ATTN JonKatz : Slashdot Posting Rules
on
Mage The Ascension
·
· Score: 1
Looking at these nifty little instructions below the submit button, we see 3 hints our beloved Mr Katz should take note of:
Important Stuff:
- Please try to keep posts on topic.
- Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said.
- Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
Any canadian who's been hiding in their basement for the past 2 years will remember the panic when we first heard of the "blank cd-rom levy" and how it was going to triple the retail prices on all cdr media, but once it had gone through all the legislative bullshit procedures it ended up being so minuscule we hardly noticed a change. That's right, they charge 3.2 cents per cd. Wo-fricking-hoo. At first people were yelling nonsense like 4.00$ per blank cd (which cost about 1.75$ back then). Seen it, heard it, still don't give a fnarg about it.
What i'd like to read about is JonKatz's brain dissected and scattered across the country. "An epic tale of a wasted brain put to good use as fertilizer!"
The person might be a genius novel writer, but if they don't know a thing about computers other than "these machines are cool" (which is litterally false since my PC was complaining of excess heat this morning - anyways!).. well maybe they should stick to book writing instead of trying to tell me what I already know is wrong. We all know the classic situation where a total ignoramus tries to tell you how to do your job (i.e. they call tech sup't but don't pause long enough between complaints to allow you to help them). There are some people out there who simply lack the mental tools required to grok computers adequately, or maybe they're just synaptically lazy.
Ok then, let's just all buy PS2's, dismantle them for parts and upgrade our boxen with the underpriced gear. I could use a DVD player and that nifty little graphics chipset alongside my Geforce2. That'll teach Sony =)
If such a user were dumb enough to be "alarmed" by a simple port number, then I'd much rather see them go elsewhere. Anyone who's ever worked on phone tech support will remember the long joke that ends like this :
- "Sir you'll need to return your computer to the store for a refund"
- "Oh really ? it's that bad ? what's wrong ?"
- "Just tell the salesman you're too @!#$ing stupid to use a computer."
If IDE requires so much assistance from the main CPU to get its deed done, then would it not be possible to SCSIfy an IDE drive with some tantric controller card / embedded adapter encasing that would do this "dirty work" and emulate SCSI with its lovely 1% cpu usage ? Even dedicated ATA/66 and ATA/100 cards like the Promise Raid Controller swallow a good slice of the CPU time.
For most hard drives it's not too bad, but the real problem comes when you have a high-speed cdrom. Think Kenwood 72x. That thing sucks away nearly 20% CPU no matter how fast the PC. Another brand name 40x drive also bogs down my other box by a good 12-15%. On the other hand, my SCSI 24x could (theoretically) run on a 286/12 without a hiccup (of course the system bus would freak out).
Are there spec incompatibilities between SCSI and IDE that would prevent this kind of gadget from existing ? It would allow high-end workstation users to add cheap unreliable storage for their pr0n on those fancy-shmancy SGI boxes.
Ok then. Make a CDDB "ripping" util that dumps everything into a comma-delimited file, which is then porked into a "totally separate" util that reads the glorious file and shoves the data back into FreeDB. Stupid laws only need stupid workarounds.
Apple has known this for a while now, else they wouldn't be focusing on the BSD-like MacOS-X. Let's make it known that I never liked Macs, I've used (rather, _touched_) them twice in my life, and I've never experience a computer as frustrating as the Mac. No right-clicking, no console, not even an illusion of control to apease my mind. And I remember my short-lived days of ISP tech support, and the agony that resounded when my turn in the queue was met by a Mac user. Then I realized that even the Mac power users, those who knew the OS incredibly well, were still powerless and unable to solve their stupid dialup troubles. It's a sad thing indeed, and I'll be happy the day the "Classic" Mac OS dies.
Why not just start a mass backup of the CDDB into FreeDB and pick up where it left us off ? Just query every single possible disc-id and keep it somewhere warm. IANAL, but since this is information that was publicly submitted in the first place, I don't think they can sue anybody for copying what they copied in the first place. Although not every judge has a functional logic module in his/her brain.
Let's imagine Sony and all those other big fat corporate whores were to block napster usage at the ISP level (yay, we can work around that), well wouldn't Napster be well placed to sue Sony for boycotting the service ? Napster is making money out of this, so if any company takes steps to massively restrict Napster, then I'm pretty sure there's some business conduct legislation that can be used against the RIAA.
