I know this is a complex issue with all sorts of angles and subtle arguments on both sides but couldn't we just kill the bastards? You know, if you see a geneticist crossing the road, just run them down like the dog s/he is, that sort of thing.
See, we all laughed at Lucas with the Merchants having their robot army controlled from a central point in Episode I, now we know why: uts the
price of each unit by two-thirds, . Those tight-wad merchants!
One TacNuke on the base where all these pilots are sitting (close to battle so the signal lag is small) and it's goodnight folks.
Florida should simply give Gore 12 votes and Bush 13. This would mean that Bush wins Fl., which I think he has, and Gore gets the white house, with the majority popular vote. Hey presto: the electorate has been fairly represented at state and national levels. Never going to happen.
Also: use biros to put a tick beside the one you want, count the result by hand. Humans are far better at this than machines but slower, but then you've got until next year to do the count so you've got plenty of time to sort it out and get the right answer, rather than getting the fast answer for Dan Rather. Never going to happen.
Simulation and understanding are two different things. I wrote a system to simulate UK weather years ago using dice. Didn't mean I understood the real weather, just that I could construct statistical models based on statistical observations.
SOAR and other rule-based "explanations" of reasoning are cute and get you your grant money but tell us nothing about real reasoning. It's like saying that Freud's explanations make up a self-consistant model so they must be an accurate description of how the mind works. They are the first but they certainly aren't the second.
The theoretical advancements have already been made. The only thing holding these system back from real-time performance is raw power.
Everything in these two statements is wrong, assuming that you do not mean "simulation" when you refer to them performing.
Although you don't take 100% advantage of the 600 dpi, it'll still look better then when it's printed on a 300 dpi printer.
I do not agree; I think this just looks crap. I assume you mean that you would make each pixel a 2x2 square. Uggh!
At a later stage you could rebuild/enhance your wm to use high-res bitmaps.
This is just a kludge, the real issue is trying to come up with a solution which is portable to less well-endowed displays. Scaling is the only way to go.
It's time now to start getting rid of bitmap based window managers. All those nice open and close widgets and the icons on your desktop for applications, drives, printers etc are going to be tiny on these things.
Making them into bigger bitmaps will just make them non-portable to older/cheaper machines.
Time to get scalable icons working, whether you're Windows or X. There should be just enought time before these start hitting the market in bulk, although print and design houses will want these displays sooner than most and will pay for them.
Please, folks, get it right. Who started this thing of saying "legos"? Ships aren't made of "steels" and Lego houses are made of Lego bricks. Lego cities don't consist of Legos houses.
I ain't got one but I've always assumed the requirement for the server connection was to upload information on your viewing habits rather than the need to get listing information.
My problem is that they gain power /
influence, without doing anything themselves.
My point is that assuming that people without this advantage will not do anything to gain power and influence, or that those who do have it will abuse it, is naive at best and bigoted at worst. Al Capone didn't have a big inheritance, but he ended up with power/influence; FDR and Churchill had very privleged backgrounds and they ended up helping to save the world from an evil led by a person who had a middle class background.
Judging the validity of a person on the basis of the amount of money they started with is just wrong; what people do in their lives is much more important than where they started.
I don't think that Bill Gates' rich background is the reason he's a bastard, I think it's because he had a very bad upbringing, which is down to his parents' characters (actually his grandparents may be more to blame). But I've known lots of people with his attitudes from poor backgrounds too.
Natapoff's argument is that the electoral college system is better because it means the less popular person can win an election. His backup to this is that that makes it more exciting, like a sports competition.
Well, it's not meant to be exciting; it's meant to be accurate, and the possibility that the wrong person wins increases voter power, but only when the race is very close and then it increases the wrong voter's power, ie the one's who vote for fringe no-hoper parties, causing the general public's more popular candidate to lose.
The guy actually describes the fact that the person with the smaller number of votes gets elected as a "minor vice" and defends it on the grounds that it's temporary. So, might as well just toss the coin then, since the result only stands for four years and you might pick the right candidate. Save everyone all that time and money too.
Your offspring should start out the same way as everybody else.
People do not start off the same as everyone else. Some are smart, some are dumb, some are stronger, some are men, some are tall, etc.
You are saying that if someone makes money they have no right to give that money to someone else, in this case their children.
