Dude, however they might treat their users, they certainly know that if their only consideration is the last dollar, then they need to treat their developers really really well. And VB is a great example. They want to make sure that *anyone* can make an application (bloated, slow, whatever) and they can do it fast. This is all well and good. They treat their *developers* really really well. MSDN is *not* an immediately profitable enterprise. They just know who they depend on.
Man, Wired was *good* in that first year. They put Alvin Toffler on the cover. Hehehe. In the end though, we all should have subscribed to Mondo 2000 instead. I don't think they would have done the same BS that wired mag does now, all the focus on VC and the new new new new economy.
No, a proximity mine with a strong magnet would not be capable of attaching to many of the surfaces that you can use this technique with. How many metal walls do you see in an average day?
Well, at the time they were talking about having Cable downstream only, and you'd have a regular modem doing the upstream traffic. So that's why I thought it sucked then. The reason that I think it sucks now is that most of the time, my 56k modem is faster. I guarantee you, I'm not downloading 650 megs in an hour.
Is this a joke? Someone moderated it as funny, and that's the only way I can imagine this as a +5 comment. Microsoft holds their developers in nothing less than utter contempt? You're kidding, right?
I remember quite a while ago, while I was like eleven years old, reading in Wired Magazine about the wave of the future. We were all going to use cable modems. So, I read the article, which was a rave review, salivating. And then I got to the end of the article and they said that you wouldn't get vastly improved uploading speeds. Just downloading. Because that's all home users do.
I was eleven years old, definitely a home user, and thinking to myself, "What? That sucks."
That's probably because slashdot munged the signature. With the rule against really long words. The same thing that screws up URLs. Iduno, would a gpg sig get damaged by an inserted space?
Dude, you can't call Ghandi a coward. Really. He wanted Britian out of his homeland with no blood spilled. He pretty much got his way. And he did it by laying his life on the line. That is pacifism. That is not cowardice.
And of course, you should have no respect for anyone that wants someone else to do their fighting for them. That is most certainly cowardice. It's also not pacifism.
Except that a brain transplant could be more accurately described as a full body transplant. Most of what makes you martyb is in the brain, not the body. If the problem is with the brain, then you've got to fix the one you've got. And if it's with the body, then hell, just swap out parts.
Perhaps the success could be replicated for the Brain as well? (A 'living' computer?!)"
Or perhaps also the success could not be replicated for the Brain. Even if this particular advance could be used to supply blood to the brain, the spinal cord is the complicated part. So no.
Why do people say stuff like this? You know, the brain is a perfectly good 'living' computer?! while it's sitting inside your skull. I can't really imagine a better place for it.
I'm not being intentionally dense. There is no such thing as a "pacifist nation." There are pacifist people. This is why we cannot respond to your challenge. India never even counts, because while there were pacifists in India, the government was British (The Raj, whatever). So, now that I consider further, your challenge has no meaning.
For that matter, You're making a caricature of pacifists in general. Most pacifists know that at some point, you need to defend yourself. And sometimes you need to be able to make the credible threat of violence to keep people from attacking you. The few pacifists that do not share this opinion are the ones that are willing to die rather than kill. It's hard to malign Quakers by saying that they'd rather have others do the fighting. They don't want to defend themselves or their way of life.
It's always important to remember, that Ghandi's hunger strike was a non-violent solution to their problem only because the British knew that if he died, every single Indian would wage unending war against the Raj. It was pacifist, but they still needed an army.
I'm sorry. I must have misunderstood. I thought that by "more than one generation" you meant the society lasted more than one generation. Which it most certainly did. It just didn't remain pacifist.
Also, many many pacifists understand that pacifism has it's limits. As another poster pointed out, even Ghandi knew that non-violent means wouldn't work against the Soviets. I'm a pacifist. I'm also not opposed to any of the action taken today.
Lastly, calling a nation pacifist is kindof silly. No nation has policy made by one person only, and thus no nation has a completely unified position in terms of pacifism.
Uh, do any of these responders realize what this post is about? They keep arguing with your description of Reagan as "a great orator." So they talk about what an idiot Reagan was. Read the quote again, fools. Nutscrape isn't making Reagan look like a genius here.
Here at UPenn we're sortof balanced. One of the expenses of being balanced is that some cheaters don't get caught and some people get accused of cheating when they haven't. But most classes do allow us to talk to each other about our code. And, we have an elective group project class available after freshman year. Junior year is a required group operating systems project. You write a toy operating system to run on solaris. Senior year you have to do a project that can be group based or not.
It would be very very detrimental to be a CS major here without taking the elective software project during your sophomore year. I'm not sure how anyone can survive junior year without it. In our (small) project, one of our team members basically lied about how much work he had done. We allowed him to procrastinate the integration and we were totally screwed.
