The University I go to issued laptops with XP to everyone and what do I see when I click "start"? A huge cartoony blue thing that takes 1/4 of the whole screen and doesn't have a single shortcut I often use!
Lost and confused, I move the mouse around for minutes like some kind of idiot, looking for some kind of clue to where my friggin' programs are!
Look, I do these things with the start button: Run, Find, Control Panel, Network, Programs. That's five things. Usually I only use the Programs menu. Second to that, Run.
Like I said, I'm usually in the Programs submenu, but now that's extra clicks away and my screen is cluttered with the crap I try so hard to get rid of. Thanks Microsoft.
I changed it back to the original. (But don't get me started on themes...)/rant
wrong - if you read the article, they're not talking about drivers. They're talking about 3rd-party code, which includes apps, add-ons, etc.
I read it. It just says "third pary code" -- and that includes (and is the most likely) drivers. Remember that almost every driver installed on a regular Windows box is third party code.
If I'm not mistaken, the major labels charge the artists (yes, they charge the artists) to pay for: * recording or mastering that was done for the music * artwork on the cd
And, as far as paying the artist whose music they're stealing, they get some 14 cents per album. Does that really bring it up to $12.00 to $18.00?
P.S. What is this suposed promotion and advertising? Would I know if I've ever been exposed to it or is it just buying a place on the top 10?
P.P.S. Do lawyers really do research on the songs?
Hollywood has been making a lot of big-budget crap. The sad thing is they make the money back from one-time viewers who just wanted to know "Is it really worth my money?"
Some losses to piracy might be a good thing. Almost all movie and music pirates are willing to pay for those few jewels that come along in the diaretic flow. If only the good one's make money, maybe they'll only make the good one's.
I have to second this post. (Sadly, no mod points.)
Before MP3's, the only CD I owned was U2's Joshua Tree, which my sister gave to me. I didn't own any more music because I didn't know of anything I liked; MTV doesn't play music, VH1 only plays lists and some shows, the radio has the same twenty songs in a loop from here around the world and back again.
After MP3's came around, I found music that I actually liked and I've now got almost 40 albums paid for. If I can't find music on Kazaa or some other P2P network, where can I go to sample new music I might be interested in?
Music is just in a sad state. The record companies rip off the artists, the media doesn't expose artists, I'm trying to discover some artists and the RIAA wants to sue me for my part.
The best way to increase security is to find he holes first, I agree, but we're not talking about "best ways" -- just helpfull ways.
And you don't seem to understand the OpenBSD example. It's not because the OS is secure that matters; it's that it's both open to scrutiny AND is obscured. The point is that you can have both. You're locked into a false dichotomy./late post
Wait... you saying that since relying on obscurity isn't a good idea that it can't help? You'll need something to justify this.
Look at the post you're replying to: "obscurity is not sufficient for security." Hazaa! You agree!
There's more: "It does not mean that obscurity is not helpful as part of an overall security system." Well, what do you say?
Have a secure OS (say, OpenBSD) and do everything to hide which OS it is. It's open to scrutiny but there's one more hurdle to jump over when attacking. It's not a big hurdle, but it doesn't hurt.
They're just trying to get rid of anyone who won't vote for Bush in the election. Think about who uses these OS's and the slight political slant of their user bases...
Mac - political tilt to Green or Dem. Unix var - tilt to Libertarian, Green, Etc.
It's like conservatives and the environment -- take a look at where the liberals are and where it would be flooded if the oceans rise. You'll have to ask yourself, "Are they trying to kill off the opposition?"
I'm no Bush supporter, but when our major iron competition gets water, electricity and natural gas for free then dump their products here for less than it took to make even with the top three expenses covered, then I don't think we need to question why there are steel tarrifs.
1. I'm unaware (and perhaps uneducated) of anything in the quantum mechanical models of the mind that would require any more particles than what's in the brain. I believe they involve non-locality and action at a distance, but only inside the skull. Perhaps I'm wrong about that. I'll look into it.
