Xanga was negligent because they failed to implement a safeguard that is known to be useless. The main purpose of this fine seems to be to allow the FTC to claim that they're doing everything they can to protect children. And, technically speaking, they are!
If all we have left are the "big guys" where is the next revolution going to come from ?
Dude, SGI was not a little guy. Oh, they started out as one — as did Microsoft and IBM — but then they grew into a major player. They started out with simple graphic workstations, but at their peak they absorbed Cray, MIPS, and several other companies, and were making big expensive hardware for major customers. They were one of the big guys. They just weren't very good at that role.
To answer your question: the next revolution will come from the same place all the previous ones came from: the latest crop of little guys.
True. But there are still big chunks of IRIX that have never been open-sourced, and probably never will be. When I worked at SGI back in 1999 (when they were first getting into OS) there were a lot of requests from form SGI people who wanted their pet projects or tools made OS just so they could go back to developing them or using them. They all got the same answer: converting a project to open source is a significant effort, and SGI wasn't going to invest that effort just because somebody wanted the software. That would be especially true now, with SGI's odds of survival not being favorable.
Oh please. The information in question is easily verified. The problem with information gained casually, whether it's from an AC on Slashdot or from somebody you actually know, is that nobody bothers to verify it.
The Internet didn't create BS; it just propagates it more quickly. The problem is not forums like Slashdot, it's the mental laziness of people who prefer truthiness to actual thought.
It's really easy to lose track of that sort of thing in a movie. There are so many details to keep track of! That's why the goofs sections on IMDB are so popular.
I recently saw a stinker of a movie called Angel Eyes. At the beginning of the movie, the hero gets into a car accident and loses his wife and child. Throughout the movie, his trauma is symbolized by the fact that he never drives. He gradually recovers after falling in love with Jennifer Lopez's character. (Never mind that she was the cop who pulled him out of the wrecked car — not exactly a positive association!) Just before the final fadout, the hero gets behind the wheel of Jay-Lo's jeep, symbolizing his recovery, and they drive off together. As the camera lingers on them, you notice that neither of them has fastened their seat belts! Interesting that nobody in the production spotted that.
If you use a program frequently, you leave it open. If you don't use a program frequently, its files will probably have been crowded out of the cache by the time you open it again.
Providing a universal disk cache is one of those hacks that sounds cool, but just doesn't correspond to a real-world use case.
It would seem that you're more into retro games than I am. I don't do arcade-style games — hand-eye coordination issues.
I'm suprised to hear that there are compatibility issues. The fact is that DOS (and its clones, such as FreeDOS) are not really OSs, they're just a think library layer between the application software and the hardware. So probably your compatibility issues have more to do with hardware than your OS.
You might have more luck running old games under DOSBox than on a system booted up with FreeDOS. (That's the only way I've every run FreeDOS.) That system does a very good job of emulating the old hardware you probably don't have. There's a huge list of games that are known to work well with DOSBox.
This is a depressing thread to read - there seems to be a clear majority that think just because it's not immediately useful to them, it must be a waste of time and pointless.
We get those on every story. Not usually a majority though. Labor day?
You're obviously not into retro games. When I want to play Sword of the Samurai, I run it on top of FreeDOS, which runs on top of http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php>DOSBo x, which runs under Windows XP. Or I could just boot up FreeDOS, but that requires that I shut down XP, which is a nuisance.
There's also a lot of people who write embedded applications in DOS or DOS-like OSs. Having an open source alternative to aging, poorly supported closed-source OSs is good news to them.
Aren't "other" cookies supposed to be invisible to a domain application?
Right. But not all cookies from a given web page necessarily come from a single domain. For example, if you browse a page from bluorus.com that contains a graphic served by amazon.com, you'll get cookies from both domains. Often the graphic is a "web bug": a 1 pixel by 1 pixel file whose only purpose is to create a tracking cookie.
Obviously this isn't going to happen unless the web sites you browse have an affiliation with Amazon (or whoever). So you and Jewfro got different results because you browse different web sites.
Note to editors: be more sceptical of scandals reported by users with handles like "Jewfro".
