Two kids (again super intelligent) dupe the world into thinking they are the new intelligensitia?
That's why it's science fiction.
Play time in the battle area is analgous to fighter planes and space craft how?
It's not the same in a direct physical aspect, but I'm sure you noticed that in the book, it wasn't an issue of how the parallel in a physcial sense, rather the purpose of the battle area was to build the bonds between Ender and the other students. Ender needed to understand the other kids, how they thought and what type of responsibility they could each handle. Also it built their trust of Ender as a leader and this became vital later on when Ender was fighting the buggers.
But the most interesting part of that was glossed over as Ender felt really bad. So he spent a long time talking about dead people and that made it better.
I agree, that is one of the most interesting aspects of the book. And I don't think it was glossed over, he was a psychological wreck at the end of the book. Also if you keep reading the other books in the series, he never really get's over the fact that he killed a whole race of sentient beings. He spends the rest of his life trying to save life to atone for his sins. In Speaker for the Dead, Ender says, "I'm not one to despise other people for their sins . . . I haven't found one yet, that I didn't say inside myself, I've done worse than this."
As I often try to tell people, Ender's Game itself is only a fun action book that Card wrote when he was young. He then later expanded on the idea and used Ender as the main character in a much more rich series of books. The Ender's Game series is more of a philosophical series where Card gets to talk about life, death, genocide, right, wrong, morality, etc, etc. I admit that he tends to deify Ender too much, but the debates he has between the various characters intrigued me greatly (much more than the action in Ender's Game).
"Why not name your company FreeMoneyForCrackers.com instead?"
Because everyone knows that crackers crack sites for fun and intellectual enlightnement, not money. (Likewise, people who encrypt their data have nothing to hide, they just want the extra security. And people who use Napster are trying to spread music from new artists, not trade copywrighted music.)
The problem with most shells is that they look better at higher resolution then lower, unfortunately, I'm trapped at 640x480.:(
Everything looks better at higher resolutions, and all desktops become more function if there is more space (higher resolution). But the point I was going to make is that the whole purpose of using an alternate shell is so you can customize your desktop. You can easily make a super minimal theme that works well at 640x480, it's all up to you on how you want it to be setup.
Imagine how secure Fort Knox would be if nobody knew where it was.
Well, you would have a nice illusion of security. Because in reality, someone would probably find it, and then you wouldn't know who found it or how much he/she knew about Fort Knox. This would probably be used as an excuse to not get any real security.
After all, nobody but Microsoft can fix the flaws, so whats the point of having people know about it.
While one might not be able to patch Windows itself, one can definitely take measures to protect their system via third party software or other means (e.g. a firewall program to block ports). Also, by being aware of a bug one could simply use alternate software (if IIS has a security exploit, use another httpd).
But the only way the hackers find out is by reading bugtrak!
That's obviously false. Someone has to find the bug first and that someone could be anyone. And after one person knows, the information can be spread in many different ways (IRC, newsgroups, other web sites).
Well, maybe Windows Programming isn't your cup of tea, but if you want to learn about it, I would suggest writing a few Litestepmodules. This is good way to learn Windows programming because you can make something small or something big and there's plenty of ideas floating around at Mind Junction. It's also nice because you can write things that you want to write.
. . . but it doesn't change the fact that he shouldn't have been mucking around on someone else's network to begin with.
Ahh, you bring up the question that I have on my mind. Really, why shouldn't he have been mucking around? Because you're not "supposed" to? Seriously, what's a good reason for him not to? I think it really comes down to why he was mucking around. If he was doing it because he was trying to see how secure his own private information was, I think he has a right to check that. If someone tells me that my information is being kept private, I'd like to know what measures are being taken and be able to test if it really is secure. Now, I suppose if he was mucking around trying to take other people's private information, then he should be persecuted. Things get really sticky when you try to factor intent into the situation. (and yes, either way, it probably violates a TOS, but then again, I'm not concerned about legal, I'm concerned about fairness)
My m$ sources tell me that the recent 'stability' in IIS is due to analysis of Apache and copying the strategy, namely forking the process and periodically killing the children and restarting new processes.
