...and no sissified, overpaid, limo-driving [NFL] superstars
Jeez, you know, I thought they made pretty good money without having to rely on a second job as a chauffeur. They should go on strike for better wages.
Considering that you are currently the first one to waste everyone's time by contributing nothing to this conversation while trumpeting your own ego in the typical anti-TV manner, I'd say you can probably just shut up right now. I simply don't care if you watch TV, movies or the nubile children playing outside your house, for the likes of you will certainly not influence me in any fashion. I'm willing to bet that you are one of those clever pranksters who uses a dollar sign instead of the S in MS when referring to Microsoft as well -- am I right? It just seems to fit somehow.
I will, however, congratulate you for using the age-old "speaking for the masses" mistake in order to look like a complete jackass. Kudos!
I think the "Ms" prefix indicates that she's been married and is now divorced. Maybe she's PacMan's sister or something. His mother maybe?
Wait just a minute here - were there any more PacMan games produced after Ms. PacMan arrived? Uh-oh, I think Ms. PacMan is just a gelding version of the original PacMan. There goes my childhood.
Is this a boring article, or freaking what? Sometimes, I have to wonder how the Slashdot crew is the least bit surprised at the number of trolls around here, what with real conversation starters like this masterpiece.
Geek 1 - IBM's got a new CPO. How about that?
Geek 2 - I hear he's a lawyer.
Geek 1 - A lawyer? Wow, that's a spicy meatball!
Cripes, this has absolutely no meat.
---
Re:GM food is not a good idea yet
on
Golden Rice
·
· Score: 1
Wow, this sure looks like a troll, but you're totally right. If nobody dies, there's no room for the next crop of ill-planned, disposable people.
What a surprise that humans, in an attempt to support each and every soul stumbling about this planet, may be damning it to further failure. Man, we sure suck.
So really, you're advocating an internet that is only run by gigantic service providers, because nobody else can afford to stick to their word regardless of what you do in a way that you find satisfactory. Either that, or every small ISP charges $99.99 per month for hosting on the off chance that you're going to run an MP3 site that requires another OC line while still allowing them to abide by the original contract.
A small ISP is not "overselling" by putting a limit on the type of content they allow. Look around you; when something dramatic changes in any industry - like how bandwidth monsters like MP3 and DiVX have changed the web - concessions have to be made. Undoubtedly some small ISPs have thrown in the towel instead of changing their TOS, while others have decided to change with the times. Again, that's their choice and you're not forced to use their service if you disagree.
The $11.95 you may be paying for your web hosting account does not give you the right to blow through 30G of bandwidth without hearing any complaints. That's not using what you've paid for, that's abuse, plain and simple. If, using your suggestion, ISPs billed by kb-hours, it still means that they need a 100Mb connection and server power from here to the moon to ensure there's enough headroom to satisfy their potentially abusive client base at the times of heaviest use. What kind of moron would want to start a local ISP involving that kind of investment? No one, that's who. It's like requiring every new fast-food restaurant to have seating for 2,000. Suddenly, since nobody's dumb enough to bite, AOL and @Home are the only games in town.
If all the hosting companies pull the same crap, the "power of your money" means squat
Well, I give you that much, but you can't possibly expect smallish ISPs to allow users to do whatever they like without bounds, can you? If you were to fire up an ISP and pay for the T3 (or whatever) connectivity, then had some kid plow through 30GB in a month with his warez site, not to mention the load on the servers, you'd have to solve the problem.
Maybe (I certainly do not know this as fact), MP3s weren't "all the rage" when this ISP drew up the original TOS. There was no provision because it wasn't an issue. Suddenly, bandwidth hogging, mostly pirated MP3s are everywhere, and the ISP saw the need to amend the service agreement. Are you telling me that they shouldn't have that right? Jimmy's ISP and Tire Shop doesn't have the money to fight a RIAA lawsuit, so what else can they do? They make MP3 storage a service violation, just like any other smart business owner would do when faced with the potential of harboring activity that will get them in hot water or lose quantities of money.
Obviously you disagree with the course of action taken in this case, so what would you have done in their shoes? I don't like the "tyranny" any more than the next jackass, but I can't afford to bankroll a free-for-all ISP, can you?
Give me a break. A privately held host can change the TOS on a whim, and you should have absolutely no right to object - it's their hardware! The day that there are "automatic civil penalties" for doing so is the day that every ISP that isn't publically traded pulls the plug... I sure would with no protection in the courts. Enjoy your AOL or @Home hosting and the included luxury of trying to deal with a company that size. Hope you're not in a rush for anything.
signe nailed it with his "all you have is the power of your money" quote. You, on the other hand, are wrong.
Actually, what I meant was that it gobbles up copious amounts of system resources and crashes routinely, sometimes taking Windows as well, sometimes not. You're right, it doesn't adversely affect the Windows install itself from my experience either, but is still not particularly pleasant to run in a 96MB RAM situation simultaneously with anything else of any size (Word 97 is a good example). Sadly, this is very often the case with the vast majority of our client base (law and accounting firms). Personally, I'm hard-pressed to think of a more finnicky piece of software in such a scenario.
You're right, I could lurk here all day using the magic "fascist" term and calling people selfish for thinking about #1 as was the case in the epic post I replied to (probably by you).