Stingrays are generally non-aggressive and intelligent creatures. They have been called the "pussycat of the sea,"
Something I can attest to first-hand. The Monterey Bay Aquarium has an exhibit where you can pet bat rays.
I know Irwin has a lot of fans. But I always found his personality very hard to take. The fact that he managed to get himself killed by such an inoffensive creature does little to raise my opinion of him.
If you're concerned about energy-wasting appliances, then you probably don't own a fancy plasma display. And if you don't, then a fancy home theater appliance is a waste of money anyway.
Look, if we were football fans, and word came that a professional player had done something evil and been disqualified from the NFL (or whatever it is that they do), then that would be breaking news to us — even though nobody who doesn't follow football would give a shit.
(I do realize that there are entire states where everybody is a football fan. But you get my drift.)
What we are is science geeks, and a bunch of scientists are telling that there are only 8 planets, not the 9 we all grew up with. That's breaking news to anybody who gives a shit. And indeed more non-science geeks seem to give a shit about Pluto's demotion than non-football fans would give a shit about that football player.
I think you're full of shit, but it doesn't matter. Even if you're not, you only need so much memory for that kind of optimization. Having more than you need is useless.
Excuse me? Does it say anywhere in the article that Google is planning to listen in without permission? Or if they do listen in that the sounds will be heard by any actual people, rather than the usual adword software?
People keep attacking Google for doing things that have the potential for violating privacy. (Recall the uproar when they started generating ads based on gmail messages.) The simple fact is that anything you do online has the potential for violating privacy. That's especially true of you're a search engine, but even an ordinary ecommerce or news site has great potential for violating privacy.
If you're concerned about privacy, and you don't want to give up using the internet, then you have to insist that the technology you use is covered by a reasonable privacy policy ("we will not share your email" etc.) and that the people who supply the technology are serious about enforcing that policy. If you think the answer is to not use technology that has potential for abuse, then you should go live in a cave.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course not! They're runing accolades for overpriced DRM crippled movie downloads. For example, compare the download of Walk the Line for $20.00 with a 2-DVD special edition for about the same price.
Attention editors! Please ignore breathless announcements of downloadable media services except in those very rare cases where economic reality is acknowledged.
In other words, Xanga was negligent because they failed to implement a safeguard that is known to be useless. The main purpose of this fine seems to be to allow the FTC to claim that they're doing everything they can to protect children. And, technically speaking, they are!
Yeah, I always thought it was a reference to Elmer.
This is Slashdot! Bad taste == Funny.
Dude, SGI was not a little guy. Oh, they started out as one — as did Microsoft and IBM — but then they grew into a major player. They started out with simple graphic workstations, but at their peak they absorbed Cray, MIPS, and several other companies, and were making big expensive hardware for major customers. They were one of the big guys. They just weren't very good at that role.
To answer your question: the next revolution will come from the same place all the previous ones came from: the latest crop of little guys.
True. But there are still big chunks of IRIX that have never been open-sourced, and probably never will be. When I worked at SGI back in 1999 (when they were first getting into OS) there were a lot of requests from form SGI people who wanted their pet projects or tools made OS just so they could go back to developing them or using them. They all got the same answer: converting a project to open source is a significant effort, and SGI wasn't going to invest that effort just because somebody wanted the software. That would be especially true now, with SGI's odds of survival not being favorable.
Oh please. The information in question is easily verified. The problem with information gained casually, whether it's from an AC on Slashdot or from somebody you actually know, is that nobody bothers to verify it.
The Internet didn't create BS; it just propagates it more quickly. The problem is not forums like Slashdot, it's the mental laziness of people who prefer truthiness to actual thought.
All the buzzwords are completely different!
It's really easy to lose track of that sort of thing in a movie. There are so many details to keep track of! That's why the goofs sections on IMDB are so popular.
