Why buy legos in bulk and waste them building something immediately? I say, carry around a giant backpack full of them. That way, if an emergency comes up, and you need something right now, you can just construct it.
Haven't you ever misplaced your crack pipe? It can be a hassle when the only construction materials at your disposal are duct tape, a bottle of gatorade, six McDonald's straws, and a jar of peanut butter.
Also, if you were ever in a shipwreck, and you ended up on a desert island, and then a CRT tube and solar panel washed up on shore, you could construct your own television.
30K is... a lot. Did she massively underestimate demand or something? My friends have a "brit-pop" band - they produced their first album for $3,000 and recouped about $2,200 in sales. It's still a loss, but it makes me wonder who would take a $30,000 hit.
Re:When will they get it?
on
Napster Wars
·
· Score: 1
I'm also accepting $15 million investments if anyone is interested
If your name was chez69_Linux_Solutions, I'd consider it.
Actually, someone left a post here a couple months ago about a mining company that changed its name from something like "Johnson Minerals" to "Linux Solutions" the day before it went IPO. It was a surprisingly successful IPO for a mining company. Sorry, I don't remember any of the specifics.
Re:When will they get it?
on
Napster Wars
·
· Score: 1
Napster makes money?? How?
It may not seem like they have a business model that would make money, but appearances can be deceiving. Almost no high-tech companies make a profit on the merits of their own business these days. They rely heavily on advertising, investment, and stock.
I read somewhere that Napster's involved in this game and is going/has gone IPO. I don't know if that's true. But if my company can exist for a year without putting out a product, and attract $5 million venture capital to boot, something as high-profile as Napster should have no problem making a bundle.
Re:Link to survey.....
on
Napster Wars
·
· Score: 1
They did a survey about internet usage and excluded everybody under 18??
My 16-year-old brother and all his friends are on summer vacation right now. Since they're too lazy to work, they spend all day alternating between grabbing MP3s and playing Age of Empires II.
Someone show me an 18+ year old with that kind of spare time on his/her hands. Sure, they exist. But not in such overwhelming numbers.
RealPlayer and Quicktime rank as my #1 and #2 most annoying pieces of software, ever. The thought of them working together makes me cringe.
They've probably got a team of engineers working on new, unexpected places to put shortcuts, fully integrated networks of "Register Now/ Later" windows, hideously overdone interfaces, and random things to stick in unexpected places in the registry.
Numbers added: Which does not differentiate between 1. A causing B, 2. B causing A, 3. A and B both being caused by C, 4. A causing B indirectly through some other factor D, 5. B causing A through some other factor E, or 6. A and B occuring together more often due to chance.
Let's see... 1. Cell phones cause brain cancer. 2. Brain cancer causes people to use cell phones. 3. Solar flares cause both brain cancer and an uncontrollable desire to use a cell phone. 4. Cell phones cause brain cancer, but only because people's fingers contain trace amounts of uranium, and their fingers are too close to their brain all day. 5. Brain cancer causes cell phone use, but only because people with brain cancer need to call their doctors from unusual places at all hours of the day, so they buy cell phones. 6. It's pure coincidence that brain cancer correllates with cell phone use. On a side note, we at Brown & Williamson believe that it's pure coincidence that lung cancer correlates with cigarette smoking.
Your points on correllation and causation are technically correct. But, come on, use Occam's razor. One of these things is not like the others (hint: the others are ridiculous)
That's interesting, though. Apparently, this is a method for turning sonar into computer-readable data, which is, as far as I know, the same way these marine mammals communicate.
Two implications spring to mind: 1) Is there any chance of getting "dolphin interference" in the signal?; and 2) Could this make it easier to eventually decode these sonar signals, which some scientists think could be a highly developed lanaguage?
Even if this turns out to be futile, this kind of technology could prove pretty useful for marine researchers - this way, you could go down in SCUBA gear with a waterproof laptop and still be able to get online.
Since Jon Katz doesn't know anything about technology, he has to "guess" at what interests us, and having written eight million articles about censorship, he's now turning to random buzz.
Give him a couple months, and we'll get "Pocket Lint: What it means to American society."