The notion that rich children always waste their money is as accurate as the notion that poor people use the money they do have wisely. Some do, some don't.
Many of the world's great scientific breakthroughs have been made (pre 1930's) by rich "idle" people doing private research or (post 30's) with grants donated by them.
To assume that being given a pile of money make the receiver a waster is as bigoted as assuming that being given black skin makes you a thief.
I agree with you on the patent issue but I think that inheritance tax is just envy with a thin (very thin) patina of moral outrage. Put it this way: if your parents had left you $1m would you have used the spare time that buys to make interesting, open-source, software? I would.
Larry Niven was given $1m for his 21st birthday and he gave us Ringworld; I think the world did okay from that.
Ignoring the demented raving that follow this bit, who do you think created that great economy? Bush's dad knackered it, Clinton rebuilt it, Boy George would just run it into the ground again.
If you think that capitalism is the same as meritocracy (sp?) then you need a bit more experience of the real world before shooting your mouth off.
No, emulators do not generally copy anything and most do not contain within them the means to break passwords or encryption so they are not covered by copyright. Just as photocopiers are not covered by copyright.
The distribution of the games is a different matter. The only possible defence is fair use under para 4 of section 107 of Title 17 of US Law which states that the effect of copying on the potential market is an important factor in such cases.
If a game is no longer in production it could be argued that there is no further market to be reduced by copying and that any future release is bound to be a "new, 21st century" Space Invaders, or whatever, and that in fact the copying is actually keeping that future market viable for the company by advertising the old game. You'd need a kindly judge, though.
If the game is still in production then bend over and take it like a man, cause you are breaking the law.
If they were too lazy to keep accurate records, that is their fault and no one else's.
Obviously your company is the size of a city IT department and the IT departments in your city have nothing better to do than keep track of thousands and thousands of M$'s little bits of paper.
It is unreasonable for anyone to ask for all the licenses used in an organisation this size. I would be happy if they went into a university and requested proof of ownership for a randomly selected batch of software and took it further if the selection showed a substantial problem. This way is just shit but, of course, it doesn't cost Mammon, er... Gates anything.
Basically the department is assumed to be guilty and their fine is the cost of the paperwork and time to do the checking. No judge, no jury, just the way M$ likes things.
This is a classic "pick a slave and beat them as a warning to the other slaves; don't matter none if the one you pick hasn't done anything, so long as the message gets across to any that have" tactic.
Slashdot Mirror
Would that help?
TWW
Someone take Netscape outside and put it out of our misery.
TWW
One TacNuke on the base where all these pilots are sitting (close to battle so the signal lag is small) and it's goodnight folks.
TWW
Also: use biros to put a tick beside the one you want, count the result by hand. Humans are far better at this than machines but slower, but then you've got until next year to do the count so you've got plenty of time to sort it out and get the right answer, rather than getting the fast answer for Dan Rather. Never going to happen.
TWW
SOAR and other rule-based "explanations" of reasoning are cute and get you your grant money but tell us nothing about real reasoning. It's like saying that Freud's explanations make up a self-consistant model so they must be an accurate description of how the mind works. They are the first but they certainly aren't the second.
The theoretical advancements have already been made. The only thing holding these system back from real-time performance is raw power.
Everything in these two statements is wrong, assuming that you do not mean "simulation" when you refer to them performing.
TWW
I do not agree; I think this just looks crap. I assume you mean that you would make each pixel a 2x2 square. Uggh!
At a later stage you could rebuild/enhance your wm to use high-res bitmaps.
This is just a kludge, the real issue is trying to come up with a solution which is portable to less well-endowed displays. Scaling is the only way to go.
TWW
I don't have a Windows machine anymore but as I recall this just expanded the bitmaps it did use for the widgets, so you get blocky widgets.
Things may have changed in the three years since I stopped using it.
TWW
Making them into bigger bitmaps will just make them non-portable to older/cheaper machines.
Time to get scalable icons working, whether you're Windows or X. There should be just enought time before these start hitting the market in bulk, although print and design houses will want these displays sooner than most and will pay for them.
TWW
The last Fafhrd and Grey Mouser book was a waste of paper, on the other hand. Probably the most disappointing book I ever read.
TWW (over here in Blighty)
Yes, it did.
TWW
It just doesn't work.
