Innovation in music happens when some teenage kid has to choose between suicide and picking up his guitar, when some girl writes new lyrics while she's crying of a broken heart,
Bwahahaha. The sort of angsty tripe that those two losers would write is exactly the sort of melodramatic tripe that corporate music executives like - it sells well to angsty teenage idiots. When Kurt Cobain blew his brains out, the corporate music world blew its load into its collective pants working out the profits it would make.
True innovation in music comes from balanced people who don't think "waaah, I am sad, let's write a song" is a valid artistic statement.
Napster was never for distributing unsigned bands. It was for stealing copyrighted material. That is why it has been shut down: it was illegal. That is why it is currently dead (all the criminals are going to places like Gnutella).
I download MP3s. I burn MP3s to CD. I do not burn complete albums to CDs; I buy those, but I love to make compilation CDs. I also love the inserts and lyrics and stats on the band that come with purchasing a CD; nothing can replace that. Is that so dishonest?
Yes, if you are downloading MP3's of music which is under copyright. This is called piracy and it is illegal. Thank you, come again!
bandwidth is cheap. processor power is cheap. why should we dick around with formats that are impossible for developers to use? anyway, bandwidth issues will be mitigated by the new binary xml formats that are coming up.
Re:Maybe you misunderstood.
on
Beer In Space
·
· Score: 1
shouldn't a nitrogen-powered keg (Guinness) work?
probably not --- there's no assurance that once you pump gas in, it goes to the top of the keg and the beer stays at the bottom by the output pipe, because there's no such thing as "top" and "bottom" in space:)
There's a feeling nowadays that the experiments that demonstrated the extended daily cycle when you remove the cue of the sun were flawed: they let people turn the lights up and down themselves. Just an electric light is thought nowadays to be enough to reset your circadian rhythm, so these people were actually programming themselves into an artificial cycle. There's a feeling that people have on average a 24-hour cycle, but "owls" have a slightly longer natural cycle and "larks" a slightly shorter one. There was a good article in the New Scientist about this recently, but their server's down so I can't link to it...
Any sillier than "Oneday", "Twoday", etc? Or just sillier than being called the "Human Calculator"? Sounds like some weird B-Movie: sequels "The Human Vacuum Cleaner (He Sucks!)" and "The Human Insectocuter".
Just imagine a movie of _War and Peace_ (I know there is one, but haven't seen it; I _have_ read the book); I can't imagine it doing any kind of justice to the book.
There's lots. The one that rocks is Bondarchuk's. 6 1/2 hours, subtitles, absolutely fantastic. Beg, buy, borrow or steal it.
Not even that --- most of the technologies he describes haven't died at all and have never even looked like dying. There's a tram system in Croydon, lots of people wear automatic watches, etc etc. And, yes, the full orchestra in my pants is rather pleasant.
Don't many studios still use some varient of the 'ribbon microphone'?
Yep, and the article even says "ribbon microphones remain popular today... still manufactured by Royer Labs"
And as for saying that the automatic watch is a "passed technology"; well, I guess it shows the writer hasn't been successful enough to own a decent watch.
I guess that according to the logic of this article, supercomputers are a "passed technology" because everyone uses client/server.
SSL2 doesn't have client certificates; that's SSL3. The article says
While SSL requires that the server authenticate to the user, it is usually an option for the user to authenticate to the server. And since so very few users own personal certificates, it is exceedingly rare for a user to be able to prove their identity to the server in question -- leaving the connection open to attack.
To which the obvious answer is: pull your finger out and issue client certs to your users. If it's that important that you know who they are, then the effort must be worth it. This article is basically just an enormous troll.
One joystick controls your head: changing your view of the world; the other joystick moves you forward, back, left and right (strafing, not turning)
Almost no serious Quake/GenericFPS players nowadays play any other way --- the mouse is your head, the keyboard is your feet. Once you've learnt to do it, you never go back --- in fact, nowadays I find I physically cannot control the game any other way! Of course like any good rule there are exceptions - the guys who can speedrun Quake levels on keyboard only are too scary for words.
yesyesyesyesyes - this is the point. a physical desktop isn't something that you own that no-one else can join in on, so why do virtual desktops behave like that? OK, we get our work done now, but I cuss a blue streak every day about one thing or another, so something's got to change;)
no no no no no no no --- mouse 2 is being used by person 2! person 2 probably doesn't have the same security permissions you do (eg. you're showing him your document, so he's got rights over the scrollbars, but he *definitely* doesn't own the delete button). use the desktop metaphor --- on my desk at work, I can move stuff around. Other people can move stuff around, and write on some stuff, but some stuff I tell them not to throw away and some stuff I say "that's important, get your own scratch paper". why don't virtual desktops work the same way?
Seriously though - yeah, universally, it would be hard to do, but on the application level, it would be quite cool.
Get enough apps that want to do it, though, and next-gen OS's will have to support it - perhaps apps that wanted to play in a multi-mouse environment could describe themselves as such to the OS, and those that didn't could do the same, and the OS would handle bubbling mouse events only to those apps you opened, or which said they could play multi-user ball?
which keyboard? the local one, associated with the local mouse --- or the remote one associated with the remote mouse? How about some buttons down the bottom of the screen that you click a mouse in and then mash your keyboard and the OS maps the two together? How about two entirely separate users logged in with different permissions sharing a desktop on a third machine? One with red and one with blue so you don't get confused, and the security model of the system knows about "I want to be asked if it's OK before new users can join" and "I want to be asked before I open document X in a multi-user situation". There's gotta be ways to do this stuff - it's not like trying to make pipes work in a GUI!
