So sorry about your investment, but you're invited over to a kegger at my place with your notebook computer where a friend of mine has arranged a special web feed where we can see SCOX being dropped off the NASDAQ in real time - kind of like the ball dropping in Times Square in NYC at the stroke of midnight. Bring your own fireworks.
You do realize that your 1 in 10,000 rate would only be one or two false positives a day in an airport that sees 10s f thousands of people. Only smaller airports see that level of traffic and the USA has many airports. It is a ludicrous figure for a nation that used to preach "innocent until proven guilty".
Comparing a nation with a real terrorist problem like the Philippines which has three "major"[1] airports (probably only NAIA reaches >10k passengers a day) - the Davao City airport terminal has been bombed twice[2] since 2003 and NAIA domestic terminal bombed once. I'll leave out the SuperFerry bombing a few years back which was blamed on terrorists, but I heard too many contradictory stories from locals to really believe that. Three bombings in the last 4 years. Exactly how many bombings have occurred in USA airports over the last 50 years with vastly more traffic and older or existing technology?
In the first two pages of a google search on "airport bombings in the US" shows two results[3] for planned, but foiled bombings, one in New York which was dubious at best, and the other from a planned future plot from someone involved in the African embassy bombings. The New York incident was last year, but the previous LA one was in 1998 and the individual "involved" wasn't even on US soil let alone anywhere near LAX when he was apprehended.
So sorry, the numbers just do not add up. As a positive enhancement to US security this system doesn't make any sense at all. The rate is already 0, can't get any better than that. This method of harassing passengers wouldn't have changed 9/11 at all - they used box cutters and wouldn't have shown up.
I won't go into the current lunacy regarding fluids on a plane which was a reaction against a plot that was stopped by other means any way.
I feel sad for young people today who have no idea how much fun it used to be to fly thirty or forty years ago.
[1] Davao City International Airport, Cebu International Airport and Ninoy Aquino International Airport.
[2] My memory vaguely tells me three, but I can't remember exactly the third so I'll take the conservative figure.
[3] And a third result for the 3/2003 Davao City Airport old terminal bombing I watched in horror on TV in my first week of being in the Philippines.
It is strange how averse many people are to the idea. Yeah, times have definitely changed. Records show that for a long time on the earliest European sea voyages to the new world, the average person wasn't going to make it back alive but they went anyway.
Yes, I would go on a one-way trip to Mars, though I have no idea how I would explain it to my wife and children. I've dreamed of being an astronaut since I watched the Apollo guys do it on TV when I was in elementary school.
This could be interesting if they interconnected with a game like World of Warcraft and put a portal in Shattrath. Then we could like, organize big raid parties, invade 2nd Life and kill everyone in sight.
I suppose their economy could suffer a bit because then people would have to save money for body armor and weapons instead of genitalia, but they could always sell cool stuff like hoof and horn manicures that you can't get in Azeroth. Maybe we could even have interconnected auction houses too. We both win.
Moore's Law has roughly the same significance as Bode's Law http://www.alcyone.com/max/physics/laws/b.html
The form of Bode's law (that is, a roughly geometric series) is not surprising, considering our theories on the formation of solar systems, but its particular formulation is thought of as coincidental.
At some point this type of activity does become criminal, but to be worried that you are going to go to jail for one slip of your pointer finger is simply ridiculous. First, I agree with what you wrote regarding google ads. As a matter of fact, in the first month or so after I was back in the US after a lengthy stay in Asia I was emailing a friend (through gmail) regarding Linux notebook computers and gmail brought up a set of targeted ads that included the company my friend recommended later. I do not mind the way google does ads. I'm never ever going to buy from an ad, at least on first sight[*], but at least they do it in a fashion that isn't intrusive and bandwidth wasting the way a flash movie ad is.
I very much do mind how this term is defined. Read the wikipedia entry (which could only have been edited by an advertiser). I very much object to the wording. I very much object to the fact that the "blocking ads is theft" meme even exists with legs on it - what next, is email SPAM blocking to be considered theft as well if you don't click on the link and buy from the provided link?
The bigger picture is a frightening one and most reminiscent of the dysfunctional society in Pohl's Space Merchant/Merchant Wars novels where the world leaders are all the heads of advertising agencies.
