I'm using a Visiontek TI 4600, and haven't had any problems with it - I'm using an Athlon XP 1800+ with a Soyo Dragon+ (using the Via chipset that everyone complains is buggy), but installation was a snap, replacing my Creative Labs 32MB Savage 4 Pro card. And I'm using Win2k and the onboard 6.1 audio and 100BT, "to boot"...
If it is the GeForce4, it's probably your particular card. Did you try taking it back for a replacement, before telling us all how bad it is?
More likely you have some weird BIOS issues or power problems... you should check those, too.
Only phones made for that technology will work on that system.
Well, you know, that's why I went with a tri-band GSM phone (a Motorola p7389), a year ago. The European networks don't have a problem running different phones across GSM... why does the US?
The other issue that is run across quite a bit is knowledge. Most wireless representatives will have no idea how to program handsets they do not actually sell, even if they run on the same technology and frequency. A person who sells only Nokia and Motorola handsets will have no clue how to program an older Ericsson or Samsung, for example.
Perhaps. But that doesn't explain why, if I switch to AT&T's new GSM/GPRS network, they want me to buy at least a Motorola 7382i form them, if not something more expensive. Web browsers for phones (at least Motorolas) are ridiculous, anyhow, so I don't need GPRS. So why do I have to have a phone with GPRS, and why can't I get one from a catalog or direct from the manufacturer (thereby getting around the excuse that the firmware is not up to date), if GPRS is not just an optional layer?
The answer, of course, is that the service providers make money off the phones! If not directly, they talk you into long contracts in order to decrease the price of the handset, and some will also try to charge you to "unlock" your phones when you change providers, as well.
(geez, guys, after the first dozen or so complaints about spoilers, you'd stop adding more redundant postings... Aren't you smart enough to know that if a show is about to come on, you don't read a news article about it unless you don't mind the plot being revealed? Get a grip.)
Personally, I was very glad to see this news story - I have not followed the show for several seasons (frankly, I haven't even seen it regularly since the movie), and the Lone Gunmen idea was one of the last plot devices I ever really liked about the show. To hear that they met a noble end makes me wish I'd seen this episode... and being on the west coast, I might have time to turn it on and watch it, due to ths article's timely placement. At least now I can set a reminder to watch the repeat.
I have no doubt that Lucas had kids in mind when he made Jar Jar.
Sadly, though, the kids don't seem to like him all that much. When this movie first came out in the theater, I took some preteens and teens to see it - not a single one liked the Jar-Jar character. They all said he "sucked."
Then again, they also mostly thought Anakin was a whiny brat, which surprised me. I thought they'd be wrapped up in the idea that he got to fly a pod racer, etc. But Lucas soft-peddled the whole slavery thing, and these kids, some of whom had been abused, weren't buying it.
I know I thought the Ewoks were cool when I was 6.
The Ewoks were cool when you were 6. I remember secretly thinking they were cool, and I was supposed to be too old for that (11 or 12). But then, of course, "the Ewoks Big Adventure" came out, to milk that dry.
I could continue with more reasons why I think the "new Star Wars" won't even be palatable to kids, but it mostly has to do with the usual rants you've heard before, like wondering why "the Force" turns out to be just commensalism or something - it doesn't explain how there can be a "dark side" adequately, etc. And good lord... how can those thousands of robots all be such bad shots? =)
Wouldn't it have been easier/simpler/cheaper to just have the thing find a wall socket and plug in when it was running down?
Perhaps it has weird power requirements not easily adapted to a wall socket, like it has to charge quickly off 220VAC or something. Having it recognize wall sockets without the use of costly emitters would require significant extra programming (better machine vision, etc). And then there's the fact that if it has to go to a central location and have a person charge it, that person can also look it over for physical problems and also clean whatever crap may have gotten on it. I'm sure it's not a major addition to the routine, since it already has to return for new drugs...
How is repacing the non-skilled labour with robots helping aleviate the shortage of skilled labour
If pharmacy techs and nurses get stuck doing these deliveries (as the article seemingly implies), the answer is obvious. But even if it is currently a job for unskilled laborers, replacing humans with robots probably still is cheaper, which means these facilities may be able to offer more money to prospective skilled laborers.