So... whilst I would seriously doubt the existance of any GPL'd code in windows, there may be some analysis and subsequent adoption of sucessful stategies, but this should hardly come as a surprise to anyone.
Ok, first off, I think this article is just trolling because this is just idle speculation and rumor. However, if it were to be true, then the author has a point. Your comparison with IIS and Apache is true, if all they are doing is copying basic program abstraction and making their own implementation, then there's nothing wrong with that. However, if they have people dedicated to just reading code and tweaking the code to work in Windows to do a task, then there's a problem. The difference is between writing one's own implementation or altering an exisiting implementation just to work on a different OS.
My understanding was that Card plans two more books before finishing off the Alvin Maker series. The sixth book, which he is currently working on is called "The Crystal City" (Card's Bibilography). Hmm, and I can't seem to currently find info about book seven, maybe there's only going to be six . ..
Is the Alvin Maker series as good as the Ender's Game series? Well, they're really pretty different. I like both series, the Ender's series is a nice philosophical debate while Maker series is a nice historical fantasy about America. Heh, if it's by Card, it's probably good . ..
Sure, some (although not many) fansubbers will ship to international locations. Some examples are Saichi Distribution and VKLL. You could also check Fansubs.net for others that will distribute internationally.
It's not an issue of how good AOL's portal is, the complaint is about AOL having too much control over it's users. It's about letting the user change it if they want to. I figure users should either deal with it or change ISPs, but the complaint does seem valid.
If you really believe that open source software is better (million eyes look at the source), then would you really want to use MS code anyway? That's kinda like admitting that MS does make better software. Granted one could take bits and pieces of the code, but really, I don't think I'd want to see it. It kind of takes away the satisfaction of doing it yourself and showing MS (and the world) that open source software can work.
Better yet, save your $0.75 and just close your eyes and press (lightly) the palms of your hands against your eyeballs. You get this cool color show for free!
upto this point, nintendo has come through with one thing that few others have: quality games!
I think you're assuming that what you find to be a quality game is the same as what others find to be a quality game. Obviously not everyone likes the same types of games and it's an unfair statement to say that only Nintendo comes out with quality games. Anyway, if we are talking about game quality, that's not quite the same thing as consoles themselves, considering it's not Nintendo that makes all the games for their machines. Also, many games are ported to multiple consoles so that's also a factor.
Anyway, while I won't say one console creates quality games compared to other consoles, I will say that different consoles have different markets. For example, Sega has a repuation for having good sports games. Nintendo tends to be targetted for a younger audience (like, 10 year olds) that goes for action/adventure games (mario, zelda, bond, whatever). Sony, on the other hand, have a very large RPG market which is probably for an older crowd (teenagers). (Probably due to memory limitations of a cartridge compared to CDs. Those nice RPG movie sequences require space). Anyway, the point is, Nintendo doesn't have better games than other consoles, but they do have different games.
I'm sure most of us have heard many of these possibilities of doomsday. But who cares? I would say they're all pretty much unavoidable and in many cases you won't see it coming. I suppose it's kinda interesting reading about it (death by alien invasion sounds like it might be fun), but hardly anything to lose sleep over.
Ok, after reading through the proposal, it just seems that the guy was confused with what the delete key means. So because it doesn't do what he thinks it should do, he wants everyone to go change how applications implement the delete key. Last time I checked, the delete key is just a key on the keyboard and it can do whatever the applications programmer wants it to do. If I write a program that uses the delete key to bring up a menu, that's perfectly fine and I see no problems in doing such a thing. By no means should the key that happens to be labeled delete have only one function. That would severely undermine the usefulness of computers if each key could only do what it's told.
It seems to me that the real problem is that people are just uneducated of what the delete key really does when the user "delete's" a file. There are programs out there that will really delete files completely for you, so the option is still there. There is no reason why everyone should make the default behavior one way or another, let the user decide by educating the user of his or her options.
An advancement in technology isn't wrong. Swapping CDs with your friends isn't wrong. What is wrong is profiting from others' hard work and knowingly stealing another individual's copyrighted works.
