People who make a big deal of it suffer from another "disease" where they think it makes them cool to whine about how bad their withdrawl symptoms are.
With all due respect, fuck you. It all depends on physiology and the amount that you used to ingest. Maybe you were used to a few cups of coffee a day, and your body handled the lack well; I was drinking something like two 2-liters a day, and when I stopped cold turkey, I was quite fucked up for about four days. Horrible headaches, complete exhaustion, even trembles.
The rest of us would appreciate you not judging us based solely on your own experience. Thank you.
Actually, no. I agree with the grandparent post: I ACTUALLY WANT a phone that is just a phone. Text display in low-rez, low-power black and white; good sound, good mic, good reception; small size with no moving parts. That's it. Nothing else. Should last a week or more on one charge with light usage.
That is, in fact, what I want. You can show me all the gadget-phones you like, but I just want the above feature-set, please and thank you.
I'm completely serious here, this joke with NEVER get old, not as long as there are those of us who remain who have ever actually seen a "NO CARRIER" message. I salute you, sir!
If you have concerns about Google scanning your email to place unobstrusive, sometimes-actually-useful text advertisements next to your email, then there is a solution. DON'T FLIPPING USE IT! That's all there is too it!
If you like it, use it; if you don't, then nothing is stopping you from not signing up.
Not as clear cut as all you people make it sound, actually; what if the OTHER guy uses Gmail, not me?
What if I'm working from home, and need to email my boss something but the company email is down, and he tells me to send it to his Gmail account? What if I'm answering a personal ad and exchanging messages with somebody, and she asks to move the conversation to email, and she uses Gmail? What if I'm looking for a job, and a headhunter who assures me he's got something for me asks me to send my resume to his Gmail account?
*I* might not use the service, but if other people do and I email THEM, then my emails still end up stored by Google and subject to the very things that kept me from using it in the first place.
(This is all devil's advocate, btw. I think Gmail is all good, all the time.)
Relying on a webmail system for your primary communications just seems foolish.
I follow your point, and mostly agree, but I have two comments:
Webmail is accessable from anywhere, on any machine. I routinely check my mail from random machines wherever I happen to be. To use your example, if I'm in an airport and "desperately need to review" something in my email, I can sit down at a public terminal, slip in a credit card, and be reading my email.
SquirrelMail runs on my server in my closet, which is where my email gets sent to. Private email, only I get to see it, web access. It's the best of all worlds.
I'm surprised the author made no reference to the relative volumes of the mobile phone converstation and the face to face conversations.
article:
Furthermore, the actors conducted half of the conversations at a normal loudness level, whereas the other half were exaggeratedly loud (as measured on a volume meter). The actual content and duration of the conversations were the same in all conditions.
This concept is not without merit. They DO seem to be quite good at this stuff. Sure, they made some great GPUs, but when they started cranking out solid, feature-filled MB chipsets, I sat up and took notice. Could we someday see an all-nVidia machine?
My second thought, however, was that this would probably kill the company. I think CPU design and manufacture is a huge step forward from even GPU and chipset design and manufacture. I think if nVidia entered that arena, it would be a case of 'bite off more than you can chew'.
I go back to the old Unix addage: "Do one thing, and do it well." Well, nVidia's doing a couple things now, but they're still able to do them well. And AMD is kicking ass on the CPU front. I see no real reason for nVidia to compete with AMD; the future looks far more rosy to me with them standing back to back, using both their resources to produce a 1-2-3 combo, CPU-chipset-GPU.
Why is it that people look at a project, which someone else has put a ton of time and effort into, and think they can find flaws in less than a minute. Is your opinion of your fellow man that low, or your opinion of yourself that inflated?
Finally, somebody says this and gets modded up. I've been posting this for years and always get modded as 'troll'. Sir, I salute you.
Maybe one day we'll find a material that reaches a practical amount of efficency for solar cells. In the mean time we need power and fussion and fission are the most practical and cost effective.
Practical? You realize that we've been working on this fusion thing for like forty years now, with another ten until "break even" point? The parent you replied to suggested that we may have spent that time and money developing just the material you mention in your closing sentence, a concept that your post did nothing to refute. "We don't have that material now" does not address "perhaps we should have developed such a material."
Personally I think there is no moral obligation to turn every acre of land over to food production.
RTFA. Half of it was about producing higher-yield crops specifically so we don't destroy natural biodiversity by clearing forests to make them into low-yield farmland.
make 10 times more food and you'll have 10 times more people.
RTFA. It specifically talks about this argument and at least claims evidence that this has not been the case since the huge gains made in crop yields in the 60s.
Technically speaking, I think that actually qualifies for compliance.
I'm confused. The GPL states that you can distribute binary versions of GPLed code provided that you "a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code..." That sounds like exactly what they're doing. Why the "technically speaking" or the "actually qualifies"? It is flat-out full-on compliance.