Slashdot Mirror
Bwahahaha. The sort of angsty tripe that those two losers would write is exactly the sort of melodramatic tripe that corporate music executives like - it sells well to angsty teenage idiots. When Kurt Cobain blew his brains out, the corporate music world blew its load into its collective pants working out the profits it would make.
True innovation in music comes from balanced people who don't think "waaah, I am sad, let's write a song" is a valid artistic statement.
Napster was never for distributing unsigned bands. It was for stealing copyrighted material. That is why it has been shut down: it was illegal. That is why it is currently dead (all the criminals are going to places like Gnutella).
Nope, he got somebody to read the last sentence of the submission to him. Never overestimate the literacy of the average Slashdot editor!
Yes, if you are downloading MP3's of music which is under copyright. This is called piracy and it is illegal. Thank you, come again!
Why not a device to email you a clue over the Internet?
I sense "Ah... I can score points off someone, but only if I reply to them without attempting to understand their post". - Dimwit.
...'cos sure as hell lUn1x couldn't run a spaceship.
...and what you have to say reminds us all of the old adage "No news is the best news".
You are on the way to destruction.
bandwidth is cheap. processor power is cheap. why should we dick around with formats that are impossible for developers to use? anyway, bandwidth issues will be mitigated by the new binary xml formats that are coming up.
probably not --- there's no assurance that once you pump gas in, it goes to the top of the keg and the beer stays at the bottom by the output pipe, because there's no such thing as "top" and "bottom" in space :)
There's a feeling nowadays that the experiments that demonstrated the extended daily cycle when you remove the cue of the sun were flawed: they let people turn the lights up and down themselves. Just an electric light is thought nowadays to be enough to reset your circadian rhythm, so these people were actually programming themselves into an artificial cycle. There's a feeling that people have on average a 24-hour cycle, but "owls" have a slightly longer natural cycle and "larks" a slightly shorter one. There was a good article in the New Scientist about this recently, but their server's down so I can't link to it...
Any sillier than "Oneday", "Twoday", etc? Or just sillier than being called the "Human Calculator"? Sounds like some weird B-Movie: sequels "The Human Vacuum Cleaner (He Sucks!)" and "The Human Insectocuter".
"Of Herbs And Stewed Rabbit", Book 4 Chapter IV.
There's lots. The one that rocks is Bondarchuk's. 6 1/2 hours, subtitles, absolutely fantastic. Beg, buy, borrow or steal it.
...indeed, they're supposed to have "Beren" and "Luthien" inscribed on their tombstones. How cool is that?
Not even that --- most of the technologies he describes haven't died at all and have never even looked like dying. There's a tram system in Croydon, lots of people wear automatic watches, etc etc. And, yes, the full orchestra in my pants is rather pleasant.
Yep, and the article even says "ribbon microphones remain popular today ... still manufactured by Royer Labs"
And as for saying that the automatic watch is a "passed technology"; well, I guess it shows the writer hasn't been successful enough to own a decent watch.
I guess that according to the logic of this article, supercomputers are a "passed technology" because everyone uses client/server.
Well, SSH1 goes up to 1 right? Whereas SSH2 goes up to 2. That means it's one more secure.
SSL2 doesn't have client certificates; that's SSL3. The article says
To which the obvious answer is: pull your finger out and issue client certs to your users. If it's that important that you know who they are, then the effort must be worth it. This article is basically just an enormous troll.
Almost no serious Quake/GenericFPS players nowadays play any other way --- the mouse is your head, the keyboard is your feet. Once you've learnt to do it, you never go back --- in fact, nowadays I find I physically cannot control the game any other way! Of course like any good rule there are exceptions - the guys who can speedrun Quake levels on keyboard only are too scary for words.
yesyesyesyesyes - this is the point. a physical desktop isn't something that you own that no-one else can join in on, so why do virtual desktops behave like that? OK, we get our work done now, but I cuss a blue streak every day about one thing or another, so something's got to change ;)
no no no no no no no --- mouse 2 is being used by person 2! person 2 probably doesn't have the same security permissions you do (eg. you're showing him your document, so he's got rights over the scrollbars, but he *definitely* doesn't own the delete button). use the desktop metaphor --- on my desk at work, I can move stuff around. Other people can move stuff around, and write on some stuff, but some stuff I tell them not to throw away and some stuff I say "that's important, get your own scratch paper". why don't virtual desktops work the same way?
which keyboard? the local one, associated with the local mouse --- or the remote one associated with the remote mouse? How about some buttons down the bottom of the screen that you click a mouse in and then mash your keyboard and the OS maps the two together? How about two entirely separate users logged in with different permissions sharing a desktop on a third machine? One with red and one with blue so you don't get confused, and the security model of the system knows about "I want to be asked if it's OK before new users can join" and "I want to be asked before I open document X in a multi-user situation". There's gotta be ways to do this stuff - it's not like trying to make pipes work in a GUI!