P.S. In my opinion, the only truly unskilled labor is the kind that can be done by people you can hire off street corners for the day and pay cash to... (excepting prostitution, maybe)
Even if you never touched KaZaA, your systems may be affected if someone manages to attack Brilliant Digital's update service.
How? If I never touch Kazaa (that means, never install it), this article doesn't tell me how it can affect me. In fact, the article doesn't seem to say anything we haven't already heard in Slashdot before, about attacks through the use of DNS redirects or man-in-the-middle, etc. But how does it affect me, when I haven't installed the program?
they have inadvertently created a Single Point of 0wnership: a single machine or small group of machines which, if succesfully attacked, can be used to gain effective control of the Internet.
Okay, now this is total FUD. You're telling me that if they get hacked, the entire Internet is at the mercy of the hackers. Why is that?
As far as any of us have been able to tell, he has absolutely no medical requirement for any of his equipment, or any actual physical or psychological dependence on his equipment. He has been observed working fine without it on several occasions.
Thanks for sharing some closer insight to the guy... Judging from his website, he seems to have been more than a bit eccentric to begin with, and also has done previous publicity stunts which seem to focus more on him than on his "cause."
I can't believe he didn't prepare himself for the possibility that all of the equipment might have to be removed - especially in light of the "standard" security precautions. And again, you're right - none of it was medically necessary. However, I could see him possibily being psychologically distraught over its forcible removal - though more from the shock of being questioned and examined and refused than from a real dependence on the equipment as a crutch (your comments leave little room for that, assuming you are telling the truth, which we also can't verify). So I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that his original account of being disoriented, etc., was not embellished. That doesn't take away from the fact that he caused the confrontation himself.
In fact his home made jury-rigged devices are likely far more dangerous in terms of radio interference than a laptop that follows standards.
This is a good point. And even conforming laptops are supposed to remain off during portions of the flight. I wonder if Mr. Mann follows regulations then, and what kind of "disorientation" he gets, then? Or does he blithely put all of his fellow passengers at potential risk by not following FCC regulations?
So... this is perfect for people who intentionally change tempo... now the music will follow your lead.
The problem comes when someone tries to be deliberately counter-tempo... it doesn't work any more. Of course, turning it off fixes the problem...
Why be counter-tempo? Often, especially if you're doing something unusual like singing a harmonic of the original pitch, it actually underscores (pardon the pun) the original work better.
Songwriters (or composers) write for the voices in their heads, or to specific types of voices that they expect to be singing their work. Sometimes some tweaking can make things sound better, especially if you're not their "target" performer. For example, I can imagine a barbershop quartet doing a really awesome cover of "Closer to God," but certainly not by singing it exactly like Trent Reznor does...
First off, the fairly good thing about current mail is that with SMTP, my server connects to your server. There are no intermediary servers in the middle.
Even this is not precisely true. Unless you have someone's mail server IP listed as a local override in your mail server, your mail server will go down the list of MX records for them until it finds a live host to hand off to. If their server is offline temporarily (or they are set up for ETRN or something), you'll end up getting a secondary server that will forward the mail to them, later.
And that's just one legitimate way for a third party to become involved... if you use Earthlink, for example, you're forced to pass through their mail servers, as they block port 25 upstream... what do you want to bet that the "compliance" with law enforcement has to do partly with that requirement?
If they do, she'll find some online slight that TECHNICALLY could have been prevented (if Sony had assigned an administrator to watch over this kid 24/7 and intervene), and use that as the basis of another lawsuit against Sony for "not preventing my son's death".
It could be even worse. What if the discovery process uncovers that he was teased in the game, too? Or that he made threats, and people didn't take him seriously, and maybe a "guide" (or whetever they are called in EQ) even suspended him for his actions, or something. Can you imagine the fodder for future lawsuits? If you interacted with the guy at all, you could be at risk. Administrators of other types of games like MUDs or, God help us, MUSHs (I knew a guy who used to "play" on a MUSH, which is like a MUD only without any real fighting system, etc. - they would just pose for hours, pretending to be people who knew how to say "thee" and "thou;" if someone had to leave for a while, their friends would wait hours for them to return so they could get on with the "wedding" or whatever and then write pages of coverage for their "history") will certainly lean towards pulling the plug if they suddenly become responsible for their players' offline lives.