You know, I'm not sure we should include too much redundancy in our machines.
Generally, we're probably going to use these things in controlled environments where adaptability isn't going to be a massive concern.
My real issue is that the more a machine adapts, the harder it is to shut it down. In some cases, this could just be amusing - but as we develop better AIs, I'm wondering if a machine could "learn" to develop protocols that would contradict what we wanted them to do. That would really open a can of worms, wouldn't it?
Okay, this is pretty funny, but there's a really valid point buried in this thread.
While we could easily rapidly oxidize (i.e. burn) the cricket for energy, it's an awfully inefficient way to get the energy out. And as for annihilating the cricket and converting it directly to energy, well, that's problematic at best.
Somehow, our bodies are able to chemically metabolize crickets in a way that gets a lot more bang for the buck. And, if we could somehow build a bot to hunt and metabolize crickets when its battery got low, man, that would be awesome.
There's a lot of research directed at getting computers to mimic the human brain, but I think it could be equally useful to get them to mimic living metabolism.
The language performance tests tell us what we already knew: C is better than anything else, for everything - except handling text. When it comes to handling text, it blows goats, so you should use PERL. Everything else is crap.
The next Shakespeare is probably clacking away on some Weblog or messaging system
You really have to wonder whether Shakespeare would have been held in such high regard, or would have even written the plays he did, if, if after every posting, he was hit with 4,000 flames and 500 requests for naked AVI's of Juliette.
I think it would be much more effective to shoot him than to strap twelve cell phones to his head and make him chain-smoke while microwaving burrito after burrito and watching television on a World War II-era set.
Falsely representing yourself as someone else, its a crime. As in illegal.
Maybe we ought to find this Signa1 l1 (that's, I believe, Signa one L one) guy and throw him behind bars. Or, we could arrest Tom Green for claiming to be the real Slim Shady.
How's this for civil disobedience: "My name is Bageeno Hormonis. I work for Starbucks."
For some reason, porn spam never actually leads to real porn.
What are these spammers thinking? It seems to me to be a reasonable business model to 1) Put up a porn site; and 2) Advertise it.
But, instead, the porn-spammers tend to skip step 1, and you get a site with 12,000 banner links to other non-existent porn sites, and when you close that window, six more pop up with 5,000 banner links to the aforementioned sites.
I mean, seriously, I don't mind sex being delivered through advertisements. Hell, that's why I subscribe to the Victoria's Secret Catalog. But this - man, they're just teasing me. I say, give this guy 80 years and chemical castration.
The Offspring, like Limp Bizkit, are one of the bands that have come out in support of Napster - claiming that it helped musicians get their music to the public and that it was a Good Thing.
So, why the sudden change of heart? Obviously, lawyers didn't make this decision. It's ballsy, and it's weird, and it's risky. Is it just a big joke?
Nearly everyone who uses "Rant Mode" is moderated through the roof. Maybe it gives them a fucking good excuse to use a fuckload of profanity and insult the collective fucking intelligence of the so-called fucking Slashdot community. So, what the fuck is so insightful about "Let's not take away sources for venting stress". Maybe I'm venting my stress right now. Are you fucking moderators going to moderate me down? Is that what Kintanon would have fucking wanted? Maybe if you moderate me down so fewer people can read this, I'll end up fucking shooting my co-worker in the fucking head. And I'm tired of people saying I'm tired of people saying "That's not the way to handle it" and not offering a better way. and then not offering a better way. I say, this fucking rant is no better than any troll re: Natalie Portman, and offers no more fucking insight than "OPEN SOURCE IT" or "Can you imagine a Beowulf cluster of these?"
Slashdot Mirror
Why buy legos in bulk and waste them building something immediately? I say, carry around a giant backpack full of them. That way, if an emergency comes up, and you need something right now, you can just construct it.
Haven't you ever misplaced your crack pipe? It can be a hassle when the only construction materials at your disposal are duct tape, a bottle of gatorade, six McDonald's straws, and a jar of peanut butter.
Also, if you were ever in a shipwreck, and you ended up on a desert island, and then a CRT tube and solar panel washed up on shore, you could construct your own television.
