Well, no. See, something a lot of people forget is that in order to digitally copy a book it must first be digitized, which is a daunting task for the average person with a scanner, OCR or not. Are you going to take apart a book, scan each page, then put them into a pdf file? Didn't think so. It's a far stretch from ripping songs from a CD. --
Well, I don't think there is much value in making a machine that can print out the same titles that you can get from your local B&N (or online, for that matter), because those books (they mention Stephen King's Dreamcatcher) are at least somewhat popular and available (save remote/country areas, where this machine could be used for that purpose).
Where I think the most important use comes in is in the opportunities this opens up for Indy writers and zine publishers. This way, seemingly anyone can get a "professional" looking hardcopy of their own material, whereas previously they would be confined to the copying machine at Staples. --
I have a bunch of rackmount equipment, and not one rack. Why? I just never saw the need. My rackmount switch is lying vertically against my router. A rackmount server can fit on a shelf.
It's really more compact (though maybe not as neat) to put rackmounted stuff wherever you have a niche for them, rather than setting aside an entire block of space. --
Who cares if they "support" linux? Just call them up and ask them the basics you need to connect (protocol, addresses, etc) and you should be on your way. Tell them you're running Windows if you must. What you do with the information you get is then up to you, but that's the way it's always been with non-windows/mac operating systems and ISPs. Do you call up Earthlink and ask them how to setup minicom? --
Isn't the whole point of being anonymous to decrease you accountability?
Erm, no. He clearly states that his purpose is to promote open discussion, and that if you try to exploit his services by making death threats and such, then you will be held accountable. How else can you protect yourself against the idiots on Usenet? --
I'm with ZDnet. We're conducting a survey to discover the hidden meanings behind a person's password and what it reveals about that person. Please post your password as a reply to this thread. It's for science.
Version number inflation is a really stupid concept to those who know what they are doing. But since when did that mean anything? Very few people grasp the concept that just because something has a higher version number does not mean it is more dependable or bug-free (*COUGH*Mac OS X*cough*).
In particular, this reminds me of when Slackware decided to jump to version 7 from 4 just to keep up with certain other distros when Linux was becoming popular.
Idiocy never ceases to amaze and influence. Then again, the folks in Redmond are seemingly above numerical versioning after 3.11. First Windows 95, then 98, then 98B (ooooh), then ME/2K, and after that I guess they decided to switch to something other than the year (people may start noticing how much they are being fucked over if they are reminded of the present year by looking at their boot screen) and now we have XP. After that.... XP2? XIP? LMNOP? XYZ?
Well, give Disney a little credit for The Little Mermaid and Aladdin, after all, those were original stories, right?,
The Little Mermaid, maybe. Aladdin, was "lifted" from Arabian folklore. Disney in reality has came up with little "original" material since Mickey Mouse. Disney's animations are usually just re-tellings of history or previous works (ahem, Hunchback of Notre Dame?). A good site on the subject of the "Disneyfication" of history is here. --
Every paragraph was about how microsoft could afford to take over virtually every section of the market, and build this disguisting empire.
This really makes me want to cry. Or kidnap bill gates and staple stuffed Tux dolls to his forehead.
What disgusts me the most, was that stupid reference to the Ali boxing match. Here's to taking something way out of context and fucking it up the ass till it bleeds your name.
Well, it seems like a similar case to that of Passport.
But regardless, is this really a bad thing? If you are using their servers and bandwidth, then why shouldn't they be allowed to set forth whatever policies they want? If you don't like it, don't use it. Why is this such a hard concept? --
So, I go to: http://www.unite-and-resist.org/0-997B-1047-1-100- 0-A.html as mentioned in the article, and decided to look at the parent site. Seems like unite-and-resist.org is against AI, but then again looking closer I can't figure out if this site is serious or not. Could be just a sarcastic statement, or it just be some freak ranting (not that there's anything wrong with that, mind you).
Well, you could burn a boot CD, witch would contain all the neccisary files to "run" the system, and then you will indeed be running that OS (although a system without connectivity is hardly a system at all). Keep in mind that you can fit 650 to 700 MB on a CD-R, which is more than enough room to contain your kernel, X, apps, etc.
Or, if you want a more usefull system, you could tell the boot CD to access a NFS on your LAN via the DC's ethernet adapter. --
it will just take time and resources before someone will come up with a way to crack it on the fly
Uh huh.
Lets see, how long has the distributed.net project to crack RC5-64 been going on for? And they have a tremendous amount of computing power at their hands.