I hope this woman gets the publicity she is seeking and that the trial gets televised on C-SPAN... but I further hope that the Sony lawyers are pointed in their questioning, so that she shows the world at the end that she knew her kid had serious problems but failed to intervene sufficiently while he was alive. If he really had all the problems she claims he had, then she should have had him declared mentally incompetent/unstable/whatever and gotten him treatment for all of his many non-game-related problems. Instead she waits until he is dead, and makes a grab for cash.
These laws were created to protect children exactly like you!
No, the laws were created as protectionist measures for older workers, not younger. Having lots of teens in the workforce lowers the market rate for unskilled and semi-skilled workers, because there is more labor in supply relative to the demand than before. If you look at the "schools" that many child actors attend while making movies, you'll see what a farce the whole matter is.
As far as kids programming for big projects: as a group they can learn spoken and written languages better than adults can, up to a certain age. If they want to take advantage of this ability and learn programming languages, why shouldn't they profit from it? Why shouldn't we all, as long as they still socialize normally? There's an IRC client for BeOS called Baxter. From what I read, some 12-year-old made it a couple years ago. It's probably still considered the best IRC client out for that OS. Don't tell me he didn't have fun doing that... and I doubt it damaged him, except to give him false hope in a non-Microsoft OS =)
Why would anyone die of suffocation from Halon? That seems to be a very common myth...
Perhaps because on every data center and POP tour I've been given, if the subject of Halon systems comes up, the facilities engineers always point out the masks and the warning placards, and say that if someone gets caught inside without the gear when the system discharges, they could die.
HALON 1301 Interrupts chemical reactions Bromotrifluoromethane Effective on Class A, B, and C fires Not acutely toxic at 10% by volume (anesthetic and cardiac effects) Delayed effects and effects of chronic exposure not well known Toxic decomposition products are generated by fire Vapor density = 5 (collects in pits and low areas) Production restricted per Montreal Protocol due to depletion of ozone layer
HALON 1211 Interrupts chemical reactions Bromochlorodifluoromethane Effective on Class A, B, and C fires No residue May be sprayed (Boiling Point = 25oF) Used in portable fire extinguishers Disadvantages: Acutely toxic at >4% by volume (dizziness, impaired coordination and cardiac effects) Must be used at >5% by volume Toxic decomposition products are generated by fire Vapor density = 5.7 (collects in pits and low areas) Production restricted per Montreal Protocol due to depletion of ozone layer
Your comment on halon is well received; probably halon would be more effective, assuming the delivery system was operating.
Even assuming that a cost-effective delivery system for Halon-type fire suppression systems could have been installed into the towers, you'd have ended up with two unstable towers with giant holes in them and heavy airplane wreckage, as well as many floors' worth of people who'd have died of suffocation from the Halon.
Now consider that as soon as you install a large-scale fire suppression, it becomes a potential terrorist target, itself. Imagine what could happen if you worked in an office and then suddenly, without warning, the system activated without there being a fire or other indicator of danger? Would you know what was happening in time to get out before succumbing to it? Would there be enough emergency portable air masks for you and all your colleagues and guests and maintainance personnel and people in the elevators, and would they be properly trained in how to use them?
And assuming you could answer "yes" to all of the above, or find some way of working around the issues, why wouldn't the terrorists just destroy some other buildings, or blow up the subways, etc?
The answer isn't to build a lot of systems to make sure people are safe - you can never build enough to protect against every possibility. The answer is to prevent where possible the actions to which we can't adequately react. This means going after terrorist training facilities and organizations, but it also means we should look at what we are doing that causes marginally-rational people to contemplate overly-extreme responses such as this.
Try telling that to someone who's tearing their hair out at 8pm on a Friday trying to get something finished so that they can finally go home, only to have their underspecced machine grind to a halt as it swaps due to lack of RAM, and/or run at a snail's pace due to a slow CPU.
If you have a slow computer, that $80 for the cost of one office suite would be better spent on more memory and/or a newer cpu... and then all your stuff runs faster. I'm looking at SharkyExtreme's weekly pricing guides right now, and they say that you can get a Duron 1.3G for $74 or a T-bird 1.1G for the same price, or a Celeron 1.2G for $72. If your system already has a CPU that's this good or better, then you can get 256MB of PC100 RAM (CAS3) for around $59.
