Or at least it was, a year and a few months or so ago when I decided to try Linux for the first time. It stands for Softlanding Linux System and exists (AFAIK) entirely as disk sets. I tried to d/l the 1st two, disk sets A and B which were evidently what you needed to get a basic system started (without niceties like TeX and X and emacs) and tried to rawrite them but I failed to get a system going due to my inability to grasp things like partitioning hard drives and fips-ing.
Which is fortunate because about a month later I found debian, which quickly became both my first successful non-windows install and my OS of choice. And which ironically mentioned SLS on its web site.
I found SLS by searching AOL for "linux" (yes, I was on AOL--I went for the free month to use their browser because one of my DLLs was corrupt and it prevented both IE and netscape from working on my then win95 box, plus stopping me from reading email, prompting me to get my yahoo addy; this was also what prompted me to consider a change in OS) and it may still be there. It evidently hadn't come very far from 1993 (prob'ly ended completely somewhere along the line and was simply circulating in frozen form); it didn't seem very advanced, looking at the descriptions and features, once I found out what other distros could do.
If you want a full system it involves d/ling (or somehow obtaining, I don't think anyone sells SLS) something on the order of thirty or forty, or fifty floppies, give or take. Yecch. I haven't seen this system in CD form.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Okay, here goes. Just how effective is the tack of sticking stuff like "bomb gun terrorist saddam hussein nuclear pedophile crack heist uranium hacker militia blackbox hijack" at the end of one's communications just to give you guys excessive stuff to deal with, especially when large numbers of people do it on a specific day out of the year? Does it just make you guys laugh at the futility of the excercise or do you get really pissed off? Also, if you guys only read the overseas email, is anybody reading our email? I feel we have the right to know if our own government is spying on the entire country. Unless of course being computer users somehow incriminates us or waives our rights legally in some way we were not aware of. Then it's all cool. Feel free to simply not answer either of the above questions, if you feel that would represent a threat to national security. I'd much prefer that to a couple spooks showing up at my door.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Does the NSA, or other TLA-agencies for that matter, have incentive programs that would interest the kind of people that you want working for you?
The CIA has a nice college plan. Similar to but more generous than (cash-wise) the Army's, but also more requirements. Up to $60,000 toward tuition for four years (15k/year max) whereas army goes up to 50k for tuition but you gotta work for them for 1.5x the time you're in college afterwards plus during the summers. And you gotta maintain GPA requirements and a certain course load that constitutes full-time student status. I don't know, I'm only in high school now; I'll figure that bit out when I get there.
I know the CIA isn't the same as the NSA but that's a perk for ya. I only knew about that one off-hand 'cos it's what I been eyeing.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
The RCMP also provides the services provided in the US by the Treasury Police, including dealing with "crimes about currency," and the protection of heads of state and diplomatic persons.
Since the charge of the secret service is primarily to take care of "crimes about currency" as well wouldn't that make the mounties, and not the CSIS as previously stated by several others, effectively the Canadian secret service?
Sure, everyone's heard of the RCMP and not many ppl have heard of CSIS, but on the other hand everyone's heard of the "secret" service. Far more ppl have heard of them than the NSA (at least normal everyday ppl, the boring type) So being secret is hardly a criterion, I think we should be going by what the agency is charged with.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
My point is that the industry is probably looking down the road and seeing something that could conceivably ruin them - artists selling music directly to average, everyday consumers! They want to nip it in the bud. I know everyone thinks the RIAA is just plain stupid or short-sighted, but it seems like they know what's going on
Of course, and this is why we are right and they are wrong--because ultimately we know and they know they don't give a shit about protecting artists' rights to control their work; that they are only out to keep the artists under their control, keep it so the artists "need them."
Artists don't need labels to make music. What do they need them for? To get the music to the consumers, and funnel cash back to the artists. Except the label keeps most of the cash. But it would be an impossible job without the label. The label also does the essential job of running promo for the artist. Enter the net. It does promo, gets music out and funnels cash back in better than a major label. (well, maybe not the last but you keep a bigger cut so it amounts to more). The only way to do better with a label is to make it "big time" and what percentage of signed artists actually make that? Plus you have to sell your soul, i.e. become somebody you aren't because it looks better and shape your life to the promotion schedule. Fun.