We wrote what he should have written in the wee hours, and had learned several valuable lessons. And those lessons certainly saved our asses several times in our next project. Most notably when we picked group members.
Also, for those concerned that their partners' diligence wouldn't match their own, why on earth were they your partners? Did the prof choose for you? The best solution to that issue was what they did in my highschool. All major assignments were group projects. If the assignment was worth 100 points for four people, you would get a grade out of 400, and had to unanimously decide how those points were allocated to individuals. I had an A+ in every class that worked that way. And I cared more about my work then than I have in college.
Funny, you call that a libertarian rant. We used to call that being a "Social Democrat." But now that being liberal is equated with inefficiency, everyone disses us liberals and thinks they're being subversive when they suggest that personal freedoms are sacred. When that's all we ever really stood for in the first place. Well. I guess we've got no one to blame but ourselves.
What, are you kidding? What is the combined readership of Slashdot and 2600? That is the total number of people in the US that have heard of this case. He is a high profile attorney, but this is not the most high profile case he could be working on. How many people do you know that are not geeks and would have known about Dmitri if you didn't tell them? If the media covered this the way that they should have, Dmitri would be free anyway.
Say "speech". You figured guns were next, but it looks like speech is next. Crypto is for geeks. Everyone wants free speech. And that's what we're talking about.
I switched to YellowDog Linux on my beige G3 mac. I was sick and tired of having my Mac crash everytime I used remote access software. (There's nothing more dangerous than VNC and shareware FTP on a mac)
And there I was. Everything was great. And if I wanted to use those MacOS programs that crashed all the time, I could feel free. I could switch consoles and get some work done while I was waiting for it to boot. I really feel like MOL is better than straight MacOS in some respects. Not video performance, of course.
If pop up ads started using techniques like this AnonymousComrade suggests, eventually the DMCA would apply. They could encrypt their content, their ActiveX control could decrypt it, and hacking IE to kill the popups would be illegal. They wouldn't even have to use real encryption. They could use ROT13, and the legislation would still work. Then they can use the revenue generated by the ads to purchase more congresspeople. It'll be great!
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, however they might treat their users, they certainly know that if their only consideration is the last dollar, then they need to treat their developers really really well. And VB is a great example. They want to make sure that *anyone* can make an application (bloated, slow, whatever) and they can do it fast. This is all well and good. They treat their *developers* really really well. MSDN is *not* an immediately profitable enterprise. They just know who they depend on.
Man, Wired was *good* in that first year. They put Alvin Toffler on the cover. Hehehe. In the end though, we all should have subscribed to Mondo 2000 instead. I don't think they would have done the same BS that wired mag does now, all the focus on VC and the new new new new economy.
No, a proximity mine with a strong magnet would not be capable of attaching to many of the surfaces that you can use this technique with. How many metal walls do you see in an average day?
So, then, what do you think of ML? I thought that was pretty clean.
Well, at the time they were talking about having Cable downstream only, and you'd have a regular modem doing the upstream traffic. So that's why I thought it sucked then. The reason that I think it sucks now is that most of the time, my 56k modem is faster. I guarantee you, I'm not downloading 650 megs in an hour.
Is this a joke? Someone moderated it as funny, and that's the only way I can imagine this as a +5 comment. Microsoft holds their developers in nothing less than utter contempt? You're kidding, right?
I remember quite a while ago, while I was like eleven years old, reading in Wired Magazine about the wave of the future. We were all going to use cable modems. So, I read the article, which was a rave review, salivating. And then I got to the end of the article and they said that you wouldn't get vastly improved uploading speeds. Just downloading. Because that's all home users do.
I was eleven years old, definitely a home user, and thinking to myself, "What? That sucks."
That's probably because slashdot munged the signature. With the rule against really long words. The same thing that screws up URLs. Iduno, would a gpg sig get damaged by an inserted space?
We better get started writing those pseudo-AI drivers. Lord only knows how we've gotten along without them.
Dude, you can't call Ghandi a coward. Really. He wanted Britian out of his homeland with no blood spilled. He pretty much got his way. And he did it by laying his life on the line. That is pacifism. That is not cowardice.
And of course, you should have no respect for anyone that wants someone else to do their fighting for them. That is most certainly cowardice. It's also not pacifism.
Except that a brain transplant could be more accurately described as a full body transplant. Most of what makes you martyb is in the brain, not the body. If the problem is with the brain, then you've got to fix the one you've got. And if it's with the body, then hell, just swap out parts.
Perhaps the success could be replicated for the Brain as well? (A 'living' computer?!)"
Or perhaps also the success could not be replicated for the Brain. Even if this particular advance could be used to supply blood to the brain, the spinal cord is the complicated part. So no.