"Sorry it's late, but my PC is too slow to run the software I use" is not something the client will accept if a deadline is missed.
That's right. And buying software isn't going to solve this problem when you use applications that don't come with this software.
i suppose The Hunger Site really does deserve to go out of business. survival of the fittest. anyway, those kid's wouldn't be starving if they being productive members of the economy, right?
Yah, I guess they need to take a lesson from little kids in China and South America, etc., and learn to make clothes and toys for rich Americans and their kids if they want food and stuff... right?
What utter nonsense. A business is supposed to make money by selling a legitimate product or service. If a significant portion of your revenue comes from "referrals" and not from the sale of a legitimate product or service, then you deserve to go out of business.
Since when is this not a legitimate service?
By saying that referrals are not legitimate services, you're saying that the site that Greater Good runs, (the one that gives most of the revenue to nonprofits that I mentioned earlier) should go out of business. You're also saying that all of those 1-800-DENTIST or whatever lines should go out of business; they do the same thing, except for profit. And you're definitely saying that all the little if-you-find-my-program-useful-please-click-here-an d-buy-something websites deserve to die, because they are getting money for referrals, not directly from sales, too.
Somehow the word "conceivably" did not make it through the filtering into the final comment. That is, the corrected sentence above should read "Obviously, if Morpheus has a way to hijack referrals, that means it's now conceivably outright fraud."
I guess I typo'd the EM tags... I would hate to be sued for slander simply because I didn't couch this in properly oblique terms. Watch me be the next Morpheus scandal to hit Slashdot...
I admit, I'm being a bit extreme with the title of this comment, but please consider this point, which I don't think has been brought up, yet:
Shopping sites in general, as well as many other public sites that depend on referral revenue to operate will lose money as a result of this, and if this practice becomes common, will eventually have to shut down or change revenue models.
While you may not think that has a real impact on sites you personally visit (does Slashdot really depend on revenue from its click-through links to bookstores?) there are some good causes that stand to be hurt by this.
One highly-visible example of how hijacking referrals would be a real problem for a good cause is the shopping site that the parent company behind The Hunger Site (linked in my.sig) runs. It's a very simple setup: you click through, buy stuff, and the nonprofit of your choice gets most of the commission (the parent company makes money, but hey, it's not like Amazon would give me the money back if I went straight there).
Obviously, if Morpheus has a way to hijack referrals, that means it's now outright fraud. And yes, in situations like the one I just outlined, money that would otherwise have trickled to, say, a humanitarian organization that feeds starving kids, would instead go Morpheus (Not to mention that there might be some laws about using computer resources without permission).
Most people don't use the shopping site I mentioned, but they do use other sites that depend at least in part from referral revenue. You should find out what your favorite sites' (Anandtech, Sharky Extreme, Ars Technica, Slashdot, Everything2, just to name a small number that might) revenue sources are, and if any of them rely on referrals, you should consider whether another file service might fit your needs better.
(p.s. No, I don't have any formal relationship with the Hunger Site or its parent company, unless you count clicking its URL when I remember to, putting its site up as my.sig, and subscribing to its shopping service.)
How do you provide the same QoS and testing abilities as a real T1 if, down in the telco closet, that smartjack runs into an HDSL box? When the telco says "it tests fine to the smartjack," aren't they in fact lying in this case?
Another thing - if a pair or two go bad on a T1, or someone nicks it with a backhoe, you still have a good change of some throughput, right? Sure, you'll get errors, but you're not necessarily dead in the water. Can you explain how the redundancy of multiple pairs is duplicated by HDSL?
To put it simply you are wrong. You mean to tell me that if they had approved a.xxx TDL that all the porn sites in the world would just change their domain names and live happily ever after quarantined in the.xxx TDL.
And you're an idiot.
Sorry, but he's got a valid point. Just because legitimate adult entertainment producers want that TLD doesn't mean that there aren't others who will continue to run their operations elsewhere. Have you forgotten that.XXX domains would immediately become hot properties as soon as they get introduced? This would create barriers to entry in the market for some legitimate businesses who can't scramble fast enough. Not to mention that many of the purveyors of pop-up (and under) ads and "hot lists" typically redirect to servers with only IPs, etc., and could care less about getting domain names.