Labels (esp. big ones) usually take away artists' rights to control their music. So don't artists have a right to not need labels if this is at all possible? There's a reason most artists (i.e. the ones who haven't been major label brainwashed) regard mp3s as good. We all have a fundamental right to have napster around.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
/. of bias, and jupiter of just trying to show what looks good, and of us only looking at this study and not the other because we want to feel better about our side. But it's true. B4 I started d/ling Mp3s I had bought only one cd.
Now one thing people should think about, is who stands to gain from all this. RIAA is backing their study because they have a huge financial incentive. It has nothing to do with artists' rights for them. Look at their (members') track record for trying to take away artists' rights to their own music. So their arguments are just a face for them to get more money.
Where's the money in it for us? We are just in it to listen to good music, and to make informed choices before we buy; we have no billion dollar industry to defend. So our arguments are probably more valid.
The RIAA spokespeople say as a last resort that it ultimately doesn't matter whether MP3s increase sales or damage them, because they are a stealing of property, but what is intellectual property? "Intellectual property" is an institution created in this country for the good of the people (at large, not the copyright holders) to encourage intellectual production (of books, inventions, etc.) by rewarding the innovators. If the innovator is already getting rewarded without controlling the consumption of her/his work then i.p. is completely unneccessary because innovation is encouraged, except that i.p. now works great as a market control device in violation of antitrust. This is what Microsoft is doing and this is what RIAA and MPAA are doing. i.p. is an entirely outdated concept.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Gah!! MacOS isn't much of a breakthrough because you can't DO anything really efficiently with that interface. It's a breakthrough in killing efficiency to look pretty. X didn't really copy Mac. Mac is fundamentally based on your desktop icons and your menu bar and all these things and all X really copied was the window from Xerox PARC. But you/could/ have desktop icons in X, or top-level menu bars or just about anything, and you can also write a slew of nifty bottish stuff and crap that doesn't require you to waste 20 clicks for everylittlething you want to get done, which is where windows now is from trying to imitate the mac. Well in response to the next guy, sorry if I sound bitter toward "anything not X" but I just have opinions about people throwing the word breakthrough around. I mean, most of the mac people I know, not to discriminate or anything, this is just what I observe, tend to not know how to really get anything/done/. They know all kinds of crap about keeping up appearances, but take my calc teacher for instance, he's all about sacrificing functionality for appearance. They're the type of people who I wouldn't want a job interview with because I know they'd pass me up over my lack of "attention to detail" in favor of somebody who knows how to "dress to impress" and all the right things to say but who just can't cut it when it comes to crunch time. MacOS was a breakthrough, sure, in losing the capabilities of your computer playing around with looks.
Now of course you'll prob'ly try to tell me that X is just too complicated for the average bum to fool with, and you lose just as much time fussing trying to get it to work right. Sure, but a good *out-of-the-box* X configuration shouldn't be that bad. If our computers came with Linux preinstalled and preconfigured it wouldn't have a rep for being such a "hard" OS since most of the pain (IMHO) is in initially configuring things.
I should also point out that the future of computing is "supposed" (according to "visionsaries like the guy this article is about") to be toward greater automation, like where you talk to your computer with a simple request and it carries out everything it entails. MacOS actually works away from this because the automation potential is greater even with DOS. The dependant link between the programs and the GUI at the lowest level is the enemy of further automation. X furthers automation in that none of the programs are fundamentally dependant on the GUI, it is just one mode of I/O. I/O can be redirected and processes can be detached. So MacOS is a breakthrough in stepping backward.
Maybe it wouldn't have mattered if we were just calling it "a breakthrough". After all, it was the 80s and MacOS was surmounting ye olde TRS-80 and C64, not to mention APLLE II for its place in ppls homes. But to call it the/last/ breakthrough? We're only a step or two away the Star Trek "computer, do blah blah blah for me" and the/last/ breakthrough was to take us a step further from that? Something tells me no.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
1st of all, it's/always/ been held by legal precedent. Also, states have to have constitutions to enter the union which have to be approved and they pretty much have to guarantee the same freedoms in the 1st ammendment or they can't get in. 3rd, it would be hella abusive if the 1st ammendment could be circumvented by making laws at the non-federal level. Of course, then the federal government would just coerce lesser governments to make the same laws they were prohibited from making. How stupid do you think the supes are, no way would this fly.