In fact, all they ACTUALLY have to do is slip a piece of paper into the box that tells people to write to them and they'll have the source code sent to them on a disc, for a nominal fee. That would also be full-on flat-out compliance.
When the user is connected to a multiplayer server, the game acts like a throttled BT client for patches. It could even do a little speed test when connecting to the server to get a feel for the speed of the pipe, then subtract what the game should take, and throttle the BT activity to some percentage of that. Even a trickle adds up over the length of a typical on-line session, and for people with bigger pipes, it's a big win that doesn't affect the gamer at all.
So only the technologically elite should be allowed to put up websites?
No. The point is, it's possible in many ways to set up a web server to not melt in the face of a link from Slashdot or Google. If you can do so but do not, then you can't complain. If you cannot do so... LEARN.
It's not the responsibility of all the other people in the world to check the capabilities of some site they're going to or even linking to. Build your server to survive whatever may come, or resign yourself to deal with whatever may come. If your machine crashes or your bandwidth costs go through the roof... your fault, not mine. Nor Google's. Nor Slashdot's.
Plus all humanity is stuck on one planet. That's bad! There are numerous things which could wipe out the entire race. But put humans on other worlds, and you begin to ensure the race has a future.
Here here! Why isn't this obvious? Aren't we all nerds here? Have we not heard of RAID1?
Despite what idiots say, the GPL has never been tested in court because it's rock-fucking-solid. It cannot be defeated, not really.
This sounds like zealotry, but it's true, isn't it? Say the GPL goes to court; some company getting sued wants to make the GPL invalid. If the GPL wins, then they didn't have the right to use the code without following the terms of the license to the letter. If the GPL loses... then they didn't have the right to use the code at all.
It's like trying to smash hundreds of ants with your fingers. You can catch a few, but the rest are scattering all of the place, and none of them individually amount to anything important.
Maybe. But I say, keep fucking smashing. Again. And again. And again. They may have hundreds, but the only thing stopping us from getting them all is time. Take them down one by one.
I've got more than one friend who claim to be geeks who "can't get through 50 pages of that horrible book." I simply tell them that they cannot be a true geek until they fully grok the wisdom that is Snow Crash.
---
"If you ever find yourself in the presence of a destructive force powerful enough to decapsulate those isotopes," Ng says, "radiation sickness will be the least of your worries."
We have a saying... "Let routers route and servers serve."
By and large, this is, of course, correct. But that's not to say that there aren't some sane roles for a router to play in network and even system security.
Here's a random thing I thought of, tell me if this seems sane. You're running a network of machines; you want to make sure these machines all have a certain patchlevel in order to participate.
So, each machine has software installed that keeps track of which patches are installed on the machine. When the machine starts up, it does the following: contact DHCP/router and get an address. Router goes into 'lockdown' mode for that addy, which means only letting it talk to one server. Machine contacts that server for a patch list. If the machine is up to date, it contacts the router and router turns off 'lockdown' mode. If it's not, software comes up to install patch from the server.
Of course, I've left out some details on a proper implimentation, but isn't this a fairly sane way for a router to participate and cooperate in order to try and keep a network "safe"?
Slashdot Mirror
With all due respect, fuck you. It all depends on physiology and the amount that you used to ingest. Maybe you were used to a few cups of coffee a day, and your body handled the lack well; I was drinking something like two 2-liters a day, and when I stopped cold turkey, I was quite fucked up for about four days. Horrible headaches, complete exhaustion, even trembles.
The rest of us would appreciate you not judging us based solely on your own experience. Thank you.
Doug
Actually, no. I agree with the grandparent post: I ACTUALLY WANT a phone that is just a phone. Text display in low-rez, low-power black and white; good sound, good mic, good reception; small size with no moving parts. That's it. Nothing else. Should last a week or more on one charge with light usage.
That is, in fact, what I want. You can show me all the gadget-phones you like, but I just want the above feature-set, please and thank you.
Doug
I'm completely serious here, this joke with NEVER get old, not as long as there are those of us who remain who have ever actually seen a "NO CARRIER" message. I salute you, sir!
Doug
Christ, you people are short-sighted.
Rather than repeat myself...
Doug
Not as clear cut as all you people make it sound, actually; what if the OTHER guy uses Gmail, not me?
What if I'm working from home, and need to email my boss something but the company email is down, and he tells me to send it to his Gmail account? What if I'm answering a personal ad and exchanging messages with somebody, and she asks to move the conversation to email, and she uses Gmail? What if I'm looking for a job, and a headhunter who assures me he's got something for me asks me to send my resume to his Gmail account?
*I* might not use the service, but if other people do and I email THEM, then my emails still end up stored by Google and subject to the very things that kept me from using it in the first place.
(This is all devil's advocate, btw. I think Gmail is all good, all the time.)
Doug
I follow your point, and mostly agree, but I have two comments:
Doug
Linux server, hosting a domain, running in my closet. And you?