I find it most ironic that several of the people posting here confess to fraudulent clicking (by the definitions Google brings up when you web search them for "click fraud") when their intent was to be friendly to the webmaster of the pages they were visiting.
For once, the/. editors got a story title more correct than the story, but "false click" isn't that much of an improvement. Sigh.
[*] O.K., O.K. I bought Burning Crusade when I first saw it was made available for download from Blizzard over the internet from the initial WoW screen, but I'd already decided to buy it before that point.
I know the "fraudsters" use robots, but that's not convincing either. If your agreement is this easy to exploit, YOU need to fix YOUR AGREEMENT. Don't call it fraud. I would tend to agree with that statement, but I wanted to see what the definition of a "fraudulent click" was.
The act of purposely clicking ad listings without intending to buy from the advertiser. http://www.tractionsearch.com/se-dictionary.php
All I can say is ewwww. The wiki entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Click_fraud for click fraud is much stronger and definitely stresses the "fraud" aspect as a US felony. Double ewwww. This sounds like something out of Space Merchants by Fred Pohl.
Ad-block plus is really my friend and if that kind of law can be enacted and enforced, I will gladly forgo the web2.0 experience or whatever they're calling it now. I'd like the old internet back with Usenet, mailing lists and anonymous FTP for software downloads please.
I am not volunteering to be a mantainer: I don't have any interest in linux on the desktop nowadays I was not asking you to be a maintainer, I was only asking why you made the assertions that you did.
In any case personally I think linux on the desktop as a primary OS is pointless for the general public I disagree, but whatever.
In general am just saying that if somebody comes up and says 'let's fork!' the reaction shouldn't automatically be negative, let anybody do whatever forking they want, if it has merit it will survive, if not it will die: no need to panic. Forking for no good reason is pointless and can be counterproductive and divisive. Since you were making the claims that Linus is holding back Linux desktop development by rejecting specific patches aimed at the desktop, I just asked for an example.
The project that I've been most involved with is XEmacs which is a highly successful fork of a well-established piece of software. There's nothing wrong with forking for a good reason - sometimes you need to light a fire under someone's ass to get something done or just do it yourself.
Irrelevant. Most people aren't consuming content from their desktop PCs - and they sure as hell aren't consuming HD content (the stuff that will actually be DRMed, eventually) from their desktop PCs.
They could have told the studios what to go do with themselves. And ended up with a lame duck platform that couldn't play HD media. I bet that was a short meeting. Now, I'm confused. First you say, DRM'ed HD content isn't being consumed on desktop PCs, then you say only a "lame duck platform" could not play that kind of content. Which is it? And what is the point of Vista in the home?
Just asking.
I do put together or buy computers based on what kind of multimedia content it can play. I loathe geographical-based DRM, never mind copy protection. I find it hateful to not be able to consume content I purchased legally on a player outside the country of the content's origin.
PU-238 would be an unlikely source of problems of this sort. I agree with you, but for a different reason. If the sickness is caused by exposure to plutonium, everyone there will be dead very soon because plutonium is one of the most toxic substances known. If (most) everyone is still alive in a week or so, it wasn't plutonium.
if something comes up that will increase the desktop performance by x% and kill server performance by y%, it won't go in as far as I can see. Can you name a specific example of that? Con's swap prefetch patch doesn't count because it didn't reduce server performance, it isn't being stone-walled by Linus, and the reason it was rejected appeared to be because it was papering over a problem that shouldn't exist in the first place.
I have first hand experience with regards to server/big iron transitioning to desktop. The "big iron" I was given to test with when I was Linux kernel hacking at NEC (in 2002) is woefully underpowered compared to typical notebook computers of today. I don't see any reason why this trend won't continue.
Basically, I don't see any evidence of the desktop being held back in Linux and it has worked fine for me in that capacity since the 1.2 kernel days. What would you do differently if you were in charge of a desktop Linux fork?
Yeah. And they even used to have a solver program that ran on Linux (1997/1998 time frame). I read their stuff religiously everyday until they canceled that.
NY Times crosswords rule. Solving NY Times crosswords on Linux was at least as much fun as WoW.
Is it wrong that I'm thinking of building a water cooled laptop with 8 cores, a RAID5 with ~2TB of usable space, and a 24" monitor? Probably. Can you imagine the amount of global warming a beowulf cluster of those things would cause? It might melt the polar icecaps instantly, but hey, that would solve the problem of the water cooling.