You're basically saying we don't have/any/ freedom of speech except where the feds are concerned? That the state can put us away for saying to vote against the governor? Huh, right, this nation wouldn't even/exist/ anymore under the pretense of democracy if that were true, probably wouldn't have lasted five years. Check your case law next time before you post.
Furthermore, AFAIR there are/supreme court opinions/ which extend 1st ammendment "freedom of speech" to "freedom of expression" by virtue of the 14th.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
In my town all the power comes from the hydroelectric dam. The problems are really with people so unconcerned that the only reason they'd switch to electric cars is the rising fuel cost caused by the impending energy crunch. Those same people are of course not concerned enough to switch to sensible forms of power. Unfortunately that's still most ppl (at least in the US anyway) The same people who drive SUVs, also don't give a shit whether their power comes from hydro or gas or even nuke, as long as it keeps rolling in.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
What if a few hundred or so of somebdy else's skin flakes get mixed in with my millions? And those happen to be the ones they get with this device? Like say my girl has been running her fingers through my hair, and the thing is overhead so it picks up her cells, and she's been smoking god-knows-what what. But I wouldn't mind taking the rap for her in a case like this because drug laws are insidious and evil. A wierder scenario is they DNA test and figure she's entering the building. What the hell do they think they'll accomplish? They know with the amount of contact between human beings that we all have sizeable traces of each others' cells, not large enough to be visible, but if you're trying to detect the sub-visible you'll get the other ppl.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
So when will gcc be able to compile the source into a working AI?
The real question is, when will we invent a brand of coffee which keeps me from making crappy spelling errors in my slashdot posts late at night? They would have to add a new flag and invokacion Now we just need to right the libraries. That's not counting the ones I caught before I hit submit.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
They would have to add a new flag and invokacion command like g++ is for using gcc for c++. I guess that would be called using the DNA libraries to link it.
That same invocation (hey, did I spell it right this time?) could be used to compile and link genomes for other organisms like the fruit fly, or anything else we may have mapped, from sources.
Now we just need to right the libraries. Shhh, don't tell anyone that's the hard part.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Just don't let it spread to the ti calcs. then we won't have/any/ way to beat back the whiny newbie flamers.
Newbie: Whaddya mean IT'S NOT A GAME BOY?!?! the web page said you could turn your TI-83+ into a GAME BOY!!! that's the whole reason I bought this PILE of LARD!!! now HELP ME, you lousy SACK of BOLOGNA!!!! I want GAMES, and I WANT them YESTERDAY!!!! Me: Uhhhh, that's a TI-85-- Newbie: SHUT and DO AS I SAY, hear?? So much for the fallback of saying "you can't expect to turn them on and expect instant games, games games, they aren't gameboys" (unless you know wtf you're doing, hehe). We better not let that happen.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Okay, I'm not just going to repeat the evidence and citations already posted equivocating that it is impossible to actually play anything with this because both a) the games aren't compatible and b) it's painfully slow. That would be (-1, redundant). I'm going to pose the question: "why?" Why are they doing this? The palm is obviously not suited to do this kind of crap. It wasn't made for this kind of load and can't handle it as an incidental. So give it up, guys.
Unless you're masochists. Then I aplaud you. Masochism's all cool, it's a hell of a lot prettier than taking your problems and wierdnesses out on other people. (picturing people with guns here) So keep at it, dudes, don't let me stop you.
Oh, and right now I'm thinking maybe it shoulda started with something like a TRS-80 emulator or Atari 2600 emulator, something where all the games are under 32k instead of just the crappy ones.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Run Tetris on a Gameboy emulator running in a Windows Palm emulator running under wine running on a Linux machine running in a vmware window on a Windows box that you are accessing via VNC from a Sun server that you are accessing from a dumb terminal.
Nuthin' but net.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom? Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Slashdot Mirror
Is it just me, or does Softlanding Linux System sound like a great Hitchcock title?
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Sorry, couldn't resist that one.
I would mod that one up +1 insightful or interesting (on of the two) if I hadn't already posted this round. Somebody do it for me? pleaze?