I'm pretty okay with me reading my own mail. <smiles contentedly>
Doug
Doug
This concept is not without merit. They DO seem to be quite good at this stuff. Sure, they made some great GPUs, but when they started cranking out solid, feature-filled MB chipsets, I sat up and took notice. Could we someday see an all-nVidia machine?
My second thought, however, was that this would probably kill the company. I think CPU design and manufacture is a huge step forward from even GPU and chipset design and manufacture. I think if nVidia entered that arena, it would be a case of 'bite off more than you can chew'.
I go back to the old Unix addage: "Do one thing, and do it well." Well, nVidia's doing a couple things now, but they're still able to do them well. And AMD is kicking ass on the CPU front. I see no real reason for nVidia to compete with AMD; the future looks far more rosy to me with them standing back to back, using both their resources to produce a 1-2-3 combo, CPU-chipset-GPU.
Doug
Finally, somebody says this and gets modded up. I've been posting this for years and always get modded as 'troll'. Sir, I salute you.
Doug
My company's proxy blocked the link. Catagory? "Sex"
Another victory for filters!
Doug
Practical? You realize that we've been working on this fusion thing for like forty years now, with another ten until "break even" point? The parent you replied to suggested that we may have spent that time and money developing just the material you mention in your closing sentence, a concept that your post did nothing to refute. "We don't have that material now" does not address "perhaps we should have developed such a material."
Doug
Who modded this up?
RTFA. Half of it was about producing higher-yield crops specifically so we don't destroy natural biodiversity by clearing forests to make them into low-yield farmland.
RTFA. It specifically talks about this argument and at least claims evidence that this has not been the case since the huge gains made in crop yields in the 60s.
Doug
I'm confused. The GPL states that you can distribute binary versions of GPLed code provided that you "a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code..." That sounds like exactly what they're doing. Why the "technically speaking" or the "actually qualifies"? It is flat-out full-on compliance.
In fact, all they ACTUALLY have to do is slip a piece of paper into the box that tells people to write to them and they'll have the source code sent to them on a disc, for a nominal fee. That would also be full-on flat-out compliance.
Doug
When the user is connected to a multiplayer server, the game acts like a throttled BT client for patches. It could even do a little speed test when connecting to the server to get a feel for the speed of the pipe, then subtract what the game should take, and throttle the BT activity to some percentage of that. Even a trickle adds up over the length of a typical on-line session, and for people with bigger pipes, it's a big win that doesn't affect the gamer at all.
Doug
No. The point is, it's possible in many ways to set up a web server to not melt in the face of a link from Slashdot or Google. If you can do so but do not, then you can't complain. If you cannot do so... LEARN.
It's not the responsibility of all the other people in the world to check the capabilities of some site they're going to or even linking to. Build your server to survive whatever may come, or resign yourself to deal with whatever may come. If your machine crashes or your bandwidth costs go through the roof... your fault, not mine. Nor Google's. Nor Slashdot's.
Doug
Just to be pedantic, the correct word would be "bracer". A gauntlet is a glove; a bracer is worn on the wrist or forearm.
gauntlet
bracer
Doug
Here here! Why isn't this obvious? Aren't we all nerds here? Have we not heard of RAID1?
Doug
This sounds like zealotry, but it's true, isn't it? Say the GPL goes to court; some company getting sued wants to make the GPL invalid. If the GPL wins, then they didn't have the right to use the code without following the terms of the license to the letter. If the GPL loses... then they didn't have the right to use the code at all.
It's lose-lose for the company, isn't it?
Doug
Woah, back up there. This 'Jupiter' you speak of, it's a what, now? A planet, here in our solar system? Wow! Please, tell me more!
Doug
Maybe. But I say, keep fucking smashing. Again. And again. And again. They may have hundreds, but the only thing stopping us from getting them all is time. Take them down one by one.
Doug
Case in point: Jack in the Box commercials. If they were compiled on a DVD, I'd buy them.
"Bun is neither meat nor cheese." "Word."
Doug
Funny all by itself
Doug
I've got more than one friend who claim to be geeks who "can't get through 50 pages of that horrible book." I simply tell them that they cannot be a true geek until they fully grok the wisdom that is Snow Crash.
Doug
By and large, this is, of course, correct. But that's not to say that there aren't some sane roles for a router to play in network and even system security.
Here's a random thing I thought of, tell me if this seems sane. You're running a network of machines; you want to make sure these machines all have a certain patchlevel in order to participate.
So, each machine has software installed that keeps track of which patches are installed on the machine. When the machine starts up, it does the following: contact DHCP/router and get an address. Router goes into 'lockdown' mode for that addy, which means only letting it talk to one server. Machine contacts that server for a patch list. If the machine is up to date, it contacts the router and router turns off 'lockdown' mode. If it's not, software comes up to install patch from the server.
Of course, I've left out some details on a proper implimentation, but isn't this a fairly sane way for a router to participate and cooperate in order to try and keep a network "safe"?
Doug