2. If we are missing something in our model that we haven't yet observed, it could mean one of two things: 1) It could still work because that aspect isn't important (and if it can't be observed, it can't interact, and thus has no say in the operation of the brain?), or 2) Not work, but provide valuable information on that thing we didn't know about. I think either is great.
Some people say a computer can't think, but a computer can simulate atoms and quantum mechanics. If that's all there is to your brain, then it isn't logically impossible, right?
Even better, there has been progress reverse-engineering brain regions like some auditory or visiual -- giving us the actual algorithms the brain uses. Shouldn't work like that be enough?
P.S. A lot of arguments go like this: Computers use first order logic, we don't, so AI can't work. Haven't there been higher order logics implemented in software?
The biggest problem I see in textbooks right now is just how full of errors they are. After that, they have too many pictures, too much white space and rarely get to the point -- they've got fat that needs to be trimmed.
Check out that link. It's a really good source for what's wrong with textbooks.
Are people complaining about everything on the radio? I hate most of it, but most of it really isn't very good and it's always been like that.
Take a look at some playlists from the 60's. It's almost all crap. After 5, 10, or 20 years go by, the good stuff gets filtered out from the rest and you look back at how great things were; even though, in the end, nothing's changed.
Slashdot Mirror
It's perverse!
/rant
The University I go to issued laptops with XP to everyone and what do I see when I click "start"? A huge cartoony blue thing that takes 1/4 of the whole screen and doesn't have a single shortcut I often use!
Lost and confused, I move the mouse around for minutes like some kind of idiot, looking for some kind of clue to where my friggin' programs are!
Look, I do these things with the start button: Run, Find, Control Panel, Network, Programs. That's five things. Usually I only use the Programs menu. Second to that, Run.
Like I said, I'm usually in the Programs submenu, but now that's extra clicks away and my screen is cluttered with the crap I try so hard to get rid of. Thanks Microsoft.
I changed it back to the original. (But don't get me started on themes...)
According to:
http://www.medterms.com/
The male gonad is the testicle (or testis), located behind the penis in a pouch of skin (the scrotum).
The female gonad, the ovary or "egg sac", is one of a pair of reproductive glands in women.
Byte-wise, most third party code is applications, but notice when I wrote most likely. Drivers are the most likely to crash a system.
wrong - if you read the article, they're not talking about drivers. They're talking about 3rd-party code, which includes apps, add-ons, etc.
I read it. It just says "third pary code" -- and that includes (and is the most likely) drivers. Remember that almost every driver installed on a regular Windows box is third party code.
They don't want single songs -- they want a single ok some from an otherwise crappy album.
If artists were any good nowadays, it'd be different.
What in hell is a quid?
If I'm not mistaken, the major labels charge the artists (yes, they charge the artists) to pay for:
* recording or mastering that was done for the music
* artwork on the cd
And, as far as paying the artist whose music they're stealing, they get some 14 cents per album. Does that really bring it up to $12.00 to $18.00?
P.S. What is this suposed promotion and advertising? Would I know if I've ever been exposed to it or is it just buying a place on the top 10?
P.P.S. Do lawyers really do research on the songs?
ASF files pop up links for me and I'm running WMP6.4 on Win95, so...
Hollywood has been making a lot of big-budget crap. The sad thing is they make the money back from one-time viewers who just wanted to know "Is it really worth my money?"
Some losses to piracy might be a good thing. Almost all movie and music pirates are willing to pay for those few jewels that come along in the diaretic flow. If only the good one's make money, maybe they'll only make the good one's.
You obviously got the joke.
No, you did not.
This music piracy "theft" is different in that any losses are just guesses of intent.
If I download a CD that I wanted to buy and then don't buy it, that's a loss of the value of the sale. I'd say this one's clear cut.
If I download a CD that I wasn't going to buy, then what?
I have to second this post. (Sadly, no mod points.)