See, the possibilities are endless.
Snot?
30K is... a lot. Did she massively underestimate demand or something? My friends have a "brit-pop" band - they produced their first album for $3,000 and recouped about $2,200 in sales. It's still a loss, but it makes me wonder who would take a $30,000 hit.
I'm also accepting $15 million investments if anyone is interested
If your name was chez69_Linux_Solutions, I'd consider it.
Actually, someone left a post here a couple months ago about a mining company that changed its name from something like "Johnson Minerals" to "Linux Solutions" the day before it went IPO. It was a surprisingly successful IPO for a mining company. Sorry, I don't remember any of the specifics.
Napster makes money?? How?
It may not seem like they have a business model that would make money, but appearances can be deceiving. Almost no high-tech companies make a profit on the merits of their own business these days. They rely heavily on advertising, investment, and stock.
I read somewhere that Napster's involved in this game and is going/has gone IPO. I don't know if that's true. But if my company can exist for a year without putting out a product, and attract $5 million venture capital to boot, something as high-profile as Napster should have no problem making a bundle.
They did a survey about internet usage and excluded everybody under 18??
My 16-year-old brother and all his friends are on summer vacation right now. Since they're too lazy to work, they spend all day alternating between grabbing MP3s and playing Age of Empires II.
Someone show me an 18+ year old with that kind of spare time on his/her hands. Sure, they exist. But not in such overwhelming numbers.
RealPlayer and Quicktime rank as my #1 and #2 most annoying pieces of software, ever. The thought of them working together makes me cringe.
They've probably got a team of engineers working on new, unexpected places to put shortcuts, fully integrated networks of "Register Now/ Later" windows, hideously overdone interfaces, and random things to stick in unexpected places in the registry.
This is the worst news I've had in months.
If I see one more Ayn Rand comment today on slashdot, I am going to light the entire state of michigan on fire in your name.
I hereby christen Chiasmus' rule: All Slashdot stories must eventually become a discussion on one of five topics:
1. Linux and the Open Source movement.
2. MP3s and intellectual property.
3. Ayn Rand.
4. The War on Drugs.
5. The inadequacies of Slashdot itself.
It doesn't matter what the story is. It will become a discussion on one of these five topics.
Numbers added: Which does not differentiate between 1. A causing B, 2. B causing A, 3. A and B both being caused by C, 4. A causing B indirectly through some other factor D, 5. B causing A through some other factor E, or 6. A and B occuring together more often due to chance.
Let's see...
1. Cell phones cause brain cancer.
2. Brain cancer causes people to use cell phones.
3. Solar flares cause both brain cancer and an uncontrollable desire to use a cell phone.
4. Cell phones cause brain cancer, but only because people's fingers contain trace amounts of uranium, and their fingers are too close to their brain all day.
5. Brain cancer causes cell phone use, but only because people with brain cancer need to call their doctors from unusual places at all hours of the day, so they buy cell phones.
6. It's pure coincidence that brain cancer correllates with cell phone use. On a side note, we at Brown & Williamson believe that it's pure coincidence that lung cancer correlates with cigarette smoking.
Your points on correllation and causation are technically correct. But, come on, use Occam's razor. One of these things is not like the others (hint: the others are ridiculous)
One airline stewardess made me shut my TI-85 off and stick it under the seat during takeoff.
I've always assumed there was some kind of a reason. After all, people in positions of authority rarely act arbitrarily.
That's interesting, though. Apparently, this is a method for turning sonar into computer-readable data, which is, as far as I know, the same way these marine mammals communicate.
Two implications spring to mind: 1) Is there any chance of getting "dolphin interference" in the signal?; and 2) Could this make it easier to eventually decode these sonar signals, which some scientists think could be a highly developed lanaguage?
Even if this turns out to be futile, this kind of technology could prove pretty useful for marine researchers - this way, you could go down in SCUBA gear with a waterproof laptop and still be able to get online.
I think the government should drop the euphamisms and just officially declare the "War on Its Citizens" that it's been waging for years.
As the "best Slashdot article title - ever".
I think you forgot one.
D) He's completely out of relevent stories.