By creating an.XXX or.adult TLD, Pornographers get all the benifits of opening a store five miles outside the city limits while at the same time giving those who are intolerant to porn every opportunity to shut them out of the 'communities'. Parasitic scammers who try to lure people to illigitamate sites would quickly find themselves without the stronger, legitimate pornographers to shield their activity, and fade away.
This is simply not going to be the case. Do you recall the rules for the top three TLDs open to public registration?.COM is for corporations,.NET is for networks, and.ORG is for noncommercial organizations. If we apply your logic to current rules, all legitimate companies use.COM unless they're ISPs or other networks. However, this is not what happens in reality.
Here's the comment that started this thread:
When they refused to create the.XXX TLD they showed complete disregard for the future of the net as a self regulating entity. If they had created an.XXX TLD then we could banish net nany, cyber sitter, government intervention "to protect the children" and many other anoyances in one easy swoop.
If you believe that government legislation now protects kids from "predators" or even just overzealous marketing, adding a.XXX domain will not affect the need for that legislation. If you believe that censorware exists to keep kids from wandering into areas mommy and daddy don't want them to go, adding a.XXX domain will not affect the need for restrictions elsewhere (porn isn't the only thing being censored now, for example).
There will never be an easy solution to the problems we have as a consequence of the openness and availability of the Internet. While I personally believe that parents are ultimately responsible for what their children are exposed to, the censorware packages and legislation in theory are there to cover the holes that inevitably will occur. In practice, of course, these measures are unwieldy and can limit the rights of adults as well. However, the suggestion that a new TLD will take care of all the problems that the current measures attempt to address is naive at best.
Re:Indigos weren't designed to have internal CDROM
on
Iris Indigo Case Mod
·
· Score: 1
And they were designed for ripping the guts out and replacing with a PC?
Actually, sadly, the outside part was designed as a skin for the computer inside. I can't believe he destroyed a nice and probably working piece of equipment just to have the skin.
(Of course, I can't understand why people hunt endangered animals to hang on their walls, either.)
He could have removed the skin without damaging the computer. You can find Indigo skins for sale by checking Google... it's an item that new owners sometimes replace because it's scratched...
Slashdot Mirror
I'm using a Visiontek TI 4600, and haven't had any problems with it - I'm using an Athlon XP 1800+ with a Soyo Dragon+ (using the Via chipset that everyone complains is buggy), but installation was a snap, replacing my Creative Labs 32MB Savage 4 Pro card. And I'm using Win2k and the onboard 6.1 audio and 100BT, "to boot"...
If it is the GeForce4, it's probably your particular card.
Did you try taking it back for a replacement, before telling us all how bad it is?
More likely you have some weird BIOS issues or power problems... you should check those, too.
I wish these had been around when I was a proto-geek kid with too much allowance...
especially when I hit puberty and got really interested in microscopic things, if you know what I mean =)
Well, you know, that's why I went with a tri-band GSM phone (a Motorola p7389), a year ago. The European networks don't have a problem running different phones across GSM... why does the US?
Perhaps. But that doesn't explain why, if I switch to AT&T's new GSM/GPRS network, they want me to buy at least a Motorola 7382i form them, if not something more expensive. Web browsers for phones (at least Motorolas) are ridiculous, anyhow, so I don't need GPRS. So why do I have to have a phone with GPRS, and why can't I get one from a catalog or direct from the manufacturer (thereby getting around the excuse that the firmware is not up to date), if GPRS is not just an optional layer?
The answer, of course, is that the service providers make money off the phones! If not directly, they talk you into long contracts in order to decrease the price of the handset, and some will also try to charge you to "unlock" your phones when you change providers, as well.
(geez, guys, after the first dozen or so complaints about spoilers, you'd stop adding more redundant postings... Aren't you smart enough to know that if a show is about to come on, you don't read a news article about it unless you don't mind the plot being revealed? Get a grip.)