Before MP3's, the only CD I owned was U2's Joshua Tree, which my sister gave to me. I didn't own any more music because I didn't know of anything I liked; MTV doesn't play music, VH1 only plays lists and some shows, the radio has the same twenty songs in a loop from here around the world and back again.
After MP3's came around, I found music that I actually liked and I've now got almost 40 albums paid for. If I can't find music on Kazaa or some other P2P network, where can I go to sample new music I might be interested in?
Music is just in a sad state. The record companies rip off the artists, the media doesn't expose artists, I'm trying to discover some artists and the RIAA wants to sue me for my part.
The best way to increase security is to find he holes first, I agree, but we're not talking about "best ways" -- just helpfull ways.
/late post
And you don't seem to understand the OpenBSD example. It's not because the OS is secure that matters; it's that it's both open to scrutiny AND is obscured. The point is that you can have both. You're locked into a false dichotomy.
Wait... you saying that since relying on obscurity isn't a good idea that it can't help? You'll need something to justify this.
Look at the post you're replying to: "obscurity is not sufficient for security." Hazaa! You agree!
There's more: "It does not mean that obscurity is not helpful as part of an overall security system." Well, what do you say?
Have a secure OS (say, OpenBSD) and do everything to hide which OS it is. It's open to scrutiny but there's one more hurdle to jump over when attacking. It's not a big hurdle, but it doesn't hurt.
They're just trying to get rid of anyone who won't vote for Bush in the election. Think about who uses these OS's and the slight political slant of their user bases...
Mac - political tilt to Green or Dem.
Unix var - tilt to Libertarian, Green, Etc.
It's like conservatives and the environment -- take a look at where the liberals are and where it would be flooded if the oceans rise. You'll have to ask yourself, "Are they trying to kill off the opposition?"
I'm no Bush supporter, but when our major iron competition gets water, electricity and natural gas for free then dump their products here for less than it took to make even with the top three expenses covered, then I don't think we need to question why there are steel tarrifs.
What I'm thinking is:
1. I'm unaware (and perhaps uneducated) of anything in the quantum mechanical models of the mind that would require any more particles than what's in the brain. I believe they involve non-locality and action at a distance, but only inside the skull. Perhaps I'm wrong about that. I'll look into it.
2. If we are missing something in our model that we haven't yet observed, it could mean one of two things: 1) It could still work because that aspect isn't important (and if it can't be observed, it can't interact, and thus has no say in the operation of the brain?), or 2) Not work, but provide valuable information on that thing we didn't know about. I think either is great.
I took a look around and found some quantum simulators: http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~jwallace/simtable.htm
Some people say a computer can't think, but a computer can simulate atoms and quantum mechanics. If that's all there is to your brain, then it isn't logically impossible, right?
Even better, there has been progress reverse-engineering brain regions like some auditory or visiual -- giving us the actual algorithms the brain uses. Shouldn't work like that be enough?
P.S. A lot of arguments go like this: Computers use first order logic, we don't, so AI can't work. Haven't there been higher order logics implemented in software?
Size vs population.
The biggest problem I see in textbooks right now is just how full of errors they are. After that, they have too many pictures, too much white space and rarely get to the point -- they've got fat that needs to be trimmed.
Check out that link. It's a really good source for what's wrong with textbooks.
And how many of our enemies will send medics or divert fighters to help injured soldiers?
I think almost none.
Are people complaining about everything on the radio? I hate most of it, but most of it really isn't very good and it's always been like that.
Take a look at some playlists from the 60's. It's almost all crap. After 5, 10, or 20 years go by, the good stuff gets filtered out from the rest and you look back at how great things were; even though, in the end, nothing's changed.
Not a person exists that doesn't insult someone, either to their face or behind their back
It's not hard to imagine. I think I only insulted a student once while in high school (it was well-deserved and face to face) and a teacher once.
But, thought badly of or acted against another is a whole different story.
That's exactly the thing.
He goes off on VHS piracy causing losses, but forgets that VHS multiplied his profits.