Really? I can swp CDs with my friends? Isn't that all Napster is? A method to swap CDs?
Hmm, where does one draw the line between swapping a CDs with friends and distribution to the masses online?
The RIAA may try to make an example of Mr. Kan, Mr. Sidwall, or any of a multitude of Gnutella users or developers, even if they can't shut the P2P protocol down. And if enough users are scared off, Gnutella will lose the critical mass it needs to be successful. Those who are left could potentially splinter Gnutella into dozens or even hundreds of secret sub-networks in order to evade legal scrutiny -- creating smaller groups of hosts linked together, perhaps around specific interests, rather than the one mega-network that currently exists -- but this would basically turn Gnutella into an insiders-only club: hardly the kind of mass phenomenon that would be a threat, or useful, to anybody.
I think the author underestimates the power of smaller specific interest groups. It's like what's been happening on IRC for years, lots of "small" channels distributing warez and MP3s to the public. But even in the past few years, there has been legal action attempted at IRC groups . . . also, most warez and MP3s start out by being ripped by some IRC group and distributed through IRC channels. KSi, RNS, APC still get most of the pre-release stuff and get the mp3s moving (look at the ID3 tags on your mp3s, they probably have the release group mentioned).
I suppose my point is, you never really stop MP3 or warez distribution until you stop the small groups. Because as long as they exist, other people will make the protocol/software to distribute the files. So what if Napster dies out, so what if even Gnutella dies out. That doesn't mean the end of music distribution on the net, and the RIAA would be naive to think it would.
Heh, and how many of those 40,000 clients are bots? It's amazing how many bots you need now just to hold a channel. And even then, if someone really wants your channel, it's hard to protect. As much as I hate to say it, DalNet's chanserv is kinda nice . . .
Re:The technology should be sexy, not the wearers.
on
Wearable Computers
·
· Score: 2
Crawl out of the geek box for a minute and look at it from other's perspective. Sex sells. Fashion sells.
I dunno about you, but even more than that, cool toys sell. Take for example MP3 players. While they are designed to look sleek and fashionable, I would think most people buy it because it's a cool little gadget. The same can be said for palm pilots and visors. They are sexy because they look cool and do cool geeky things (I dunno, I definitely find the ice colored visor deluxe sexy). I think there can be intrinsic "sex appeal" to the device itself, not necessarily just because the model is hot.
Do you think people buy the latest StarTac or Samsung flip phone because they work better? No, they buy them because they are cool and sexy.
Tech gadgets are cool and sexy because they work better. What makes the one PDA more cool or more sexy than another? Features. It's more than just how it looks (although that is a factor). How many people do you know that bought a device based purly on looks? It has to be a reliable product too.
While most are raving about Mac's OS X, Microsoft has covertly launched their latest attempt at an operating system...Windows Whistler.
Uhm, based on these screenshots, we know little to nothing about the "new" OS. I believe OSes are defined by features (typically kernel stuff), not how pretty they look. I want to know what makes Whistler better other than pretty icons. This just seems to be a skinnable version of Windows. If that's all you wanted, why don't you just use Litestep?
What's the difference between Freenet and Gnutella, and why do we need both?
While I'm not sure about the differences between Freenet and Gnutella, I don't think it's bad that there are two different programs that do the same thing. This provides healthy competition between people to create a better product (not a focus on profit). Also, I don't know this for certain, but I would guess that Freenet is learning from some of Gnutella's mistakes and making the protocal more efficient and (I would hope) searching faster.
So we might not need both, but in the early stages, it seems to be benefitial.
Actually, bandwidth usage has nothing to do with it. I know from personal experience, I used to run a public MP3 server, but I had it capped to 4 users and 5k/s per user (mainly for those dialup users). However, since I was publicly advertising on IRC, I got caught and got a letter from the RIAA.
Oh the other hand, I currently distributle non-copyrighted MPEG video files now and easily use 200k/s or more at times and no one bothers me. My point is that it's not bandwidth usage that's important, it's who cares about what you're distributing.
