and how is this situation different from every developing nation in the world? And that includes the US 200 years ago.
Socialism and capitalism are not mutually exclusive. And you neither is capitalism and totalitarianism. And neither is socialism and democracy. The best countries to live in are democratic with a mix of socialism and capitalism. China has a totalitarian government with a mix of socialism and capitalism. Conditions suck in most places in China because of the totalitarian government. Conditions are good in some places in China because they have a mix of socialism and capitalism. Conditions suck in some places in the US because the government is becoming less democratic and there is this weird phobia about socialism.
Remember that time the US fired a missile at a hostile Iranian aircraft and then whoops it turned out to be a 747 loaded with passengers?
How about the hundreds (maybe thousands) of times an aircraft was approaching a carrier group and they sent some fighters around to intercept and escort those planes out of the area.
If your a captain of a warship and some planes are approaching the ship, what do you do? If all you have are missiles you fire a missile and hope that plane is really a hostile attack plane. But if you have some fighter planes you can send them over to take a closer look. Oh its just a passenger plane... good thing we fire a missile at it.
So yeah if you know the other plane is hostile you'll likely shoot it down before you can see it. But if you don't know the other plane's intentions, you are likely to see it. Not everytime a fighter intercepts another plane does it result in a plane getting shot down.
to each his own... I hated the RPG stuff in WC3. Long after WC3 came out I was still playing the original SC because I like building big armies and having epic battles, not leveling up a couple of heroes and having battles with only about a dozen units on each side. If I want an RPG I play Diablo. I never tried WoW because I don't like RPGs enough to fork over $15 a month for one.
WC3 tried to be a RTS and a RPG at the same time and did neither very well. I guess if you like RPGs then it might be the best RTS game for you, but a lot of people want a pure RTS.
And SC1 was (arguably) the best RTS of all time. People were still playing it (some professionally) right up until SC2 came out. If they never made SC2 or if it was radically different, there's a good chance the people who were playing SC1 would reject it and just keep playing SC1. I don't think they were afraid to change it, they just recognised that if it ain't broke then don't fix it.
For people who loved Starcraft, Blizzard did everything right with SC2. They could have dumbed it down to make it appeal to a larger audience, but they didn't. They looked at how people were playing the original starcraft, how people were playing tournaments, all the amazing custom maps people made (many of which required hacks to get around the limitations of a 10 year old game) and made it easier for them to do what they wanted. They included the map editor they used to create the single player campaign with the game so that people could more easily create custom maps.
I think SC2 is a good example of how to make a good sequel. Listen to what people want, add new features, but don't take away the things people loved about the original.
the other way was far worse. Its far more common that you have a big group of units with a special ability and you only want one or two to use it on a unit than have all of them use the special ability. In SC1 I had to select individual units and press Y and then click on a target, then find another battlecruiser (that has enough energy) and do it again. after you do this two or three times you end up selecting one thats already used the yamato and therefore doesn't have the energy to use it again, so you have to find another one... and well it was quite frustrating.
As it is now I can send a fleet of BCs into a base hit Y and then click on the anti-air buildings or capital ships very quickly. And if I need to take out a building like a command center I can just use it three times and its toast.
Yes MS had to pay a bunch of lobbyists to get regulators off their backs, but that was because they were actually breaking the law. They were illegally using their monopoly in the OS market to squeeze out competitors in other markets. We bitch about how bad IE is but we're damned lucky that MS let it stagnate so long. Otherwise we'd all be forced to use the Microsoft Internet, which could only be viewed with MS software that was copyrighted and patented to prevent anyone from using it.
Apple can be bastards at times, but they aren't a monopoly in any market so they don't have anything to worry about from regulators, as long as they don't cook the books.
It just means the company you're investing in has decided to re-invest their profits into expansion. If their expansion plans succeed and is profitable the company will grow in value. If they piss it all away then the company doesn't grow and the stock does not increase in value.
Its no more of a gamble than investing in a company that pays dividends. The company pay dividends could just as easily fuck things up as a company that is growing. If that happens the company doesn't make a profit and you don't get your dividends.