I still cannot understand how microsoft which I do believe has a considerable amount of self interest is creating obstacles primarily for themselves. You're missing a big point. So long as it's a problem that only Microsoft can fix and bill people for, it's in Microsoft's best interest to do it that way.
I would love a clear explanation about why one standard is better than the other. <Monty-Python>That's a fascinating question and I'd like to answer it in two ways if I may... the first in my normal voice and the second in a silly, high-pitched whine</Monty-Python> Oh wait...
Seriously, consider troff as a case example, a program which Brian Kernighan once called "50000 lines of uncommented unreadable C code written by the late Joe Osana" (I've tried to remember where I first read that, but haven't found it again and it's true enough as a reading of the source reveals).
troff wasn't exactly open source as we now define the term, but the markup language specification was fully documented. As a result, it was reimplemented in a variety of forms including the GPLed groff and it is still possible to make hardcopy of troff documents written decades ago.
Similarly, the TiVoized TeX (you are not allowed to make willy-nilly changes and redistribute them, but it's still open source), will also live forever.
Even more so than open source, an open specification is something that can never ever be taken away from you and it will live in the form of working code that implements it for as long as it is useful.
Contrast this with the OOXML "standard" which includes XML tags such as format this paragraph like Microsoft Word-95 (without explanation as to what that means) or use word spacing like Microsoft Word-97 for the Apple Macintosh (also without explanation as to what that means), etc.
Can anyone name a single proprietary counterexample that has lived at least as long as troff (over 30 years)? Open standards work and we have the track record to prove it.
If you are still confused... since this is slashdot, I'll try a car analogy. A closed standard means you have to return your car to the factory in which it was made to have it serviced - a single point of failure and if the factory refuses to work on your particular car and says you must buy a new one instead, that is what you will have to do. An open standard means you can drive down the street and choose the nearest mechanic to work on your car. Fortunately, cars have open standards and the standard is only a Chilton's guide away http://www.chiltonsonline.com/
In my experience Asian gaming culture is more focused around going out to Internet Cafés My only real experience in that area is in the Philippines. Nearly everyone does not have internet access or a computer at home, so that's the only way kids can play. Children playing games and young women trolling dating websites are the internet cafe owner's bread and butter (there are others, but they're statistically negligible, with kids playing games being by far the most lucrative demographic). Most of the rules focus on keeping all seats full (profit margins are extremely low) and it is much cheaper (for example) to game for five or six hours straight at a time than for a shorter amount of time.
That being said, the number of deaths by WoW are zero because most internet cafe owners are too stupid to provide the most popular game in computer history. I suppose that may be considered a good thing.
Alcohol poisoning from drinking far too much in a short period of time is a very American phenomenon.) You've never ridden a commuter train in Japan on a weekend night (and seen kids vomiting in the station, or had to swerve around all the puddles of vomit on the floor). Overdoing alcohol is very much a phenomenon of Japanese college life and later life as a salaryman for that matter.
No, the GNU moniker is intended to reflect that the userland almost entirely comes from GNU projects and that's not likely to chang That's not true and the quota changes daily with new non-GNU stuff being written.
The user-visible portions of userland (X11 and the window manager) are not GNU projects. If a program does not have the magic words `Copyright xxxx Free Software Foundation' at the top of every source file, it is not a GNU project.
The vital portions of userland that are GNU projects are gcc and glibc. Not all Linux systems use glibc, particularly in the embedded world. With a viable non-GNU C & C++ compiler and a full-featured libc, a GNU-less/Linux is most possible.
I, for one, do not believe that glibc (or gcc+glibc) being GNU projects justifies renaming the architecture. For a long time, HJ Lu maintained a forked libc for Linux.
What was he ingesting in order to remain awake for that ridiculous period of time Probably nothing, which is a problem in and of itself. The more interesting question is:
How about the staff of this cafe? There are laws in China prohibiting this kind of computer usage and the staff will undoubtedly be answering that question to the local police.
The safest thing to do I think is start drinking (heavily if necessary) if you've been playing more than a few hours. That way you'll pass out and sleep long before you reach a danger point.