Since Jon Katz doesn't know anything about technology, he has to "guess" at what interests us, and having written eight million articles about censorship, he's now turning to random buzz.
Give him a couple months, and we'll get "Pocket Lint: What it means to American society."
You know, I'm not sure we should include too much redundancy in our machines.
Generally, we're probably going to use these things in controlled environments where adaptability isn't going to be a massive concern.
My real issue is that the more a machine adapts, the harder it is to shut it down. In some cases, this could just be amusing - but as we develop better AIs, I'm wondering if a machine could "learn" to develop protocols that would contradict what we wanted them to do. That would really open a can of worms, wouldn't it?
Okay, this is pretty funny, but there's a really valid point buried in this thread.
While we could easily rapidly oxidize (i.e. burn) the cricket for energy, it's an awfully inefficient way to get the energy out. And as for annihilating the cricket and converting it directly to energy, well, that's problematic at best.
Somehow, our bodies are able to chemically metabolize crickets in a way that gets a lot more bang for the buck. And, if we could somehow build a bot to hunt and metabolize crickets when its battery got low, man, that would be awesome.
There's a lot of research directed at getting computers to mimic the human brain, but I think it could be equally useful to get them to mimic living metabolism.
The language performance tests tell us what we already knew: C is better than anything else, for everything - except handling text. When it comes to handling text, it blows goats, so you should use PERL. Everything else is crap.
Micro$oft doesn't always come up with new standards. When in doubt, they just look to the Teletype Model 33.
The next Shakespeare is probably clacking away on some Weblog or messaging system
You really have to wonder whether Shakespeare would have been held in such high regard, or would have even written the plays he did, if, if after every posting, he was hit with 4,000 flames and 500 requests for naked AVI's of Juliette.
Yes, it would.
I think it would be much more effective to shoot him than to strap twelve cell phones to his head and make him chain-smoke while microwaving burrito after burrito and watching television on a World War II-era set.
Falsely representing yourself as someone else, its a crime. As in illegal.
Maybe we ought to find this Signa1 l1 (that's, I believe, Signa one L one) guy and throw him behind bars. Or, we could arrest Tom Green for claiming to be the real Slim Shady.
How's this for civil disobedience: "My name is Bageeno Hormonis. I work for Starbucks."
Dude!
Your stupid haiku has six syllables on the third line.
Go to my porn site
It will open twelve windows
Full of banner links
For some reason, porn spam never actually leads to real porn.
What are these spammers thinking? It seems to me to be a reasonable business model to 1) Put up a porn site; and 2) Advertise it.
But, instead, the porn-spammers tend to skip step 1, and you get a site with 12,000 banner links to other non-existent porn sites, and when you close that window, six more pop up with 5,000 banner links to the aforementioned sites.
I mean, seriously, I don't mind sex being delivered through advertisements. Hell, that's why I subscribe to the Victoria's Secret Catalog. But this - man, they're just teasing me. I say, give this guy 80 years and chemical castration.
The Offspring, like Limp Bizkit, are one of the bands that have come out in support of Napster - claiming that it helped musicians get their music to the public and that it was a Good Thing.
So, why the sudden change of heart? Obviously, lawyers didn't make this decision. It's ballsy, and it's weird, and it's risky. Is it just a big joke?
Rant Mode: On
Nearly everyone who uses "Rant Mode" is moderated through the roof.
Maybe it gives them a fucking good excuse to use a fuckload of profanity and insult the collective fucking intelligence of the so-called fucking Slashdot community.
So, what the fuck is so insightful about "Let's not take away sources for venting stress". Maybe I'm venting my stress right now. Are you fucking moderators going to moderate me down? Is that what Kintanon would have fucking wanted? Maybe if you moderate me down so fewer people can read this, I'll end up fucking shooting my co-worker in the fucking head.
And I'm tired of people saying I'm tired of people saying "That's not the way to handle it" and not offering a better way. and then not offering a better way. I say, this fucking rant is no better than any troll re: Natalie Portman, and offers no more fucking insight than "OPEN SOURCE IT" or "Can you imagine a Beowulf cluster of these?"
Rant mode: Off.