So when investing in a company that doesn't pay dividends you have to ask yourself "am I confident that this company will continue to grow?" When investing in a company that does pays dividends, you have to ask yourself "am I confident that this company will remain profitable?" Either way its only a gamble if you don't know anything about the company.
yeah, in the US its called eminent domain. The above poster is full of shit, the US government, along with the government can take your land (with compensation). Hell in the US they've done it because some corporation wants to build an office building. They do it all the time for highways and railroads.
Besides that they already have land being use by the existing rail network that they could use to build high speed networks. The problem is that the US just doesn't have the will to embark on large scale projects anymore.
We have so many reality shows now not because they're extremely popular and make lots of money, but because they're really cheap to make.
Another thing about reality shows is they choose people who are mentally unstable or at least willing to act a little nuts. Because that makes for interesting TV. Having those kinds of personalities on a Mars mission would be a disaster. So you'd have a group of normal people living in a confined space doing boring things like checking gauges and fiddling a few switches every now and then. Who is going to pay several billion dollars to produce a show like that?
I think it wold be a lot easier to just have your terrorist apply for a job at the TSA. Then it would be pretty easy for them to get anything they want into the secure area.
Do TSA employees have to have a naked scan and/or get molested every time they go into work?
They are not redacting the names of public figures. We know all about Hilary Clinton's opinions of different world leaders because they did not redact things like "secretary of state" or "ambassdor to wherever". We know about private moments with foreign leaders like the president of france and his son playing with a cute bunny rabbit.
Julian Assange obviously believes that private information on public people is fair game. So him being a public figure all information on is private life should be aired out for everyone to see. Anything less then he's a hypocrite.
A naked breast? A girl in a bikini? A diagram of female/male anatomy?
Different people define porn in different ways. Should wikipedia be changed to wikipedia.xxx because there are some naked pictures on there? Who decides?
Every individual need to make the categorizations for themselves. Supervise your kids when they're on the internet.
Do a little exercise. Invent a user interface that people are going to know how to use and give access to the most needed features.
People are used to there being an X to click to close a window. They are used to having a taskbar at the bottom of the screen. When you invent your revolutionary new interface, be damned sure you know what you're doing if you make things different from what people are expecting.
And yeah IBM, Novel and others paid for a lot of usability studies for Linux. The result of those studies showed that people were familiar with concepts such as windows, buttons, scrollbars, dragging and dropping, taskbars, notifications areas and menus. OMG but Microsoft has those things, and we need to be DIFFERENT! So we should ignore all those usability studies and make a square wheel because we don't want to be like MS?
Thats what Apple did, I suppose. But apple has the reality distortion field where you can have a bad UI, but if you have neat special effects to go along with it then its the best interface evar!
Linux does not possess a reality distortion field. But it does have a good UI. MS did usability studies. Linux did usability studies. Some of the things they came up with were similar. Therefore some UI elements were similar.
It is not a cheap copy. In fact I've noticed some UI elements in Windows 7 that were "copied" from linux.
The thing is windows has gotten people used to doing things the wrong way. You really should be avoiding downloading.exe files that claim to be installers. You should be using packages. First of all an.exe could be a virus. and Secondly an.exe is not aware of libraries and dependencies. But MS has only recently introduced MSI packages, so many software developers are used to simply putting stuff in whats basically an executable zip file and copying all the dll's needed with the exe, and you end up using more disk space and using more memory when running multiple apps.
You really don't need to use the command line in linux anymore. You can access pretty much everything using either the GUI or the CLI. But when you ask for help installing something, people are going to say "sudo apt-get install whatever" because that is a hell of a lot easier than saying "click Applications, Ubuntu Software Center, click on search bar (with the magnifying glass) type whatever, click on whatever, click the install button, type in your password". And its much easier for you when you're following the instructions to simply copy and paste the command into a terminal window and press enter.
Poor documentation? WTF? I find that to be the biggest strength of linux. I type "Ubuntu whatever problem" into google and 95% of the time I have the answer on the first page of results. Compare to windows where I have spent half a day or more trying to get a solution to a problem.