Why do people say stuff like this? You know, the brain is a perfectly good 'living' computer?! while it's sitting inside your skull. I can't really imagine a better place for it.
I'm not being intentionally dense. There is no such thing as a "pacifist nation." There are pacifist people. This is why we cannot respond to your challenge. India never even counts, because while there were pacifists in India, the government was British (The Raj, whatever). So, now that I consider further, your challenge has no meaning.
For that matter, You're making a caricature of pacifists in general. Most pacifists know that at some point, you need to defend yourself. And sometimes you need to be able to make the credible threat of violence to keep people from attacking you. The few pacifists that do not share this opinion are the ones that are willing to die rather than kill. It's hard to malign Quakers by saying that they'd rather have others do the fighting. They don't want to defend themselves or their way of life.
It's always important to remember, that Ghandi's hunger strike was a non-violent solution to their problem only because the British knew that if he died, every single Indian would wage unending war against the Raj. It was pacifist, but they still needed an army.
I'm sorry. I must have misunderstood. I thought that by "more than one generation" you meant the society lasted more than one generation. Which it most certainly did. It just didn't remain pacifist.
Also, many many pacifists understand that pacifism has it's limits. As another poster pointed out, even Ghandi knew that non-violent means wouldn't work against the Soviets. I'm a pacifist. I'm also not opposed to any of the action taken today.
Lastly, calling a nation pacifist is kindof silly. No nation has policy made by one person only, and thus no nation has a completely unified position in terms of pacifism.
India, fool. Sure, they didn't stay pacifist, but pacificism won them their freedom.
Uh, do any of these responders realize what this post is about? They keep arguing with your description of Reagan as "a great orator." So they talk about what an idiot Reagan was. Read the quote again, fools. Nutscrape isn't making Reagan look like a genius here.
Here at UPenn we're sortof balanced. One of the expenses of being balanced is that some cheaters don't get caught and some people get accused of cheating when they haven't. But most classes do allow us to talk to each other about our code. And, we have an elective group project class available after freshman year. Junior year is a required group operating systems project. You write a toy operating system to run on solaris. Senior year you have to do a project that can be group based or not.
It would be very very detrimental to be a CS major here without taking the elective software project during your sophomore year. I'm not sure how anyone can survive junior year without it. In our (small) project, one of our team members basically lied about how much work he had done. We allowed him to procrastinate the integration and we were totally screwed.
We wrote what he should have written in the wee hours, and had learned several valuable lessons. And those lessons certainly saved our asses several times in our next project. Most notably when we picked group members.
Also, for those concerned that their partners' diligence wouldn't match their own, why on earth were they your partners? Did the prof choose for you? The best solution to that issue was what they did in my highschool. All major assignments were group projects. If the assignment was worth 100 points for four people, you would get a grade out of 400, and had to unanimously decide how those points were allocated to individuals. I had an A+ in every class that worked that way. And I cared more about my work then than I have in college.
Funny, you call that a libertarian rant. We used to call that being a "Social Democrat." But now that being liberal is equated with inefficiency, everyone disses us liberals and thinks they're being subversive when they suggest that personal freedoms are sacred. When that's all we ever really stood for in the first place. Well. I guess we've got no one to blame but ourselves.
Fine. If you're gonna take away abortion, take away butchers. You are killing an innocent cow. That cow has done nothing to harm anyone.
Cows are infinitely more similar to adult humans than embryos, in behavior, cognition, and sensation.
Gosh you like that phrase.
What, are you kidding? What is the combined readership of Slashdot and 2600? That is the total number of people in the US that have heard of this case. He is a high profile attorney, but this is not the most high profile case he could be working on. How many people do you know that are not geeks and would have known about Dmitri if you didn't tell them? If the media covered this the way that they should have, Dmitri would be free anyway.
Say "speech". You figured guns were next, but it looks like speech is next. Crypto is for geeks. Everyone wants free speech. And that's what we're talking about.
No, the only thing that actually helps our failing economy would be purchasing the product that you see advertised.
I switched to YellowDog Linux on my beige G3 mac. I was sick and tired of having my Mac crash everytime I used remote access software. (There's nothing more dangerous than VNC and shareware FTP on a mac)
And there I was. Everything was great. And if I wanted to use those MacOS programs that crashed all the time, I could feel free. I could switch consoles and get some work done while I was waiting for it to boot. I really feel like MOL is better than straight MacOS in some respects. Not video performance, of course.
If pop up ads started using techniques like this AnonymousComrade suggests, eventually the DMCA would apply. They could encrypt their content, their ActiveX control could decrypt it, and hacking IE to kill the popups would be illegal. They wouldn't even have to use real encryption. They could use ROT13, and the legislation would still work. Then they can use the revenue generated by the ads to purchase more congresspeople. It'll be great!