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Or at least it was, a year and a few months or so ago when I decided to try Linux for the first time. It stands for Softlanding Linux System and exists (AFAIK) entirely as disk sets. I tried to d/l the 1st two, disk sets A and B which were evidently what you needed to get a basic system started (without niceties like TeX and X and emacs) and tried to rawrite them but I failed to get a system going due to my inability to grasp things like partitioning hard drives and fips-ing.
Which is fortunate because about a month later I found debian, which quickly became both my first successful non-windows install and my OS of choice. And which ironically mentioned SLS on its web site.
I found SLS by searching AOL for "linux" (yes, I was on AOL--I went for the free month to use their browser because one of my DLLs was corrupt and it prevented both IE and netscape from working on my then win95 box, plus stopping me from reading email, prompting me to get my yahoo addy; this was also what prompted me to consider a change in OS) and it may still be there. It evidently hadn't come very far from 1993 (prob'ly ended completely somewhere along the line and was simply circulating in frozen form); it didn't seem very advanced, looking at the descriptions and features, once I found out what other distros could do.
If you want a full system it involves d/ling (or somehow obtaining, I don't think anyone sells SLS) something on the order of thirty or forty, or fifty floppies, give or take. Yecch. I haven't seen this system in CD form.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Bummer. I think he's a slackware holdout. *g*
Actually, it's called he answered that one at the top of the article.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Okay, here goes.
Just how effective is the tack of sticking stuff like "bomb gun terrorist saddam hussein nuclear pedophile crack heist uranium hacker militia blackbox hijack" at the end of one's communications just to give you guys excessive stuff to deal with, especially when large numbers of people do it on a specific day out of the year? Does it just make you guys laugh at the futility of the excercise or do you get really pissed off?
Also, if you guys only read the overseas email, is anybody reading our email?
I feel we have the right to know if our own government is spying on the entire country.
Unless of course being computer users somehow incriminates us or waives our rights legally in some way we were not aware of. Then it's all cool.
Feel free to simply not answer either of the above questions, if you feel that would represent a threat to national security. I'd much prefer that to a couple spooks showing up at my door.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Okay, you got me. That wasn't exactly civilian. Just the first computer I could think of prior to 1952. Now it's time to go hide in a corner.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
They built that one before the NSA was formed.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Does the NSA, or other TLA-agencies for that matter, have incentive programs that would interest the kind of people that you want working for you?
The CIA has a nice college plan. Similar to but more generous than (cash-wise) the Army's, but also more requirements. Up to $60,000 toward tuition for four years (15k/year max) whereas army goes up to 50k for tuition but you gotta work for them for 1.5x the time you're in college afterwards plus during the summers. And you gotta maintain GPA requirements and a certain course load that constitutes full-time student status. I don't know, I'm only in high school now; I'll figure that bit out when I get there.
I know the CIA isn't the same as the NSA but that's a perk for ya. I only knew about that one off-hand 'cos it's what I been eyeing.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
The RCMP also provides the services provided in the US by the Treasury Police, including dealing with "crimes about currency," and the protection of heads of state and diplomatic persons.
Since the charge of the secret service is primarily to take care of "crimes about currency" as well wouldn't that make the mounties, and not the CSIS as previously stated by several others, effectively the Canadian secret service?
Sure, everyone's heard of the RCMP and not many ppl have heard of CSIS, but on the other hand everyone's heard of the "secret" service. Far more ppl have heard of them than the NSA (at least normal everyday ppl, the boring type)
So being secret is hardly a criterion, I think we should be going by what the agency is charged with.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Where'd I leave my keys?
I think that one poses a threat to national security.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Yes, but this is inside a plexiglass cube.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
My point is that the industry is probably looking down the road and seeing something that could conceivably ruin them - artists selling music directly to average, everyday consumers! They want to nip it in the bud. I know everyone thinks the RIAA is just plain stupid or short-sighted, but it seems like they know what's going on
Of course, and this is why we are right and they are wrong--because ultimately we know and they know they don't give a shit about protecting artists' rights to control their work; that they are only out to keep the artists under their control, keep it so the artists "need them."
Artists don't need labels to make music. What do they need them for? To get the music to the consumers, and funnel cash back to the artists. Except the label keeps most of the cash. But it would be an impossible job without the label. The label also does the essential job of running promo for the artist.