And ubuntuforums is always very friendly. People really bend over backwards to try to help you find a solution for a problem.
For your windows apps you have several solutions available. Wine works really well. You can install windows in a virtualbox. And you can dual boot.
But all of your points can be summed up into one: You're used to windows and linux is not windows. You know where to find documentation, and support for windows, and you have some windows only apps you like. You are used to installing things in windows.
I use Linux, Windows, and MacOS, and honestly Linux is the best out of the three. I triple boot because games work better on windows. I don't really use MacOS much, though I liked iPhoto (until it broke, it doesn't seem to work anymore) and the DVD player is nicer in MacOS, though I had to fiddle around with a hack to get around the region coding. But for browsing the web, listening to music, doing work (you know what I use my computer for 90% of the time), its all linux. MS has made some improvements with.Net and MSI's and they have improved security and stability, but its still not there.
All Assange was saying was basically "who dares speak against ME??" And the other guy was just trying to get some work done. Assange refused to give the guy the answers he needed to get his work done.
He was acting like a douche and the other guy got pissed off and told him he was a douche. And then Assange proves it by unilaterally suspending the guy.
Face it Assange is a douchebag, and he's going to bring down wikileaks.
nope, the word podcast came directly from iPod. People didn't use pod when describing mp3 players before the iPod came out.
But yeah if its only a video projector I suppose Apple doesn't have much of a case. Maybe Apple is planning on making a video projector system that you can plug your iPod into?
It is a stupid name though, I've googled for "video pod" and all the results I can see are about iPods playing videos. If I was in the market for a video projector I wouldn't buy it because I'd never be able to find any reviews on it.
how were they being dicks? They had the name first and mozilla naming it firebird did cause confusion. I myself typed apt-get install firebird and got a database installed when I wanted a browser.
Really it was mozilla being ignorant and stepping on the toes of an already existing open source project. They could have done a quick google and found someone else was using the name, and not only that but an open source project, which meant you'd end up with two unrelated pieces with the same name in all the Linux distros.
is it really censorship if the author agrees to it? Sounds to me its more of a situation where the pentagon phones up the author, let him know that he mentions a person in the book who is still active in the field, and he'll be in danger once the book is published. The author said "oh shit, I didn't realize that, the intention of my book isn't to put someone's life in danger, I'll change it up so that doesn't happen."
Israel provides valuable intel to the US. Intel on extremists in the Middle East.
Also the aid is attached to an agreement that Israel will buy weapons from the US. This means that Israel develops tactics and strategies using the same weapons that US forces use. This information is shared with the US military and results in fewer casualties of American soldiers.
Are you arguing that spending money on information that saves American lives is a waste of money?
The Privacy Policy is between you and Facebook. There is no privacy policy between you and everyone in the world.
If an employee of Facebook violates the privacy policy between you and Facebook then they can be sued. If Facebook gets a subpoena requesting information from their servers then they have to comply or the judge can throw them in jail. You cannot sue Facebook for complying with a subpoena. Because not complying with a subpoena would be against the law. Contracts cannot compel someone to break the law.
So yeah, a subpoena or search warrant trumps any privacy policy or contract you may have.
So Facebook has to abide by its privacy policy, but the courts do not have to abide by Facebook's privacy policy. You could say the courts are above the law, but its more accurate to say that the courts ARE the law.
If I tell all my friends that I'm faking my injury, and the person or company I'm suing hears of it, they can put my friend on the stand and my friend has to tell the court what I said, or risk being charged for perjury.
The company can even hire a PI and can submit photos of you doing activities that you wouldn't be able to do if you were uninjured, as long os the PI doesn't break any laws in getting them.
The courts have always been able to do this, and they've always been able to subpoena things like phone records and emails. Why should it be any different for facebook?
Bottom line, don't sue someone for personal injury if you're not really injured.
Slashdot Mirror
and how is this situation different from every developing nation in the world? And that includes the US 200 years ago.
