Hey, aren't "Associate Producers" a pretty lowly position in the games industry? Don't they like, get coffee for the producer?/. is using Jeff's name as if it meant something, which seems a little odd to me.
In matters of public trust it is not for any individual to censor himself. Rather, all facts and opinions MUST be expressed, so that those rightfully elected to make these decisions can make them will full information.
After all, what is more important? The trifling amount of money that might be saved, or valid, unrigged elections?
Take whatever opportunities present to spread the word. Make web pages with 'Gator' on them that say "Claria" is their new name. Better yet, why not lobby Google to substitute the word "Claria" every time 'Gator' is searched for...
Hands down the coolest mega-tech-toy you can buy these days has got to be Zack Simpson's "Shadow Garden". Stand between a video projector and any screen, cast your shadow and watch: Butterflies land on your shadow; Catch and pour sand with your shadow; It is awesome (and pricey)
This is stupid. No statistic can be interpreted meaningfully without CONTEXT. So, how many Windows servers switched to Linux? Use of the word 'Doubled' is meaningless if it started out as just one person. No context, no meaning. Taco, that is some pretty inflammatory wording you used... Not respectable.
Never trust anyone who calls you "my friend" without knowing you.
Screen for plugs before accepting stories
on
Nobel Prizes Awarded
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
regarding: "Looks like Cisco has done a deal with CNN..." - Don't you think it would be nice if the advertising implicit in this statement had been screened out before the story was accepted?
Duh! This is Microsoft enlisting their employees to do marketing for them. Next their employment agreements will read "Employee agrees not to discuss any software vendor in public or private, with the exception of making statements approved by Microsoft Marketing"
They GET every single thing you all are saying. Bill's statement is a necessary lie which, like all statements he must make, supports the contention that Microsoft drives innovation, and therefore you can't break it up.
If you're going to listen to very smart people talk, you must abandon empirical truth to understand what they're saying.
Remember: Politically smart people make statements that align with their interests. Period.
Regarding "(g) systematics of observations", my understanding is that all light is bent by gravity. Perhaps they are failing to account for this bending in their measurements, and the craft are not exactly where they seem.
What do you get?
* Scalability
* Reliability
* Maintainability
And if the design is right, you likely get a little higher data integrity and complex rollback features.
Nothing about 50 million emails would give any "internet provider" more than a tiny blip on the radar. These observations about "almost brought the largest internet providers to a standstill" are untrue.
If the providers made the argument in court, in order to convict, I can understand it. But it cannot be true.
Duh. Of course people who use Napster are the enthusiasts. Of course they buy more music. This is a pointless report - because - the relevant question is: "Are Napster users buying more music NOW than they did before they had Napster?" The answer to that question would make a more relevant social statement.
I'm sure that libsafe took considerable effort, and that the coders who make it are talented and dedicated people (they have to have something going for them just to find these kinds of stack problems)
However...
As stated on libsafe's page, "Our solution is based on a middleware software layer that intercepts all function calls made to library functions that are known to be vulnerable."
Well, if the functions are known to be vulnerable, then fix them! I know it sounds facetious, but isn't this little more that a way of supplying patches before the manufacturer does? Isn't this merely a way of fixing bugs without addressing the underlying problem?
If it were absolutely 100% unquestionable that some aspect of your game was causing 0.01% of players to commit homicide, would you still add that feature?
Game violence as observed from INSIDE the industry:
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, aren't "Associate Producers" a pretty lowly position in the games industry? Don't they like, get coffee for the producer? /. is using Jeff's name as if it meant something, which seems a little odd to me.
In matters of public trust it is not for any individual to censor himself. Rather, all facts and opinions MUST be expressed, so that those rightfully elected to make these decisions can make them will full information.
After all, what is more important? The trifling amount of money that might be saved, or valid, unrigged elections?
Take whatever opportunities present to spread the word. Make web pages with 'Gator' on them that say "Claria" is their new name. Better yet, why not lobby Google to substitute the word "Claria" every time 'Gator' is searched for...
Hands down the coolest mega-tech-toy you can buy these days has got to be Zack Simpson's "Shadow Garden". Stand between a video projector and any screen, cast your shadow and watch: Butterflies land on your shadow; Catch and pour sand with your shadow; It is awesome (and pricey)
This is stupid. No statistic can be interpreted meaningfully without CONTEXT. So, how many Windows servers switched to Linux? Use of the word 'Doubled' is meaningless if it started out as just one person. No context, no meaning. Taco, that is some pretty inflammatory wording you used... Not respectable.
Never trust anyone who calls you "my friend" without knowing you.
regarding: "Looks like Cisco has done a deal with CNN..." - Don't you think it would be nice if the advertising implicit in this statement had been screened out before the story was accepted?
Duh! This is Microsoft enlisting their employees to do marketing for them. Next their employment agreements will read "Employee agrees not to discuss any software vendor in public or private, with the exception of making statements approved by Microsoft Marketing"
Lets all remember that we lost 0.002% of our population to the terrorists. Shall we trade the liberty of the other 99.998% in return?
This idea has been around since 1992. Maybe it will finally get popular? Not.
This is all crazy talk. Of course they 'get it.'
They GET every single thing you all are saying. Bill's statement is a necessary lie which, like all statements he must make, supports the contention that Microsoft drives innovation, and therefore you can't break it up.
If you're going to listen to very smart people talk, you must abandon empirical truth to understand what they're saying.
Remember: Politically smart people make statements that align with their interests. Period.
You worked at Origin in Austin...
Regarding "(g) systematics of observations", my understanding is that all light is bent by gravity. Perhaps they are failing to account for this bending in their measurements, and the craft are not exactly where they seem.
Don't get sucked in by this guy's post! This is whole post is just an ad for advertising!
What do you get? * Scalability * Reliability * Maintainability And if the design is right, you likely get a little higher data integrity and complex rollback features.
Nothing about 50 million emails would give any "internet provider" more than a tiny blip on the radar. These observations about "almost brought the largest internet providers to a standstill" are untrue. If the providers made the argument in court, in order to convict, I can understand it. But it cannot be true.
Duh. Of course people who use Napster are the enthusiasts. Of course they buy more music. This is a pointless report - because - the relevant question is: "Are Napster users buying more music NOW than they did before they had Napster?" The answer to that question would make a more relevant social statement.
However...
As stated on libsafe's page, "Our solution is based on a middleware software layer that intercepts all function calls made to library functions that are known to be vulnerable."
Well, if the functions are known to be vulnerable, then fix them! I know it sounds facetious, but isn't this little more that a way of supplying patches before the manufacturer does? Isn't this merely a way of fixing bugs without addressing the underlying problem?
If it were absolutely 100% unquestionable that some aspect of your game was causing 0.01% of players to commit homicide, would you still add that feature?
Game violence as observed from INSIDE the industry:
Violence Rationalizations
Enjoy!