I recently saw a stinker of a movie called Angel Eyes. At the beginning of the movie, the hero gets into a car accident and loses his wife and child. Throughout the movie, his trauma is symbolized by the fact that he never drives. He gradually recovers after falling in love with Jennifer Lopez's character. (Never mind that she was the cop who pulled him out of the wrecked car — not exactly a positive association!) Just before the final fadout, the hero gets behind the wheel of Jay-Lo's jeep, symbolizing his recovery, and they drive off together. As the camera lingers on them, you notice that neither of them has fastened their seat belts! Interesting that nobody in the production spotted that.
What can I tell you? The same programs you say won't run on FreeDOS are known to run on DOXBox + FreeDOS.
If you use a program frequently, you leave it open. If you don't use a program frequently, its files will probably have been crowded out of the cache by the time you open it again.
Providing a universal disk cache is one of those hacks that sounds cool, but just doesn't correspond to a real-world use case.
It would seem that you're more into retro games than I am. I don't do arcade-style games — hand-eye coordination issues.
I'm suprised to hear that there are compatibility issues. The fact is that DOS (and its clones, such as FreeDOS) are not really OSs, they're just a think library layer between the application software and the hardware. So probably your compatibility issues have more to do with hardware than your OS.
You might have more luck running old games under DOSBox than on a system booted up with FreeDOS. (That's the only way I've every run FreeDOS.) That system does a very good job of emulating the old hardware you probably don't have. There's a huge list of games that are known to work well with DOSBox.
There's also a lot of people who write embedded applications in DOS or DOS-like OSs. Having an open source alternative to aging, poorly supported closed-source OSs is good news to them.
Right. But not all cookies from a given web page necessarily come from a single domain. For example, if you browse a page from bluorus.com that contains a graphic served by amazon.com, you'll get cookies from both domains. Often the graphic is a "web bug": a 1 pixel by 1 pixel file whose only purpose is to create a tracking cookie.
Obviously this isn't going to happen unless the web sites you browse have an affiliation with Amazon (or whoever). So you and Jewfro got different results because you browse different web sites.
Note to editors: be more sceptical of scandals reported by users with handles like "Jewfro".
As usual, a Slashdotter doesn't grasp the difference betwen "generally useful" and "useful to me".
When is this useful? Only when a program reads the same file over and over. Not a very well-written program!
Something I can attest to first-hand. The Monterey Bay Aquarium has an exhibit where you can pet bat rays.
I know Irwin has a lot of fans. But I always found his personality very hard to take. The fact that he managed to get himself killed by such an inoffensive creature does little to raise my opinion of him.
If you're concerned about energy-wasting appliances, then you probably don't own a fancy plasma display. And if you don't, then a fancy home theater appliance is a waste of money anyway.
Look, if we were football fans, and word came that a professional player had done something evil and been disqualified from the NFL (or whatever it is that they do), then that would be breaking news to us — even though nobody who doesn't follow football would give a shit.
(I do realize that there are entire states where everybody is a football fan. But you get my drift.)
What we are is science geeks, and a bunch of scientists are telling that there are only 8 planets, not the 9 we all grew up with. That's breaking news to anybody who gives a shit. And indeed more non-science geeks seem to give a shit about Pluto's demotion than non-football fans would give a shit about that football player.
Somehow I don't hink IBM or Lenovo had that in mind when they addeded the third button to a Windows-based laptop.
I think you're full of shit, but it doesn't matter. Even if you're not, you only need so much memory for that kind of optimization. Having more than you need is useless.
I would take it as a compliment!
Excuse me? Does it say anywhere in the article that Google is planning to listen in without permission? Or if they do listen in that the sounds will be heard by any actual people, rather than the usual adword software?
People keep attacking Google for doing things that have the potential for violating privacy. (Recall the uproar when they started generating ads based on gmail messages.) The simple fact is that anything you do online has the potential for violating privacy. That's especially true of you're a search engine, but even an ordinary ecommerce or news site has great potential for violating privacy.
If you're concerned about privacy, and you don't want to give up using the internet, then you have to insist that the technology you use is covered by a reasonable privacy policy ("we will not share your email" etc.) and that the people who supply the technology are serious about enforcing that policy. If you think the answer is to not use technology that has potential for abuse, then you should go live in a cave.
"Lighten up" is the asshole's excuse for being an asshole.