I'm not saying it _can't_ be cracked, I'm just stating that it's not as simple as waiting around a few months while your computer covers the keyspace. --
Well, yes, you could take the digital signal, put it in your TV, and take the analog out from the TV and plug it into a VCR (or TiVo, if you're so inclined), but that's not the point. If you payed all that money for digital television, then you would want to record that great digital signal and not an analog conversion of it. Going through a D/A conversion introduces undesirable loss, and therefore would undermine the purpose of getting the digital equipment/service in the first place. --
Well, I'm more familiar with Q2 (i can't even count how many days i deprived myself of _any_ sleep because i wanted to play "one more map" of CTF or Lith Rail-Only), so I'll use that as an example.
If you're coming up on someone from behind them, and all of a sudden you see them spin around on their axis and fire dead-on (or some other humanly impossible feat), then there are two possibilities: 1) he's cheating 2) he's lucky. If it happens more than once or twice, it's the former.
However, most of the bots I've seen are so poorly designed that just watching them move is a sign. Especially when you notice railgun slugs coming from their back and grenades popping out of nowhere.
If you are just really good, and don't want to be accoused of cheating, find some equal competition. I guess it's a double edged sword no matter how you look at it. --
In a game like Quake II, the ability to see through walls would hardly give you any advantage, because it comes down to your ability to move fast and aim accurately. However, in a game like Counter-Strike, a patch such as the one mentioned above could win you the game.
Anyone who's ever played CS knows the intensity of crouching behind a box, hiding behind a corner or ducking in a vent, waiting to make your move. If your enemy could just look up and see someone waiting in the vents, why not jump in behind the enemy and blow his head off?
Never the less, cheating in any form in a multiplayer game is not only rude and unfair, but you _will_ be found out, and when that happens, you are immediatly discredited. Just try to use a cheat patch or auto-aiming script for more than one round before someone yells "[your name here] is a BOT!!!". Then, hopefully someone in the room has administrative privlidges, and can ban the cheater. Or there could be a voting system in place to kick the cheater (like there is in CS). This is really the only way to stop cheating. It is impossible to prevent, but easy to stop with the right methods.
Slashdot Mirror
Now we can copy books with ease.
Well, no. See, something a lot of people forget is that in order to digitally copy a book it must first be digitized, which is a daunting task for the average person with a scanner, OCR or not. Are you going to take apart a book, scan each page, then put them into a pdf file? Didn't think so. It's a far stretch from ripping songs from a CD.
--
Well, I don't think there is much value in making a machine that can print out the same titles that you can get from your local B&N (or online, for that matter), because those books (they mention Stephen King's Dreamcatcher) are at least somewhat popular and available (save remote/country areas, where this machine could be used for that purpose).
Where I think the most important use comes in is in the opportunities this opens up for Indy writers and zine publishers. This way, seemingly anyone can get a "professional" looking hardcopy of their own material, whereas previously they would be confined to the copying machine at Staples.
--
I have a bunch of rackmount equipment, and not one rack. Why? I just never saw the need. My rackmount switch is lying vertically against my router. A rackmount server can fit on a shelf.
It's really more compact (though maybe not as neat) to put rackmounted stuff wherever you have a niche for them, rather than setting aside an entire block of space.
--
Who cares if they "support" linux? Just call them up and ask them the basics you need to connect (protocol, addresses, etc) and you should be on your way. Tell them you're running Windows if you must. What you do with the information you get is then up to you, but that's the way it's always been with non-windows/mac operating systems and ISPs. Do you call up Earthlink and ask them how to setup minicom?
--
Isn't the whole point of being anonymous to decrease you accountability?
Erm, no. He clearly states that his purpose is to promote open discussion, and that if you try to exploit his services by making death threats and such, then you will be held accountable. How else can you protect yourself against the idiots on Usenet?
--
KDE is such a resource hog. I use blackbox. >:)
--
Anything that takes longer to compile than X isn't worth it.
--
I'm with ZDnet. We're conducting a survey to discover the hidden meanings behind a person's password and what it reveals about that person. Please post your password as a reply to this thread. It's for science.
Thank you.
--
I'm tired of opening the door just to realize that I'm out of everything except baking soda and butter.
When you're a college student, you know there's nothing in there except baking soda and (maybe) butter.
--
Version number inflation is a really stupid concept to those who know what they are doing. But since when did that mean anything? Very few people grasp the concept that just because something has a higher version number does not mean it is more dependable or bug-free (*COUGH*Mac OS X*cough*).
In particular, this reminds me of when Slackware decided to jump to version 7 from 4 just to keep up with certain other distros when Linux was becoming popular.
Idiocy never ceases to amaze and influence. Then again, the folks in Redmond are seemingly above numerical versioning after 3.11. First Windows 95, then 98, then 98B (ooooh), then ME/2K, and after that I guess they decided to switch to something other than the year (people may start noticing how much they are being fucked over if they are reminded of the present year by looking at their boot screen) and now we have XP. After that.... XP2? XIP? LMNOP? XYZ?
Ugh.