Personally, I was very glad to see this news story - I have not followed the show for several seasons (frankly, I haven't even seen it regularly since the movie), and the Lone Gunmen idea was one of the last plot devices I ever really liked about the show. To hear that they met a noble end makes me wish I'd seen this episode... and being on the west coast, I might have time to turn it on and watch it, due to ths article's timely placement. At least now I can set a reminder to watch the repeat.
Sadly, though, the kids don't seem to like him all that much. When this movie first came out in the theater, I took some preteens and teens to see it - not a single one liked the Jar-Jar character. They all said he "sucked."
Then again, they also mostly thought Anakin was a whiny brat, which surprised me. I thought they'd be wrapped up in the idea that he got to fly a pod racer, etc. But Lucas soft-peddled the whole slavery thing, and these kids, some of whom had been abused, weren't buying it.
The Ewoks were cool when you were 6. I remember secretly thinking they were cool, and I was supposed to be too old for that (11 or 12). But then, of course, "the Ewoks Big Adventure" came out, to milk that dry.
I could continue with more reasons why I think the "new Star Wars" won't even be palatable to kids, but it mostly has to do with the usual rants you've heard before, like wondering why "the Force" turns out to be just commensalism or something - it doesn't explain how there can be a "dark side" adequately, etc. And good lord... how can those thousands of robots all be such bad shots? =)
Perhaps it has weird power requirements not easily adapted to a wall socket, like it has to charge quickly off 220VAC or something. Having it recognize wall sockets without the use of costly emitters would require significant extra programming (better machine vision, etc). And then there's the fact that if it has to go to a central location and have a person charge it, that person can also look it over for physical problems and also clean whatever crap may have gotten on it. I'm sure it's not a major addition to the routine, since it already has to return for new drugs...
If pharmacy techs and nurses get stuck doing these deliveries (as the article seemingly implies), the answer is obvious. But even if it is currently a job for unskilled laborers, replacing humans with robots probably still is cheaper, which means these facilities may be able to offer more money to prospective skilled laborers.
P.S. In my opinion, the only truly unskilled labor is the kind that can be done by people you can hire off street corners for the day and pay cash to... (excepting prostitution, maybe)
How? If I never touch Kazaa (that means, never install it), this article doesn't tell me how it can affect me. In fact, the article doesn't seem to say anything we haven't already heard in Slashdot before, about attacks through the use of DNS redirects or man-in-the-middle, etc. But how does it affect me, when I haven't installed the program?
Okay, now this is total FUD. You're telling me that if they get hacked, the entire Internet is at the mercy of the hackers. Why is that?
Thanks for sharing some closer insight to the guy... Judging from his website, he seems to have been more than a bit eccentric to begin with, and also has done previous publicity stunts which seem to focus more on him than on his "cause."
I can't believe he didn't prepare himself for the possibility that all of the equipment might have to be removed - especially in light of the "standard" security precautions. And again, you're right - none of it was medically necessary. However, I could see him possibily being psychologically distraught over its forcible removal - though more from the shock of being questioned and examined and refused than from a real dependence on the equipment as a crutch (your comments leave little room for that, assuming you are telling the truth, which we also can't verify). So I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that his original account of being disoriented, etc., was not embellished. That doesn't take away from the fact that he caused the confrontation himself.
This is a good point. And even conforming laptops are supposed to remain off during portions of the flight. I wonder if Mr. Mann follows regulations then, and what kind of "disorientation" he gets, then? Or does he blithely put all of his fellow passengers at potential risk by not following FCC regulations?
The problem comes when someone tries to be deliberately counter-tempo... it doesn't work any more. Of course, turning it off fixes the problem...
Why be counter-tempo? Often, especially if you're doing something unusual like singing a harmonic of the original pitch, it actually underscores (pardon the pun) the original work better.
Songwriters (or composers) write for the voices in their heads, or to specific types of voices that they expect to be singing their work. Sometimes some tweaking can make things sound better, especially if you're not their "target" performer. For example, I can imagine a barbershop quartet doing a really awesome cover of "Closer to God," but certainly not by singing it exactly like Trent Reznor does...
IANAMuse, though, so think what you will =)
I can use my Voicestream unlimited weekend minutes to trade Jamie Curtis movies and pictures, now...