Drinking and WoW, it's not a just a good idea, it ought to be the law.
and maybe even sue the hardware vendors for not consistently offering XP as an option across the range As if offering Microsoft Windows XP across the board blunts the monopoly. In freer countries, one can walk into a random computer store and buy notebook computers without any Microsoft at all (and I have the store datasheets in hand to prove it), but not in San Jose, California. There's a reason for that beyond simple supply and demand economics.
It remains to be seen if this has happened within Linux, and if it has, hard questions are going to require very good answers.. No, it does not "remain to be seen". The patches in question were DOA before they got close to entering Linus' source tree. The system worked. The patches were DOA before this flame war really got started.
Apparently they were added to some madwifi tree, but that's not an official Linux tree and the appropriate place to flame those guys is on their own website and/or mailing lists not lkml. At any rate, there wasn't and isn't even the remotest chance they would ever be merged into Linus' official source tree.
Slashdot Mirror
So sorry about your investment, but you're invited over to a kegger at my place with your notebook computer where a friend of mine has arranged a special web feed where we can see SCOX being dropped off the NASDAQ in real time - kind of like the ball dropping in Times Square in NYC at the stroke of midnight. Bring your own fireworks.
Cheers!
Comparing a nation with a real terrorist problem like the Philippines which has three "major"[1] airports (probably only NAIA reaches >10k passengers a day) - the Davao City airport terminal has been bombed twice[2] since 2003 and NAIA domestic terminal bombed once. I'll leave out the SuperFerry bombing a few years back which was blamed on terrorists, but I heard too many contradictory stories from locals to really believe that. Three bombings in the last 4 years. Exactly how many bombings have occurred in USA airports over the last 50 years with vastly more traffic and older or existing technology?
In the first two pages of a google search on "airport bombings in the US" shows two results[3] for planned, but foiled bombings, one in New York which was dubious at best, and the other from a planned future plot from someone involved in the African embassy bombings. The New York incident was last year, but the previous LA one was in 1998 and the individual "involved" wasn't even on US soil let alone anywhere near LAX when he was apprehended.
So sorry, the numbers just do not add up. As a positive enhancement to US security this system doesn't make any sense at all. The rate is already 0, can't get any better than that. This method of harassing passengers wouldn't have changed 9/11 at all - they used box cutters and wouldn't have shown up.
I won't go into the current lunacy regarding fluids on a plane which was a reaction against a plot that was stopped by other means any way.
I feel sad for young people today who have no idea how much fun it used to be to fly thirty or forty years ago.
[1] Davao City International Airport, Cebu International Airport and Ninoy Aquino International Airport.
[2] My memory vaguely tells me three, but I can't remember exactly the third so I'll take the conservative figure.
[3] And a third result for the 3/2003 Davao City Airport old terminal bombing I watched in horror on TV in my first week of being in the Philippines.
Yes, I would go on a one-way trip to Mars, though I have no idea how I would explain it to my wife and children. I've dreamed of being an astronaut since I watched the Apollo guys do it on TV when I was in elementary school.
This could be interesting if they interconnected with a game like World of Warcraft and put a portal in Shattrath. Then we could like, organize big raid parties, invade 2nd Life and kill everyone in sight.
I suppose their economy could suffer a bit because then people would have to save money for body armor and weapons instead of genitalia, but they could always sell cool stuff like hoof and horn manicures that you can't get in Azeroth. Maybe we could even have interconnected auction houses too. We both win.
Sign me up!
I very much do mind how this term is defined. Read the wikipedia entry (which could only have been edited by an advertiser). I very much object to the wording. I very much object to the fact that the "blocking ads is theft" meme even exists with legs on it - what next, is email SPAM blocking to be considered theft as well if you don't click on the link and buy from the provided link?
The bigger picture is a frightening one and most reminiscent of the dysfunctional society in Pohl's Space Merchant/Merchant Wars novels where the world leaders are all the heads of advertising agencies.
I find it most ironic that several of the people posting here confess to fraudulent clicking (by the definitions Google brings up when you web search them for "click fraud") when their intent was to be friendly to the webmaster of the pages they were visiting.
For once, the
[*] O.K., O.K. I bought Burning Crusade when I first saw it was made available for download from Blizzard over the internet from the initial WoW screen, but I'd already decided to buy it before that point.
Yeah, and I've seen a draft of the 15,000 page MOHumor-XML (Microsoft Open Humor-XML) standard which includes indispensible tags like and .
:(.