On a small side note, campus networks can easily become saturated during daytime hours and not by just mp3 downloads. Those http transactions add up fast . ..
While this may be true, whether big business endorses it or not is highly dependent on what people want. That is, if enough people are told about AMD and how it's an alternative to Intel, and want to see it in systems, then big businesses will endorse it to stay competitive. While big businesses do have lots of control, don't underestimate the power of a large group of consumers. A good read would be this article about FreeBSD Advocacy. Same idea, different product.
...there is no moral reason why copying and sharing pure patterns, regardless of their origin, is immoral.
There is nothing intrinsicly immoral with copying anything, but if you do it and the owner doesn't want you to, then you're infringing on the owner's rights. Just like there may not be anything wrong with taking a can of coke from your friend's fridge because they don't mind. But if you took a coke from someone you don't know, they'd probably be pretty upset.
Well, you could argue that copying isn't stealing because the owner still has the original and nothing has been lost. That may be true on in a physical sense, but something has been lost. The owner's ability to control how and to who the information is distributed. If information is supposed to be free, then why don't people get all worked up about Coke and it's secret formula?
If you don't want your information to be spread, the keep it in your head. If you send sound waves, text, or code in someone's direction, then that becomes part of their life experience which they then have the right to remember and share as they see fit.
Not when you give something out given certain restrictions. It's not like when music is sold to someone, the rights to the music are given with it. Rather, the individual who bought it can listen to it.
Anyway, it can be immoral to copy things if the owner of the original doesn't want you to. By copying it against their will, you're saying your desires are more important than their's. This is normally called greed.
Slashdot Mirror
Two kids (again super intelligent) dupe the world into thinking they are the new intelligensitia?
That's why it's science fiction.
Play time in the battle area is analgous to fighter planes and space craft how?
It's not the same in a direct physical aspect, but I'm sure you noticed that in the book, it wasn't an issue of how the parallel in a physcial sense, rather the purpose of the battle area was to build the bonds between Ender and the other students. Ender needed to understand the other kids, how they thought and what type of responsibility they could each handle. Also it built their trust of Ender as a leader and this became vital later on when Ender was fighting the buggers.
But the most interesting part of that was glossed over as Ender felt really bad. So he spent a long time talking about dead people and that made it better.
I agree, that is one of the most interesting aspects of the book. And I don't think it was glossed over, he was a psychological wreck at the end of the book. Also if you keep reading the other books in the series, he never really get's over the fact that he killed a whole race of sentient beings. He spends the rest of his life trying to save life to atone for his sins. In Speaker for the Dead, Ender says, "I'm not one to despise other people for their sins . . . I haven't found one yet, that I didn't say inside myself, I've done worse than this."
As I often try to tell people, Ender's Game itself is only a fun action book that Card wrote when he was young. He then later expanded on the idea and used Ender as the main character in a much more rich series of books. The Ender's Game series is more of a philosophical series where Card gets to talk about life, death, genocide, right, wrong, morality, etc, etc. I admit that he tends to deify Ender too much, but the debates he has between the various characters intrigued me greatly (much more than the action in Ender's Game).
Well, maybe Windows Programming isn't your cup of tea, but if you want to learn about it, I would suggest writing a few Litestep modules. This is good way to learn Windows programming because you can make something small or something big and there's plenty of ideas floating around at Mind Junction. It's also nice because you can write things that you want to write.
My understanding was that Card plans two more books before finishing off the Alvin Maker series. The sixth book, which he is currently working on is called "The Crystal City" (Card's Bibilography). Hmm, and I can't seem to currently find info about book seven, maybe there's only going to be six . . .
.
Is the Alvin Maker series as good as the Ender's Game series? Well, they're really pretty different. I like both series, the Ender's series is a nice philosophical debate while Maker series is a nice historical fantasy about America. Heh, if it's by Card, it's probably good . .
Sure, some (although not many) fansubbers will ship to international locations. Some examples are Saichi Distribution and VKLL. You could also check Fansubs.net for others that will distribute internationally.