Enter the net. It does promo, gets music out and funnels cash back in better than a major label. (well, maybe not the last but you keep a bigger cut so it amounts to more). The only way to do better with a label is to make it "big time" and what percentage of signed artists actually make that? Plus you have to sell your soul, i.e. become somebody you aren't because it looks better and shape your life to the promotion schedule. Fun.
Labels (esp. big ones) usually take away artists' rights to control their music. So don't artists have a right to not need labels if this is at all possible? There's a reason most artists (i.e. the ones who haven't been major label brainwashed) regard mp3s as good. We all have a fundamental right to have napster around.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
/. of bias, and jupiter of just trying to show what looks good, and of us only looking at this study and not the other because we want to feel better about our side. But it's true. B4 I started d/ling Mp3s I had bought only one cd.
Now one thing people should think about, is who stands to gain from all this. RIAA is backing their study because they have a huge financial incentive. It has nothing to do with artists' rights for them. Look at their (members') track record for trying to take away artists' rights to their own music. So their arguments are just a face for them to get more money.
Where's the money in it for us? We are just in it to listen to good music, and to make informed choices before we buy; we have no billion dollar industry to defend. So our arguments are probably more valid.
The RIAA spokespeople say as a last resort that it ultimately doesn't matter whether MP3s increase sales or damage them, because they are a stealing of property, but what is intellectual property? "Intellectual property" is an institution created in this country for the good of the people (at large, not the copyright holders) to encourage intellectual production (of books, inventions, etc.) by rewarding the innovators. If the innovator is already getting rewarded without controlling the consumption of her/his work then i.p. is completely unneccessary because innovation is encouraged, except that i.p. now works great as a market control device in violation of antitrust. This is what Microsoft is doing and this is what RIAA and MPAA are doing. i.p. is an entirely outdated concept.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Gah!! /could/ have desktop icons in X, or top-level menu bars or just about anything, and you can also write a slew of nifty bottish stuff and crap that doesn't require you to waste 20 clicks for everylittlething you want to get done, which is where windows now is from trying to imitate the mac. /done/. They know all kinds of crap about keeping up appearances, but take my calc teacher for instance, he's all about sacrificing functionality for appearance. They're the type of people who I wouldn't want a job interview with because I know they'd pass me up over my lack of "attention to detail" in favor of somebody who knows how to "dress to impress" and all the right things to say but who just can't cut it when it comes to crunch time.
/last/ breakthrough? We're only a step or two away the Star Trek "computer, do blah blah blah for me" and the /last/ breakthrough was to take us a step further from that? Something tells me no.
MacOS isn't much of a breakthrough because you can't DO anything really efficiently with that interface. It's a breakthrough in killing efficiency to look pretty.
X didn't really copy Mac. Mac is fundamentally based on your desktop icons and your menu bar and all these things and all X really copied was the window from Xerox PARC. But you
Well in response to the next guy, sorry if I sound bitter toward "anything not X" but I just have opinions about people throwing the word breakthrough around. I mean, most of the mac people I know, not to discriminate or anything, this is just what I observe, tend to not know how to really get anything
MacOS was a breakthrough, sure, in losing the capabilities of your computer playing around with looks.
Now of course you'll prob'ly try to tell me that X is just too complicated for the average bum to fool with, and you lose just as much time fussing trying to get it to work right. Sure, but a good *out-of-the-box* X configuration shouldn't be that bad. If our computers came with Linux preinstalled and preconfigured it wouldn't have a rep for being such a "hard" OS since most of the pain (IMHO) is in initially configuring things.
I should also point out that the future of computing is "supposed" (according to "visionsaries like the guy this article is about") to be toward greater automation, like where you talk to your computer with a simple request and it carries out everything it entails. MacOS actually works away from this because the automation potential is greater even with DOS. The dependant link between the programs and the GUI at the lowest level is the enemy of further automation. X furthers automation in that none of the programs are fundamentally dependant on the GUI, it is just one mode of I/O. I/O can be redirected and processes can be detached. So MacOS is a breakthrough in stepping backward.
Maybe it wouldn't have mattered if we were just calling it "a breakthrough". After all, it was the 80s and MacOS was surmounting ye olde TRS-80 and C64, not to mention APLLE II for its place in ppls homes. But to call it the
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
1st of all, it's /always/ been held by legal precedent. Also, states have to have constitutions to enter the union which have to be approved and they pretty much have to guarantee the same freedoms in the 1st ammendment or they can't get in. 3rd, it would be hella abusive if the 1st ammendment could be circumvented by making laws at the non-federal level. Of course, then the federal government would just coerce lesser governments to make the same laws they were prohibited from making. How stupid do you think the supes are, no way would this fly.