Even this is not precisely true. Unless you have someone's mail server IP listed as a local override in your mail server, your mail server will go down the list of MX records for them until it finds a live host to hand off to. If their server is offline temporarily (or they are set up for ETRN or something), you'll end up getting a secondary server that will forward the mail to them, later.
And that's just one legitimate way for a third party to become involved... if you use Earthlink, for example, you're forced to pass through their mail servers, as they block port 25 upstream... what do you want to bet that the "compliance" with law enforcement has to do partly with that requirement?
It could be even worse. What if the discovery process uncovers that he was teased in the game, too? Or that he made threats, and people didn't take him seriously, and maybe a "guide" (or whetever they are called in EQ) even suspended him for his actions, or something. Can you imagine the fodder for future lawsuits? If you interacted with the guy at all, you could be at risk. Administrators of other types of games like MUDs or, God help us, MUSHs (I knew a guy who used to "play" on a MUSH, which is like a MUD only without any real fighting system, etc. - they would just pose for hours, pretending to be people who knew how to say "thee" and "thou;" if someone had to leave for a while, their friends would wait hours for them to return so they could get on with the "wedding" or whatever and then write pages of coverage for their "history") will certainly lean towards pulling the plug if they suddenly become responsible for their players' offline lives.
I hope this woman gets the publicity she is seeking and that the trial gets televised on C-SPAN... but I further hope that the Sony lawyers are pointed in their questioning, so that she shows the world at the end that she knew her kid had serious problems but failed to intervene sufficiently while he was alive. If he really had all the problems she claims he had, then she should have had him declared mentally incompetent/unstable/whatever and gotten him treatment for all of his many non-game-related problems. Instead she waits until he is dead, and makes a grab for cash.
No, the laws were created as protectionist measures for older workers, not younger. Having lots of teens in the workforce lowers the market rate for unskilled and semi-skilled workers, because there is more labor in supply relative to the demand than before. If you look at the "schools" that many child actors attend while making movies, you'll see what a farce the whole matter is.
As far as kids programming for big projects: as a group they can learn spoken and written languages better than adults can, up to a certain age. If they want to take advantage of this ability and learn programming languages, why shouldn't they profit from it? Why shouldn't we all, as long as they still socialize normally? There's an IRC client for BeOS called Baxter. From what I read, some 12-year-old made it a couple years ago. It's probably still considered the best IRC client out for that OS. Don't tell me he didn't have fun doing that... and I doubt it damaged him, except to give him false hope in a non-Microsoft OS =)
Perhaps because on every data center and POP tour I've been given, if the subject of Halon systems comes up, the facilities engineers always point out the masks and the warning placards, and say that if someone gets caught inside without the gear when the system discharges, they could die.
The following summary is pasted from the OSHA website:
Even assuming that a cost-effective delivery system for Halon-type fire suppression systems could have been installed into the towers, you'd have ended up with two unstable towers with giant holes in them and heavy airplane wreckage, as well as many floors' worth of people who'd have died of suffocation from the Halon.
Now consider that as soon as you install a large-scale fire suppression, it becomes a potential terrorist target, itself. Imagine what could happen if you worked in an office and then suddenly, without warning, the system activated without there being a fire or other indicator of danger? Would you know what was happening in time to get out before succumbing to it? Would there be enough emergency portable air masks for you and all your colleagues and guests and maintainance personnel and people in the elevators, and would they be properly trained in how to use them?
And assuming you could answer "yes" to all of the above, or find some way of working around the issues, why wouldn't the terrorists just destroy some other buildings, or blow up the subways, etc?
The answer isn't to build a lot of systems to make sure people are safe - you can never build enough to protect against every possibility. The answer is to prevent where possible the actions to which we can't adequately react. This means going after terrorist training facilities and organizations, but it also means we should look at what we are doing that causes marginally-rational people to contemplate overly-extreme responses such as this.
If you have a slow computer, that $80 for the cost of one office suite would be better spent on more memory and/or a newer cpu... and then all your stuff runs faster. I'm looking at SharkyExtreme's weekly pricing guides right now, and they say that you can get a Duron 1.3G for $74 or a T-bird 1.1G for the same price, or a Celeron 1.2G for $72. If your system already has a CPU that's this good or better, then you can get 256MB of PC100 RAM (CAS3) for around $59.