Socialism and capitalism are not mutually exclusive. And you neither is capitalism and totalitarianism. And neither is socialism and democracy. The best countries to live in are democratic with a mix of socialism and capitalism. China has a totalitarian government with a mix of socialism and capitalism. Conditions suck in most places in China because of the totalitarian government. Conditions are good in some places in China because they have a mix of socialism and capitalism. Conditions suck in some places in the US because the government is becoming less democratic and there is this weird phobia about socialism.
In the US, we put a high value on individual legal rights unless you're a muslim or a communist. In China, it's much lower. - FTFY.
Remember that time the US fired a missile at a hostile Iranian aircraft and then whoops it turned out to be a 747 loaded with passengers?
How about the hundreds (maybe thousands) of times an aircraft was approaching a carrier group and they sent some fighters around to intercept and escort those planes out of the area.
If your a captain of a warship and some planes are approaching the ship, what do you do? If all you have are missiles you fire a missile and hope that plane is really a hostile attack plane. But if you have some fighter planes you can send them over to take a closer look. Oh its just a passenger plane... good thing we fire a missile at it.
So yeah if you know the other plane is hostile you'll likely shoot it down before you can see it. But if you don't know the other plane's intentions, you are likely to see it. Not everytime a fighter intercepts another plane does it result in a plane getting shot down.
to each his own... I hated the RPG stuff in WC3. Long after WC3 came out I was still playing the original SC because I like building big armies and having epic battles, not leveling up a couple of heroes and having battles with only about a dozen units on each side. If I want an RPG I play Diablo. I never tried WoW because I don't like RPGs enough to fork over $15 a month for one.
WC3 tried to be a RTS and a RPG at the same time and did neither very well. I guess if you like RPGs then it might be the best RTS game for you, but a lot of people want a pure RTS.
And SC1 was (arguably) the best RTS of all time. People were still playing it (some professionally) right up until SC2 came out. If they never made SC2 or if it was radically different, there's a good chance the people who were playing SC1 would reject it and just keep playing SC1. I don't think they were afraid to change it, they just recognised that if it ain't broke then don't fix it.
For people who loved Starcraft, Blizzard did everything right with SC2. They could have dumbed it down to make it appeal to a larger audience, but they didn't. They looked at how people were playing the original starcraft, how people were playing tournaments, all the amazing custom maps people made (many of which required hacks to get around the limitations of a 10 year old game) and made it easier for them to do what they wanted. They included the map editor they used to create the single player campaign with the game so that people could more easily create custom maps.
I think SC2 is a good example of how to make a good sequel. Listen to what people want, add new features, but don't take away the things people loved about the original.
the other way was far worse. Its far more common that you have a big group of units with a special ability and you only want one or two to use it on a unit than have all of them use the special ability. In SC1 I had to select individual units and press Y and then click on a target, then find another battlecruiser (that has enough energy) and do it again. after you do this two or three times you end up selecting one thats already used the yamato and therefore doesn't have the energy to use it again, so you have to find another one... and well it was quite frustrating.
As it is now I can send a fleet of BCs into a base hit Y and then click on the anti-air buildings or capital ships very quickly. And if I need to take out a building like a command center I can just use it three times and its toast.
Only if they're doing something illegal.
Yes MS had to pay a bunch of lobbyists to get regulators off their backs, but that was because they were actually breaking the law. They were illegally using their monopoly in the OS market to squeeze out competitors in other markets. We bitch about how bad IE is but we're damned lucky that MS let it stagnate so long. Otherwise we'd all be forced to use the Microsoft Internet, which could only be viewed with MS software that was copyrighted and patented to prevent anyone from using it.
Apple can be bastards at times, but they aren't a monopoly in any market so they don't have anything to worry about from regulators, as long as they don't cook the books.
ummm no.
It just means the company you're investing in has decided to re-invest their profits into expansion. If their expansion plans succeed and is profitable the company will grow in value. If they piss it all away then the company doesn't grow and the stock does not increase in value.
Its no more of a gamble than investing in a company that pays dividends. The company pay dividends could just as easily fuck things up as a company that is growing. If that happens the company doesn't make a profit and you don't get your dividends.