It's not an issue of how good AOL's portal is, the complaint is about AOL having too much control over it's users. It's about letting the user change it if they want to. I figure users should either deal with it or change ISPs, but the complaint does seem valid.
If you really believe that open source software is better (million eyes look at the source), then would you really want to use MS code anyway? That's kinda like admitting that MS does make better software. Granted one could take bits and pieces of the code, but really, I don't think I'd want to see it. It kind of takes away the satisfaction of doing it yourself and showing MS (and the world) that open source software can work.
Better yet, save your $0.75 and just close your eyes and press (lightly) the palms of your hands against your eyeballs. You get this cool color show for free!
Anyway, while I won't say one console creates quality games compared to other consoles, I will say that different consoles have different markets. For example, Sega has a repuation for having good sports games. Nintendo tends to be targetted for a younger audience (like, 10 year olds) that goes for action/adventure games (mario, zelda, bond, whatever). Sony, on the other hand, have a very large RPG market which is probably for an older crowd (teenagers). (Probably due to memory limitations of a cartridge compared to CDs. Those nice RPG movie sequences require space). Anyway, the point is, Nintendo doesn't have better games than other consoles, but they do have different games.
I'm sure most of us have heard many of these possibilities of doomsday. But who cares? I would say they're all pretty much unavoidable and in many cases you won't see it coming. I suppose it's kinda interesting reading about it (death by alien invasion sounds like it might be fun), but hardly anything to lose sleep over.
Ok, after reading through the proposal, it just seems that the guy was confused with what the delete key means. So because it doesn't do what he thinks it should do, he wants everyone to go change how applications implement the delete key. Last time I checked, the delete key is just a key on the keyboard and it can do whatever the applications programmer wants it to do. If I write a program that uses the delete key to bring up a menu, that's perfectly fine and I see no problems in doing such a thing. By no means should the key that happens to be labeled delete have only one function. That would severely undermine the usefulness of computers if each key could only do what it's told.
It seems to me that the real problem is that people are just uneducated of what the delete key really does when the user "delete's" a file. There are programs out there that will really delete files completely for you, so the option is still there. There is no reason why everyone should make the default behavior one way or another, let the user decide by educating the user of his or her options.
Hmm, where does one draw the line between swapping a CDs with friends and distribution to the masses online?
I suppose my point is, you never really stop MP3 or warez distribution until you stop the small groups. Because as long as they exist, other people will make the protocol/software to distribute the files. So what if Napster dies out, so what if even Gnutella dies out. That doesn't mean the end of music distribution on the net, and the RIAA would be naive to think it would.
Heh, and how many of those 40,000 clients are bots? It's amazing how many bots you need now just to hold a channel. And even then, if someone really wants your channel, it's hard to protect. As much as I hate to say it, DalNet's chanserv is kinda nice . . .
Here's another program that actually hides the ads (resizes your aim window smaller). It's also open sourced.
win32aimad
So we might not need both, but in the early stages, it seems to be benefitial.
Actually, bandwidth usage has nothing to do with it. I know from personal experience, I used to run a public MP3 server, but I had it capped to 4 users and 5k/s per user (mainly for those dialup users). However, since I was publicly advertising on IRC, I got caught and got a letter from the RIAA.
.
Oh the other hand, I currently distributle non-copyrighted MPEG video files now and easily use 200k/s or more at times and no one bothers me. My point is that it's not bandwidth usage that's important, it's who cares about what you're distributing.
On a small side note, campus networks can easily become saturated during daytime hours and not by just mp3 downloads. Those http transactions add up fast . .
Well, you could argue that copying isn't stealing because the owner still has the original and nothing has been lost. That may be true on in a physical sense, but something has been lost. The owner's ability to control how and to who the information is distributed. If information is supposed to be free, then why don't people get all worked up about Coke and it's secret formula?
Not when you give something out given certain restrictions. It's not like when music is sold to someone, the rights to the music are given with it. Rather, the individual who bought it can listen to it.
Anyway, it can be immoral to copy things if the owner of the original doesn't want you to. By copying it against their will, you're saying your desires are more important than their's. This is normally called greed.