IANAL but I'm pretty darn sure this is illegal. If someone were to stand outside your business preventing customers from entering, you'd have that person arrested and sue them for lost revenues. Shouldn't the same apply for online services ?
Is it just me or is the guy too fried to just make up one syntactically correct sentence without inlaying a bunch of loosely related topics and forgetting what he was taking about in the first place ?
"We know it's been hard to understand - although Metallica would like to blame Napster to cover up our pre-"Load" sex change - I believe it's true that Linux is a fresh, new - hey did you see that hottie across the street - fishtank cleaner."
(Redistribution of this mockery of a Lars Ulrich quote among ameobas is strictly prohibited. Really. Try me. Grr.)
Anyone who knows Michael Cowpland's history and style of business has read this morning's Ottawa Sun with a half-grin. Cowpland isn't just another old anal-retentive CEO who "cares" about his business too much to see its problems. He's jumping out because he sees disaster down the road and he's not going to sit like a fool waiting for the inevitable.
Cowpland is an aggressive businessman, a rebel of sorts. He effortlessly shrugs off bad karma from the press and always finds a way to turn it around to his advantage. Whatever he means by "linux-based startups", you can be sure it's going to get noticed. Cowpland's projects are often overlooked because they're not slammed in your face like most of its competition. Just look back a few years when he was looking into linux-based "network computers". Now look at daily headlines on iOpeners and NetPliances. They may not be selling Corel NetPC's, but he certainly laid down alot of the groundwork that inspired the others. Time and time again he's foreseen trends years ahead, and I'm confident he's not going to run out of projects anytime soon.
The main problem with any criticism is obviously censorship, and that censorship lies in the hands of those with deep pockets. We've seen it time and again : corporations will get to you whichever way they can. They know all the dirty tricks, they're not afraid to use them.
If a company can't take down negative criticism by asking politely (which they often skip altogether), they just send a few lawyer's letters to your mailbox and giggle as you step back, fearing lawsuits each one more outrageous than the last. Fear and loathing prevail in the billion-dollar american race. Why play nice and "deal" with the critics when you can stomp them into the ground and growl until the rest of them run and hide ?
The problem is that you have no way of knowing if it really is the president. Quite often the first line techs will simply relay you to a 2nd liner who will pose as the prez (or whomever you're asking for).
This can be a very good thing, mainly because the upper management usually has nothing to do with the actual business itself. They don't know what's going on, they just sit at meetings tossing buzzwords around. CEO's are CEO's for a reason : they're the ones who keep all the staff managers under control. They don't have the time or talent to deal with customers on the phone (unless those customers have a 7-digit bank balance).
And that thing is : why the hell does Jon Katz always need 3 pages of text to say something we already all know ? He'd make a good microsoft programmer, writing a 12 meg dll that simply blits rectangles.
Am I the only doof to notice that although our "geek" culture is off-balance gender-wise, most psychological studies on geekism are written by women ? No sexism intended, but that's like having a guy write a review on different brands of tampons. Sure there are certainly a few male (?) freaks who use tampons, but as a minority I doubt they can express the full spectrum of associated complexities. It takes a true geek to know a true geek, and I think it's commonly accepted and acknowledge that geek guys and geek grrls have some differences that simply cannot be generalized. You can't write for the smaller of the two groups and expect to appeal to the masses.
Re:Basketball Diaries wrongful death trial
on
Hacker Crackdown?
·
· Score: 1
Movies can be as graphics as they like, they have no responsibility towards the viewers. They don't check your criminal/psych records when you go to the theatres, anybody is free to view the movies. Therefore there is the possibility that some of the viewers might be psychologically unbalanced and very influencable. Can you blame this on the movie producers ? No, because they have no control over who sees their movie and who doesn't. Same thing with software developers. The lonestar coder who gives away a newsreader can't be held responsible because leetboy@aol.com uses it to propagate goat porn. If that were true, then maybe I could sue Coca-Cola for keeping me up all night, causing me to be late at work because of insomnia, and eventually resulting in my getting fired for being late all the time.