So when investing in a company that doesn't pay dividends you have to ask yourself "am I confident that this company will continue to grow?" When investing in a company that does pays dividends, you have to ask yourself "am I confident that this company will remain profitable?" Either way its only a gamble if you don't know anything about the company.
yeah, in the US its called eminent domain. The above poster is full of shit, the US government, along with the government can take your land (with compensation). Hell in the US they've done it because some corporation wants to build an office building. They do it all the time for highways and railroads.
Besides that they already have land being use by the existing rail network that they could use to build high speed networks. The problem is that the US just doesn't have the will to embark on large scale projects anymore.
We have so many reality shows now not because they're extremely popular and make lots of money, but because they're really cheap to make.
Another thing about reality shows is they choose people who are mentally unstable or at least willing to act a little nuts. Because that makes for interesting TV. Having those kinds of personalities on a Mars mission would be a disaster. So you'd have a group of normal people living in a confined space doing boring things like checking gauges and fiddling a few switches every now and then. Who is going to pay several billion dollars to produce a show like that?
I think it wold be a lot easier to just have your terrorist apply for a job at the TSA. Then it would be pretty easy for them to get anything they want into the secure area.
Do TSA employees have to have a naked scan and/or get molested every time they go into work?
They are not redacting the names of public figures. We know all about Hilary Clinton's opinions of different world leaders because they did not redact things like "secretary of state" or "ambassdor to wherever". We know about private moments with foreign leaders like the president of france and his son playing with a cute bunny rabbit.
Julian Assange obviously believes that private information on public people is fair game. So him being a public figure all information on is private life should be aired out for everyone to see. Anything less then he's a hypocrite.
Exactly how do you define porn?
A naked breast? A girl in a bikini? A diagram of female/male anatomy?
Different people define porn in different ways. Should wikipedia be changed to wikipedia.xxx because there are some naked pictures on there? Who decides?
Every individual need to make the categorizations for themselves. Supervise your kids when they're on the internet.
Yeah but neither of those companies contributed any soft money and microsoft did.
Do a little exercise. Invent a user interface that people are going to know how to use and give access to the most needed features.
People are used to there being an X to click to close a window. They are used to having a taskbar at the bottom of the screen. When you invent your revolutionary new interface, be damned sure you know what you're doing if you make things different from what people are expecting.
And yeah IBM, Novel and others paid for a lot of usability studies for Linux. The result of those studies showed that people were familiar with concepts such as windows, buttons, scrollbars, dragging and dropping, taskbars, notifications areas and menus. OMG but Microsoft has those things, and we need to be DIFFERENT! So we should ignore all those usability studies and make a square wheel because we don't want to be like MS?
Thats what Apple did, I suppose. But apple has the reality distortion field where you can have a bad UI, but if you have neat special effects to go along with it then its the best interface evar!
Linux does not possess a reality distortion field. But it does have a good UI. MS did usability studies. Linux did usability studies. Some of the things they came up with were similar. Therefore some UI elements were similar.
It is not a cheap copy. In fact I've noticed some UI elements in Windows 7 that were "copied" from linux.
The thing is windows has gotten people used to doing things the wrong way. You really should be avoiding downloading .exe files that claim to be installers. You should be using packages. First of all an .exe could be a virus. and Secondly an .exe is not aware of libraries and dependencies. But MS has only recently introduced MSI packages, so many software developers are used to simply putting stuff in whats basically an executable zip file and copying all the dll's needed with the exe, and you end up using more disk space and using more memory when running multiple apps.
You really don't need to use the command line in linux anymore. You can access pretty much everything using either the GUI or the CLI. But when you ask for help installing something, people are going to say "sudo apt-get install whatever" because that is a hell of a lot easier than saying "click Applications, Ubuntu Software Center, click on search bar (with the magnifying glass) type whatever, click on whatever, click the install button, type in your password". And its much easier for you when you're following the instructions to simply copy and paste the command into a terminal window and press enter.
Poor documentation? WTF? I find that to be the biggest strength of linux. I type "Ubuntu whatever problem" into google and 95% of the time I have the answer on the first page of results. Compare to windows where I have spent half a day or more trying to get a solution to a problem.
And ubuntuforums is always very friendly. People really bend over backwards to try to help you find a solution for a problem.