--
Well, give Disney a little credit for The Little Mermaid and Aladdin, after all, those were original stories, right?,
The Little Mermaid, maybe. Aladdin, was "lifted" from Arabian folklore. Disney in reality has came up with little "original" material since Mickey Mouse. Disney's animations are usually just re-tellings of history or previous works (ahem, Hunchback of Notre Dame?). A good site on the subject of the "Disneyfication" of history is here.
--
...Mensa being slashdotted. >:)
--
Well, they have a very good explination. There is the giver and reciever.
"See! This is what happens when you share!"
--
...because you really need that all-terrain SUV for driving to work every day.
--
Every paragraph was about how microsoft could afford to take over virtually every section of the market, and build this disguisting empire.
This really makes me want to cry. Or kidnap bill gates and staple stuffed Tux dolls to his forehead.
What disgusts me the most, was that stupid reference to the Ali boxing match. Here's to taking something way out of context and fucking it up the ass till it bleeds your name.
Ugh.
--
first of all,what makes you think that:
a) becouse something is synthetic it will fuck up your brian?
Becouse Brian told me so. And because Brian knows a lot about brains.
--
I can see The Onion headlines already:
HOLY SHIT!!! MAN WALKS ON FUCKING MARS!!!
--
Well, it seems like a similar case to that of Passport.
But regardless, is this really a bad thing? If you are using their servers and bandwidth, then why shouldn't they be allowed to set forth whatever policies they want? If you don't like it, don't use it. Why is this such a hard concept?
--
So, I go to: http://www.unite-and-resist.org/0-997B-1047-1-100- 0-A.html as mentioned in the article, and decided to look at the parent site. Seems like unite-and-resist.org is against AI, but then again looking closer I can't figure out if this site is serious or not. Could be just a sarcastic statement, or it just be some freak ranting (not that there's anything wrong with that, mind you).
Anyone care to shed some light on this?
--
Well, you could burn a boot CD, witch would contain all the neccisary files to "run" the system, and then you will indeed be running that OS (although a system without connectivity is hardly a system at all). Keep in mind that you can fit 650 to 700 MB on a CD-R, which is more than enough room to contain your kernel, X, apps, etc.
Or, if you want a more usefull system, you could tell the boot CD to access a NFS on your LAN via the DC's ethernet adapter.
--
it will just take time and resources before someone will come up with a way to crack it on the fly
Uh huh.
Lets see, how long has the distributed.net project to crack RC5-64 been going on for? And they have a tremendous amount of computing power at their hands.
I'm not saying it _can't_ be cracked, I'm just stating that it's not as simple as waiting around a few months while your computer covers the keyspace.
--
The next advancement in this trend will be TVs that you can't turn off. And then TVs that pick up signals from your end.
Sounds double-plus good.
--
Well, yes, you could take the digital signal, put it in your TV, and take the analog out from the TV and plug it into a VCR (or TiVo, if you're so inclined), but that's not the point. If you payed all that money for digital television, then you would want to record that great digital signal and not an analog conversion of it. Going through a D/A conversion introduces undesirable loss, and therefore would undermine the purpose of getting the digital equipment/service in the first place.
--
Well, I'm more familiar with Q2 (i can't even count how many days i deprived myself of _any_ sleep because i wanted to play "one more map" of CTF or Lith Rail-Only), so I'll use that as an example.
If you're coming up on someone from behind them, and all of a sudden you see them spin around on their axis and fire dead-on (or some other humanly impossible feat), then there are two possibilities: 1) he's cheating 2) he's lucky. If it happens more than once or twice, it's the former.
However, most of the bots I've seen are so poorly designed that just watching them move is a sign. Especially when you notice railgun slugs coming from their back and grenades popping out of nowhere.
If you are just really good, and don't want to be accoused of cheating, find some equal competition. I guess it's a double edged sword no matter how you look at it.
--
In a game like Quake II, the ability to see through walls would hardly give you any advantage, because it comes down to your ability to move fast and aim accurately. However, in a game like Counter-Strike, a patch such as the one mentioned above could win you the game.
Anyone who's ever played CS knows the intensity of crouching behind a box, hiding behind a corner or ducking in a vent, waiting to make your move. If your enemy could just look up and see someone waiting in the vents, why not jump in behind the enemy and blow his head off?
Never the less, cheating in any form in a multiplayer game is not only rude and unfair, but you _will_ be found out, and when that happens, you are immediatly discredited. Just try to use a cheat patch or auto-aiming script for more than one round before someone yells "[your name here] is a BOT!!!". Then, hopefully someone in the room has administrative privlidges, and can ban the cheater. Or there could be a voting system in place to kick the cheater (like there is in CS). This is really the only way to stop cheating. It is impossible to prevent, but easy to stop with the right methods.
Cheaters:Online Games::Script Kiddies:Hackers
--