Contrast this with a valid blame situation, for example if someone rams you with a truck and the resulting injuries prevent you from going to work, you can sue them (their insurance company) to compensate for your lost income, because it was their decision (or indecision) to ram you.
Software developers don't decide they want to make systems crash on purpose, and you can't sue them if it does crash. Maybe your Ram is flaky.. maybe your motherboard is so cheap it can't stand running at 100mhz.. maybe you're just too stupid to properly install it (or the underlying OS). You can't blame M$ because your Houston Tech mobo is too crappy to run crash-free. You can't blame them because your lan admins are ferociously incompetent. As soon as there's any fudge factor between the accused and yourself, their liability basically vanishes. "Maybe it crashed because the wind was blowing from the east instead of the west, restricting airflow into the building, and causing my CPu to overheat." Well maybe it doesn't make much sense but it does invalidate your claim. Doubt is every lawyer's best friend.
"Unofficially, Microsoft insiders told us to create a minimal bootable floppy disk by copying Io.sys and Command.com from the WindowsCommandEBD folder to a blank formatted disk."
Unofficially, any Dos geek knows that you can't make a boot disk by just copying some files. The BIOS doesn't know which OS you're running, much less which system file it's supposed to load, hence the existence of the boot sector, which is a mere 512 bytes of code that's supposed to launch the appropriate file. Copying io.sys and command.com won't get you anything but an error message.
The Right way to do it is to format a floppy with system files (or create that stupid rescue disk), and just delete everything you don't need afterward. That way the bootsector points correctly to io.sys (because the bootsector is updated at the end of the format, once all other files are copied). Only then will you have a good boot disk.
Why not take the next step forward and shove all the images right into the database as BLOBs ? That way you don't have to keep track of your filenames and paths and whatnot, and your database won't be rendered immediately useless should some idiot accidentally move the folder holding your images. I guess this is a stretch on the concept of "referential integrity". You just need to make sure the database doesn't get corrupted, else you're duly screwed.
Slashdot Mirror
Looking at these nifty little instructions below the submit button, we see 3 hints our beloved Mr Katz should take note of :
Important Stuff:
- Please try to keep posts on topic.
- Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said.
- Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
Any canadian who's been hiding in their basement for the past 2 years will remember the panic when we first heard of the "blank cd-rom levy" and how it was going to triple the retail prices on all cdr media, but once it had gone through all the legislative bullshit procedures it ended up being so minuscule we hardly noticed a change. That's right, they charge 3.2 cents per cd. Wo-fricking-hoo. At first people were yelling nonsense like 4.00$ per blank cd (which cost about 1.75$ back then). Seen it, heard it, still don't give a fnarg about it.
What i'd like to read about is JonKatz's brain dissected and scattered across the country. "An epic tale of a wasted brain put to good use as fertilizer!"
True, but note the exact wording of the sentence :
"... you're too stupid to use a computer"
The person might be a genius novel writer, but if they don't know a thing about computers other than "these machines are cool" (which is litterally false since my PC was complaining of excess heat this morning - anyways!).. well maybe they should stick to book writing instead of trying to tell me what I already know is wrong. We all know the classic situation where a total ignoramus tries to tell you how to do your job (i.e. they call tech sup't but don't pause long enough between complaints to allow you to help them). There are some people out there who simply lack the mental tools required to grok computers adequately, or maybe they're just synaptically lazy.
Well no it's a true story. Still I laugh because I feel that way every damned day.
Ok then, let's just all buy PS2's, dismantle them for parts and upgrade our boxen with the underpriced gear. I could use a DVD player and that nifty little graphics chipset alongside my Geforce2. That'll teach Sony =)
If such a user were dumb enough to be "alarmed" by a simple port number, then I'd much rather see them go elsewhere. Anyone who's ever worked on phone tech support will remember the long joke that ends like this :
- "Sir you'll need to return your computer to the store for a refund"
- "Oh really ? it's that bad ? what's wrong ?"
- "Just tell the salesman you're too @!#$ing stupid to use a computer."
Ha. Ha. Ha.
If IDE requires so much assistance from the main CPU to get its deed done, then would it not be possible to SCSIfy an IDE drive with some tantric controller card / embedded adapter encasing that would do this "dirty work" and emulate SCSI with its lovely 1% cpu usage ? Even dedicated ATA/66 and ATA/100 cards like the Promise Raid Controller swallow a good slice of the CPU time.