Then try "Hand me some Lego..." or "Hand me that pile of Lego..." etc.
"Hand me them Lego" is CmdrTaco English, regardless of the plural of Lego.
TWW
TWW
Anyone know if this is true or just paranoia?
TWW
TWW
My point is that assuming that people without this advantage will not do anything to gain power and influence, or that those who do have it will abuse it, is naive at best and bigoted at worst. Al Capone didn't have a big inheritance, but he ended up with power/influence; FDR and Churchill had very privleged backgrounds and they ended up helping to save the world from an evil led by a person who had a middle class background.
Judging the validity of a person on the basis of the amount of money they started with is just wrong; what people do in their lives is much more important than where they started.
I don't think that Bill Gates' rich background is the reason he's a bastard, I think it's because he had a very bad upbringing, which is down to his parents' characters (actually his grandparents may be more to blame). But I've known lots of people with his attitudes from poor backgrounds too.
TWW
Well, it's not meant to be exciting; it's meant to be accurate, and the possibility that the wrong person wins increases voter power, but only when the race is very close and then it increases the wrong voter's power, ie the one's who vote for fringe no-hoper parties, causing the general public's more popular candidate to lose.
The guy actually describes the fact that the person with the smaller number of votes gets elected as a "minor vice" and defends it on the grounds that it's temporary. So, might as well just toss the coin then, since the result only stands for four years and you might pick the right candidate. Save everyone all that time and money too.
TWW
The USA may be a republic and not a democracy but the EC is neither: it's a business cartel. It is simply not comparable with any real country.
People do not start off the same as everyone else. Some are smart, some are dumb, some are stronger, some are men, some are tall, etc.
You are saying that if someone makes money they have no right to give that money to someone else, in this case their children.
The notion that rich children always waste their money is as accurate as the notion that poor people use the money they do have wisely. Some do, some don't.
Many of the world's great scientific breakthroughs have been made (pre 1930's) by rich "idle" people doing private research or (post 30's) with grants donated by them.
To assume that being given a pile of money make the receiver a waster is as bigoted as assuming that being given black skin makes you a thief.
I agree with you on the patent issue but I think that inheritance tax is just envy with a thin (very thin) patina of moral outrage. Put it this way: if your parents had left you $1m would you have used the spare time that buys to make interesting, open-source, software? I would.
Larry Niven was given $1m for his 21st birthday and he gave us Ringworld; I think the world did okay from that.
TWW
Ignoring the demented raving that follow this bit, who do you think created that great economy? Bush's dad knackered it, Clinton rebuilt it, Boy George would just run it into the ground again.
If you think that capitalism is the same as meritocracy (sp?) then you need a bit more experience of the real world before shooting your mouth off.
TWW
No, emulators do not generally copy anything and most do not contain within them the means to break passwords or encryption so they are not covered by copyright. Just as photocopiers are not covered by copyright.
The distribution of the games is a different matter. The only possible defence is fair use under para 4 of section 107 of Title 17 of US Law which states that the effect of copying on the potential market is an important factor in such cases.
If a game is no longer in production it could be argued that there is no further market to be reduced by copying and that any future release is bound to be a "new, 21st century" Space Invaders, or whatever, and that in fact the copying is actually keeping that future market viable for the company by advertising the old game. You'd need a kindly judge, though.
If the game is still in production then bend over and take it like a man, cause you are breaking the law.
TWW
In what way? I can't think of any off hand.
TWW
Obviously your company is the size of a city IT department and the IT departments in your city have nothing better to do than keep track of thousands and thousands of M$'s little bits of paper.
It is unreasonable for anyone to ask for all the licenses used in an organisation this size. I would be happy if they went into a university and requested proof of ownership for a randomly selected batch of software and took it further if the selection showed a substantial problem. This way is just shit but, of course, it doesn't cost Mammon, er... Gates anything.
Basically the department is assumed to be guilty and their fine is the cost of the paperwork and time to do the checking. No judge, no jury, just the way M$ likes things.
This is a classic "pick a slave and beat them as a warning to the other slaves; don't matter none if the one you pick hasn't done anything, so long as the message gets across to any that have" tactic.
TWW
Yep, perfect for it.
TWW
Of course that half-pound machine is going to have a hell of a surface temperature!
TWW
Dull, dull, dull games.
TWW