Looks like we're going to have another standards battle on our hands
All I can say is ewwww. The wiki entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Click_fraud for click fraud is much stronger and definitely stresses the "fraud" aspect as a US felony. Double ewwww. This sounds like something out of Space Merchants by Fred Pohl.
Ad-block plus is really my friend and if that kind of law can be enacted and enforced, I will gladly forgo the web2.0 experience or whatever they're calling it now. I'd like the old internet back with Usenet, mailing lists and anonymous FTP for software downloads please.
The project that I've been most involved with is XEmacs which is a highly successful fork of a well-established piece of software. There's nothing wrong with forking for a good reason - sometimes you need to light a fire under someone's ass to get something done or just do it yourself.
Just asking.
I do put together or buy computers based on what kind of multimedia content it can play. I loathe geographical-based DRM, never mind copy protection. I find it hateful to not be able to consume content I purchased legally on a player outside the country of the content's origin.
I have first hand experience with regards to server/big iron transitioning to desktop. The "big iron" I was given to test with when I was Linux kernel hacking at NEC (in 2002) is woefully underpowered compared to typical notebook computers of today. I don't see any reason why this trend won't continue.
Basically, I don't see any evidence of the desktop being held back in Linux and it has worked fine for me in that capacity since the 1.2 kernel days. What would you do differently if you were in charge of a desktop Linux fork?
Think of the (Linus') Children!
Yeah. And they even used to have a solver program that ran on Linux (1997/1998 time frame). I read their stuff religiously everyday until they canceled that.
NY Times crosswords rule. Solving NY Times crosswords on Linux was at least as much fun as WoW.
Seriously, consider troff as a case example, a program which Brian Kernighan once called "50000 lines of uncommented unreadable C code written by the late Joe Osana" (I've tried to remember where I first read that, but haven't found it again and it's true enough as a reading of the source reveals).
troff wasn't exactly open source as we now define the term, but the markup language specification was fully documented. As a result, it was reimplemented in a variety of forms including the GPLed groff and it is still possible to make hardcopy of troff documents written decades ago.
Similarly, the TiVoized TeX (you are not allowed to make willy-nilly changes and redistribute them, but it's still open source), will also live forever.
Even more so than open source, an open specification is something that can never ever be taken away from you and it will live in the form of working code that implements it for as long as it is useful.
Contrast this with the OOXML "standard" which includes XML tags such as format this paragraph like Microsoft Word-95 (without explanation as to what that means) or use word spacing like Microsoft Word-97 for the Apple Macintosh (also without explanation as to what that means), etc.
Can anyone name a single proprietary counterexample that has lived at least as long as troff (over 30 years)? Open standards work and we have the track record to prove it.
If you are still confused
I saw 602's later posting and I stand corrected.
That being said, the number of deaths by WoW are zero because most internet cafe owners are too stupid to provide the most popular game in computer history. I suppose that may be considered a good thing.
I think you mean deep vein thrombosis http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000156.htm
The user-visible portions of userland (X11 and the window manager) are not GNU projects. If a program does not have the magic words `Copyright xxxx Free Software Foundation' at the top of every source file, it is not a GNU project.
The vital portions of userland that are GNU projects are gcc and glibc. Not all Linux systems use glibc, particularly in the embedded world. With a viable non-GNU C & C++ compiler and a full-featured libc, a GNU-less/Linux is most possible.
I, for one, do not believe that glibc (or gcc+glibc) being GNU projects justifies renaming the architecture. For a long time, HJ Lu maintained a forked libc for Linux.
The safest thing to do I think is start drinking (heavily if necessary) if you've been playing more than a few hours. That way you'll pass out and sleep long before you reach a danger point.
Drinking and WoW, it's not a just a good idea, it ought to be the law.
Apparently they were added to some madwifi tree, but that's not an official Linux tree and the appropriate place to flame those guys is on their own website and/or mailing lists not lkml. At any rate, there wasn't and isn't even the remotest chance they would ever be merged into Linus' official source tree.
An article was just posted yesterday; here's the main link:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/14/1723253
A direct link to the deposition is here:
http://info.riaalawsuits.us/umg_lindor_070223JacobsonDepositionTranscript.txt
Warning: It's long, but inherently pornographic in nature as the "expert" witness isn't wearing any clothes by the end of it. Enjoy!