For most hard drives it's not too bad, but the real problem comes when you have a high-speed cdrom. Think Kenwood 72x. That thing sucks away nearly 20% CPU no matter how fast the PC. Another brand name 40x drive also bogs down my other box by a good 12-15%. On the other hand, my SCSI 24x could (theoretically) run on a 286/12 without a hiccup (of course the system bus would freak out).
Are there spec incompatibilities between SCSI and IDE that would prevent this kind of gadget from existing ? It would allow high-end workstation users to add cheap unreliable storage for their pr0n on those fancy-shmancy SGI boxes.
Ok then. Make a CDDB "ripping" util that dumps everything into a comma-delimited file, which is then porked into a "totally separate" util that reads the glorious file and shoves the data back into FreeDB. Stupid laws only need stupid workarounds.
Apple has known this for a while now, else they wouldn't be focusing on the BSD-like MacOS-X. Let's make it known that I never liked Macs, I've used (rather, _touched_) them twice in my life, and I've never experience a computer as frustrating as the Mac. No right-clicking, no console, not even an illusion of control to apease my mind. And I remember my short-lived days of ISP tech support, and the agony that resounded when my turn in the queue was met by a Mac user. Then I realized that even the Mac power users, those who knew the OS incredibly well, were still powerless and unable to solve their stupid dialup troubles. It's a sad thing indeed, and I'll be happy the day the "Classic" Mac OS dies.
Why not just start a mass backup of the CDDB into FreeDB and pick up where it left us off ? Just query every single possible disc-id and keep it somewhere warm. IANAL, but since this is information that was publicly submitted in the first place, I don't think they can sue anybody for copying what they copied in the first place. Although not every judge has a functional logic module in his/her brain.
Let's imagine Sony and all those other big fat corporate whores were to block napster usage at the ISP level (yay, we can work around that), well wouldn't Napster be well placed to sue Sony for boycotting the service ? Napster is making money out of this, so if any company takes steps to massively restrict Napster, then I'm pretty sure there's some business conduct legislation that can be used against the RIAA.
IANAL but I'm pretty darn sure this is illegal. If someone were to stand outside your business preventing customers from entering, you'd have that person arrested and sue them for lost revenues. Shouldn't the same apply for online services ?
Is it just me or is the guy too fried to just make up one syntactically correct sentence without inlaying a bunch of loosely related topics and forgetting what he was taking about in the first place ?
"We know it's been hard to understand - although Metallica would like to blame Napster to cover up our pre-"Load" sex change - I believe it's true that Linux is a fresh, new - hey did you see that hottie across the street - fishtank cleaner."
(Redistribution of this mockery of a Lars Ulrich quote among ameobas is strictly prohibited. Really. Try me. Grr.)
My guess is that they'll buy out VMWare and bundle it with a preinstalled Office2k disk image.
Anyone who knows Michael Cowpland's history and style of business has read this morning's Ottawa Sun with a half-grin. Cowpland isn't just another old anal-retentive CEO who "cares" about his business too much to see its problems. He's jumping out because he sees disaster down the road and he's not going to sit like a fool waiting for the inevitable.
Cowpland is an aggressive businessman, a rebel of sorts. He effortlessly shrugs off bad karma from the press and always finds a way to turn it around to his advantage. Whatever he means by "linux-based startups", you can be sure it's going to get noticed. Cowpland's projects are often overlooked because they're not slammed in your face like most of its competition. Just look back a few years when he was looking into linux-based "network computers". Now look at daily headlines on iOpeners and NetPliances. They may not be selling Corel NetPC's, but he certainly laid down alot of the groundwork that inspired the others. Time and time again he's foreseen trends years ahead, and I'm confident he's not going to run out of projects anytime soon.
For the hell of it..
a boies.html
http://www1 0.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/20000813mag-q
The main problem with any criticism is obviously censorship, and that censorship lies in the hands of those with deep pockets. We've seen it time and again : corporations will get to you whichever way they can. They know all the dirty tricks, they're not afraid to use them.