/any/ freedom of speech except where the feds are concerned? That the state can put us away for saying to vote against the governor? Huh, right, this nation wouldn't even /exist/ anymore under the pretense of democracy if that were true, probably wouldn't have lasted five years. Check your case law next time before you post.
/supreme court opinions/ which extend 1st ammendment "freedom of speech" to "freedom of expression" by virtue of the 14th.
You're basically saying we don't have
Furthermore, AFAIR there are
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
In my town all the power comes from the hydroelectric dam.
The problems are really with people so unconcerned that the only reason they'd switch to electric cars is the rising fuel cost caused by the impending energy crunch. Those same people are of course not concerned enough to switch to sensible forms of power.
Unfortunately that's still most ppl (at least in the US anyway)
The same people who drive SUVs, also don't give a shit whether their power comes from hydro or gas or even nuke, as long as it keeps rolling in.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
After all, if the language didn't /work/, how would I use it?
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
What if a few hundred or so of somebdy else's skin flakes get mixed in with my millions? And those happen to be the ones they get with this device?
Like say my girl has been running her fingers through my hair, and the thing is overhead so it picks up her cells, and she's been smoking god-knows-what what. But I wouldn't mind taking the rap for her in a case like this because drug laws are insidious and evil. A wierder scenario is they DNA test and figure she's entering the building. What the hell do they think they'll accomplish? They know with the amount of contact between human beings that we all have sizeable traces of each others' cells, not large enough to be visible, but if you're trying to detect the sub-visible you'll get the other ppl.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
So when will gcc be able to compile the source into a working AI?
The real question is, when will we invent a brand of coffee which keeps me from making crappy spelling errors in my slashdot posts late at night?
They would have to add a new flag and invokacion
Now we just need to right the libraries.
That's not counting the ones I caught before I hit submit.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
They would have to add a new flag and invokacion command like g++ is for using gcc for c++. I guess that would be called using the DNA libraries to link it.
That same invocation (hey, did I spell it right this time?) could be used to compile and link genomes for other organisms like the fruit fly, or anything else we may have mapped, from sources.
Now we just need to right the libraries. Shhh, don't tell anyone that's the hard part.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Uh, wouldn't we need God's permission first?
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Just don't let it spread to the ti calcs. then we won't have /any/ way to beat back the whiny newbie flamers.
Newbie: Whaddya mean IT'S NOT A GAME BOY?!?! the web page said you could turn your TI-83+ into a GAME BOY!!! that's the whole reason I bought this PILE of LARD!!! now HELP ME, you lousy SACK of BOLOGNA!!!! I want GAMES, and I WANT them YESTERDAY!!!!
Me: Uhhhh, that's a TI-85--
Newbie: SHUT and DO AS I SAY, hear??
So much for the fallback of saying "you can't expect to turn them on and expect instant games, games games, they aren't gameboys" (unless you know wtf you're doing, hehe). We better not let that happen.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Okay, I'm not just going to repeat the evidence and citations already posted equivocating that it is impossible to actually play anything with this because both a) the games aren't compatible and b) it's painfully slow. That would be (-1, redundant). I'm going to pose the question: "why?" Why are they doing this? The palm is obviously not suited to do this kind of crap. It wasn't made for this kind of load and can't handle it as an incidental. So give it up, guys.
Unless you're masochists. Then I aplaud you. Masochism's all cool, it's a hell of a lot prettier than taking your problems and wierdnesses out on other people. (picturing people with guns here) So keep at it, dudes, don't let me stop you.
Oh, and right now I'm thinking maybe it shoulda started with something like a TRS-80 emulator or Atari 2600 emulator, something where all the games are under 32k instead of just the crappy ones.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Run Tetris on a Gameboy emulator running in a Windows Palm emulator running under wine running on a Linux machine running in a vmware window on a Windows box that you are accessing via VNC from a Sun server that you are accessing from a dumb terminal.
Nuthin' but net.
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
Six Degrees of by writing emulators to run inside emulators.
Would we call that "six degrees of separation?"
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?