That's right. And buying software isn't going to solve this problem when you use applications that don't come with this software.
Yah, I guess they need to take a lesson from little kids in China and South America, etc., and learn to make clothes and toys for rich Americans and their kids if they want food and stuff... right?
Since when is this not a legitimate service?
By saying that referrals are not legitimate services, you're saying that the site that Greater Good runs, (the one that gives most of the revenue to nonprofits that I mentioned earlier) should go out of business. You're also saying that all of those 1-800-DENTIST or whatever lines should go out of business; they do the same thing, except for profit. And you're definitely saying that all the little if-you-find-my-program-useful-please-click-here-a
Somehow the word "conceivably" did not make it through the filtering into the final comment. That is, the corrected sentence above should read "Obviously, if Morpheus has a way to hijack referrals, that means it's now conceivably outright fraud."
I guess I typo'd the EM tags... I would hate to be sued for slander simply because I didn't couch this in properly oblique terms. Watch me be the next Morpheus scandal to hit Slashdot...
I admit, I'm being a bit extreme with the title of this comment, but please consider this point, which I don't think has been brought up, yet:
.sig) runs. It's a very simple setup: you click through, buy stuff, and the nonprofit of your choice gets most of the commission (the parent company makes money, but hey, it's not like Amazon would give me the money back if I went straight there).
.sig, and subscribing to its shopping service.)
Shopping sites in general, as well as many other public sites that depend on referral revenue to operate will lose money as a result of this, and if this practice becomes common, will eventually have to shut down or change revenue models.
While you may not think that has a real impact on sites you personally visit (does Slashdot really depend on revenue from its click-through links to bookstores?) there are some good causes that stand to be hurt by this.
One highly-visible example of how hijacking referrals would be a real problem for a good cause is the shopping site that the parent company behind The Hunger Site (linked in my
Obviously, if Morpheus has a way to hijack referrals, that means it's now outright fraud. And yes, in situations like the one I just outlined, money that would otherwise have trickled to, say, a humanitarian organization that feeds starving kids, would instead go Morpheus (Not to mention that there might be some laws about using computer resources without permission).
Most people don't use the shopping site I mentioned, but they do use other sites that depend at least in part from referral revenue. You should find out what your favorite sites' (Anandtech, Sharky Extreme, Ars Technica, Slashdot, Everything2, just to name a small number that might) revenue sources are, and if any of them rely on referrals, you should consider whether another file service might fit your needs better.
(p.s. No, I don't have any formal relationship with the Hunger Site or its parent company, unless you count clicking its URL when I remember to, putting its site up as my
How do you provide the same QoS and testing abilities as a real T1 if, down in the telco closet, that smartjack runs into an HDSL box? When the telco says "it tests fine to the smartjack," aren't they in fact lying in this case?
Another thing - if a pair or two go bad on a T1, or someone nicks it with a backhoe, you still have a good change of some throughput, right? Sure, you'll get errors, but you're not necessarily dead in the water. Can you explain how the redundancy of multiple pairs is duplicated by HDSL?
Sorry, but he's got a valid point. Just because legitimate adult entertainment producers want that TLD doesn't mean that there aren't others who will continue to run their operations elsewhere. Have you forgotten that
This is simply not going to be the case. Do you recall the rules for the top three TLDs open to public registration?
Here's the comment that started this thread:
If you believe that government legislation now protects kids from "predators" or even just overzealous marketing, adding a
There will never be an easy solution to the problems we have as a consequence of the openness and availability of the Internet. While I personally believe that parents are ultimately responsible for what their children are exposed to, the censorware packages and legislation in theory are there to cover the holes that inevitably will occur. In practice, of course, these measures are unwieldy and can limit the rights of adults as well. However, the suggestion that a new TLD will take care of all the problems that the current measures attempt to address is naive at best.
And they were designed for ripping the guts out and replacing with a PC?
Actually, sadly, the outside part was designed as a skin for the computer inside. I can't believe he destroyed a nice and probably working piece of equipment just to have the skin.
(Of course, I can't understand why people hunt endangered animals to hang on their walls, either.)
He could have removed the skin without damaging the computer. You can find Indigo skins for sale by checking Google... it's an item that new owners sometimes replace because it's scratched...