For your windows apps you have several solutions available. Wine works really well. You can install windows in a virtualbox. And you can dual boot.
But all of your points can be summed up into one: You're used to windows and linux is not windows. You know where to find documentation, and support for windows, and you have some windows only apps you like. You are used to installing things in windows.
I use Linux, Windows, and MacOS, and honestly Linux is the best out of the three. I triple boot because games work better on windows. I don't really use MacOS much, though I liked iPhoto (until it broke, it doesn't seem to work anymore) and the DVD player is nicer in MacOS, though I had to fiddle around with a hack to get around the region coding. But for browsing the web, listening to music, doing work (you know what I use my computer for 90% of the time), its all linux. MS has made some improvements with .Net and MSI's and they have improved security and stability, but its still not there.
were you reading the same chatlog?
All Assange was saying was basically "who dares speak against ME??" And the other guy was just trying to get some work done. Assange refused to give the guy the answers he needed to get his work done.
He was acting like a douche and the other guy got pissed off and told him he was a douche. And then Assange proves it by unilaterally suspending the guy.
Face it Assange is a douchebag, and he's going to bring down wikileaks.
yeah you can have an honest internal discussion and King Julian suspends you on the spot if you give any criticism.
And apparently everyone is jumping ship.... so yeah Julian's management style sucks.
nope, the word podcast came directly from iPod. People didn't use pod when describing mp3 players before the iPod came out.
But yeah if its only a video projector I suppose Apple doesn't have much of a case. Maybe Apple is planning on making a video projector system that you can plug your iPod into?
It is a stupid name though, I've googled for "video pod" and all the results I can see are about iPods playing videos. If I was in the market for a video projector I wouldn't buy it because I'd never be able to find any reviews on it.
how were they being dicks? They had the name first and mozilla naming it firebird did cause confusion. I myself typed apt-get install firebird and got a database installed when I wanted a browser.
Really it was mozilla being ignorant and stepping on the toes of an already existing open source project. They could have done a quick google and found someone else was using the name, and not only that but an open source project, which meant you'd end up with two unrelated pieces with the same name in all the Linux distros.
but technology advances that result from cell phone research benefits the space program!
is it really censorship if the author agrees to it? Sounds to me its more of a situation where the pentagon phones up the author, let him know that he mentions a person in the book who is still active in the field, and he'll be in danger once the book is published. The author said "oh shit, I didn't realize that, the intention of my book isn't to put someone's life in danger, I'll change it up so that doesn't happen."
Israel provides valuable intel to the US. Intel on extremists in the Middle East.
Also the aid is attached to an agreement that Israel will buy weapons from the US. This means that Israel develops tactics and strategies using the same weapons that US forces use. This information is shared with the US military and results in fewer casualties of American soldiers.
Are you arguing that spending money on information that saves American lives is a waste of money?
The Privacy Policy is between you and Facebook. There is no privacy policy between you and everyone in the world.
If an employee of Facebook violates the privacy policy between you and Facebook then they can be sued. If Facebook gets a subpoena requesting information from their servers then they have to comply or the judge can throw them in jail. You cannot sue Facebook for complying with a subpoena. Because not complying with a subpoena would be against the law. Contracts cannot compel someone to break the law.
So yeah, a subpoena or search warrant trumps any privacy policy or contract you may have.
So Facebook has to abide by its privacy policy, but the courts do not have to abide by Facebook's privacy policy. You could say the courts are above the law, but its more accurate to say that the courts ARE the law.
Uh no.
If I tell all my friends that I'm faking my injury, and the person or company I'm suing hears of it, they can put my friend on the stand and my friend has to tell the court what I said, or risk being charged for perjury.
The company can even hire a PI and can submit photos of you doing activities that you wouldn't be able to do if you were uninjured, as long os the PI doesn't break any laws in getting them.
The courts have always been able to do this, and they've always been able to subpoena things like phone records and emails. Why should it be any different for facebook?
Bottom line, don't sue someone for personal injury if you're not really injured.
Yeah its almost as is the Defendant was trying to defend himself by proving the Plaintiff wasn't really injured.