If a company can't take down negative criticism by asking politely (which they often skip altogether), they just send a few lawyer's letters to your mailbox and giggle as you step back, fearing lawsuits each one more outrageous than the last. Fear and loathing prevail in the billion-dollar american race. Why play nice and "deal" with the critics when you can stomp them into the ground and growl until the rest of them run and hide ?
The problem is that you have no way of knowing if it really is the president. Quite often the first line techs will simply relay you to a 2nd liner who will pose as the prez (or whomever you're asking for).
This can be a very good thing, mainly because the upper management usually has nothing to do with the actual business itself. They don't know what's going on, they just sit at meetings tossing buzzwords around. CEO's are CEO's for a reason : they're the ones who keep all the staff managers under control. They don't have the time or talent to deal with customers on the phone (unless those customers have a 7-digit bank balance).
What's preventing them from simply using a flash upgrade or something of the sort.. once the thing is installed across the country and all ?
And that thing is : why the hell does Jon Katz always need 3 pages of text to say something we already all know ? He'd make a good microsoft programmer, writing a 12 meg dll that simply blits rectangles.
Yeah baby!
I just bought a 22" monitor, and now these people start telling me that smaller is better.. holy geez!
Am I the only doof to notice that although our "geek" culture is off-balance gender-wise, most psychological studies on geekism are written by women ? No sexism intended, but that's like having a guy write a review on different brands of tampons. Sure there are certainly a few male (?) freaks who use tampons, but as a minority I doubt they can express the full spectrum of associated complexities. It takes a true geek to know a true geek, and I think it's commonly accepted and acknowledge that geek guys and geek grrls have some differences that simply cannot be generalized. You can't write for the smaller of the two groups and expect to appeal to the masses.
Movies can be as graphics as they like, they have no responsibility towards the viewers. They don't check your criminal/psych records when you go to the theatres, anybody is free to view the movies. Therefore there is the possibility that some of the viewers might be psychologically unbalanced and very influencable. Can you blame this on the movie producers ? No, because they have no control over who sees their movie and who doesn't. Same thing with software developers. The lonestar coder who gives away a newsreader can't be held responsible because leetboy@aol.com uses it to propagate goat porn. If that were true, then maybe I could sue Coca-Cola for keeping me up all night, causing me to be late at work because of insomnia, and eventually resulting in my getting fired for being late all the time.
Contrast this with a valid blame situation, for example if someone rams you with a truck and the resulting injuries prevent you from going to work, you can sue them (their insurance company) to compensate for your lost income, because it was their decision (or indecision) to ram you.
Software developers don't decide they want to make systems crash on purpose, and you can't sue them if it does crash. Maybe your Ram is flaky.. maybe your motherboard is so cheap it can't stand running at 100mhz.. maybe you're just too stupid to properly install it (or the underlying OS). You can't blame M$ because your Houston Tech mobo is too crappy to run crash-free. You can't blame them because your lan admins are ferociously incompetent. As soon as there's any fudge factor between the accused and yourself, their liability basically vanishes. "Maybe it crashed because the wind was blowing from the east instead of the west, restricting airflow into the building, and causing my CPu to overheat." Well maybe it doesn't make much sense but it does invalidate your claim. Doubt is every lawyer's best friend.
"Unofficially, Microsoft insiders told us to create a minimal bootable floppy disk by copying Io.sys and Command.com from the WindowsCommandEBD folder to a blank formatted disk."
Unofficially, any Dos geek knows that you can't make a boot disk by just copying some files. The BIOS doesn't know which OS you're running, much less which system file it's supposed to load, hence the existence of the boot sector, which is a mere 512 bytes of code that's supposed to launch the appropriate file. Copying io.sys and command.com won't get you anything but an error message.
The Right way to do it is to format a floppy with system files (or create that stupid rescue disk), and just delete everything you don't need afterward. That way the bootsector points correctly to io.sys (because the bootsector is updated at the end of the format, once all other files are copied). Only then will you have a good boot disk.
Why not take the next step forward and shove all the images right into the database as BLOBs ? That way you don't have to keep track of your filenames and paths and whatnot, and your database won't be rendered immediately useless should some idiot accidentally move the folder holding your images. I guess this is a stretch on the concept of "referential integrity". You just need to make sure the database doesn't get corrupted, else you're duly screwed.