It's funny how you're accusing me of having no original thoughts when the post I replied to (again, probably by you) is essentially a carbon-copy of 40,000 other alarmist posts around here. Frankly, I don't care how relevant my comment was, because you tinfoil-hat wearers bore the snot out of me.
If you've ever supported a LANfull of Groupwise 5.5 installations, and seen what the god-awful client can do to a Win9x machine, you wouldn't jump at the job so quickly.
Find a good, Windows-capable calendar, on freshmeat (there's 82 of them there: at least one should work (;-)) and make it available to as many people as possible.
You have got to be kidding me. Have you ever actually worked in an office that is predominantly MS? Suggesting some (in the opinion of your boss) cheap freebee calendar off a web site is just asking for trouble. Is there an 800 number for support? What - it doesn't even come with a CD? Why doesn't it work with Word?
I'm jealous of your idealism, but that's just not the way things work in an office full of Wired reading management.
Can't have the peasants getting too informed can we?
No, because it's most likely they who are behind the garbage AOL accounts that are distributing spam in a nice even spray around the web. It's they who are most likely to use the contact information for evil instead of good.
Look around pal, the problems of the web still existed when it was the domain of the geek, but certainly not to the levels of today. The more that the ham n' eggers think they know, the more they try to put it to use. It sounds elitist of me to say so, but if you were around in the late 80s or early 90s, it's an easy comparison to make.
Allow me to reply to 100 comments with one sentence:
Fine, then use whatever works best for you.
This is not a good topic to discuss when there are at least four other browsers available in the same (or higher) league as this new failure from Netscape. Don't like the ads? I've got a secret patch that Netscape doesn't want you to know about -
Wow, you sure pegged me, lunchmeat. I can give all the credit in the world to those who contribute vast quantities to his field of expertice and are approachable and humble. This tool is not. He's just an uglier Dan Bernstien, and awfully fortunate to be a talented coder (ooh, look, credit where it's due) or he'd be spending yet another Christmas alone with his ego.
Stallman is a prick, and with drones like yourself swinging from his testicles, it's just more reason to inflate his filthy head even further. He has no reason at all to actually become approachable and helpful when there are sheep like you on the frontline defending his embarassing actions. Being a world-class coder is not enough, especially when he wants to evangelize Linux to a world of nonbelievers, and it doesn't mean I have to put up with his endless political crap because I use his software. If you were to use a single Microsoft product by choice (heaven forbid it's the best choice for any job), does that mean that you lose the right to criticise Gates' business tactics or personality? Oh, but that's different because he's the head of a corporation while Stallman is just a hippie with a bad attitude, right?
By the way, if the "dungflies" you're referring to are people who aren't interested in toeing the Linux corporate line at all costs, you nailed it. You're probably one of those dorks who calls for an embargo on MSIE use just to spite Microsoft, aren't you?
Now, it's time to give this the big "flamebait" moderation because I have the audacity to criticise Pope Stallman.
I admit that I know precisely nothing about the construction side of Java, but IMNSHO, Java is absolutely disgusting from a usability perspective. I've never actually seen one of these touted Java applications that aren't noticably, numbingly slow, either on the web or in a local environment. Have you ever used the Netware 5+ GUI? I have, and from a Java-luddite's perspective, it's enough to drive me to drinking. I do much, much more network administration work than coding, so I don't particularly care if it's an elegant language (which everyone seems to agree that it is) when any example I have of Java invariably leads to me waiting and waiting and waiting for anything to happen.
If indeed JSP is competative in speed, then tell me why it seems to get destroyed in any benchmark I've ever seen! Granted, I don't go out of my way to find such benchmarks, but it's tough to miss as I'm trolling the geek-news boards during the day. Please - point me to an unbiased test that proves your assertion.
What bothers me the most, and is the reason for my smart-assed comment to you originally, is that Java pundits tend to tell me that Java is now competative in speed, but the actual examples I have of Java are slower than evolution. Please, show me an application of any real size that is written in Java and is quick and stable, and I'll happily eat these words.
Slashdot Mirror
Products? Sure, they've got all kinds. Check this out for more information.
---
Jeez, you know, I thought they made pretty good money without having to rely on a second job as a chauffeur. They should go on strike for better wages.
---
I will, however, congratulate you for using the age-old "speaking for the masses" mistake in order to look like a complete jackass. Kudos!
---
Wait just a minute here - were there any more PacMan games produced after Ms. PacMan arrived? Uh-oh, I think Ms. PacMan is just a gelding version of the original PacMan. There goes my childhood.
---
Geek 1 - IBM's got a new CPO. How about that?
Geek 2 - I hear he's a lawyer.
Geek 1 - A lawyer? Wow, that's a spicy meatball!
Cripes, this has absolutely no meat.
---
What a surprise that humans, in an attempt to support each and every soul stumbling about this planet, may be damning it to further failure. Man, we sure suck.
---
A small ISP is not "overselling" by putting a limit on the type of content they allow. Look around you; when something dramatic changes in any industry - like how bandwidth monsters like MP3 and DiVX have changed the web - concessions have to be made. Undoubtedly some small ISPs have thrown in the towel instead of changing their TOS, while others have decided to change with the times. Again, that's their choice and you're not forced to use their service if you disagree.
The $11.95 you may be paying for your web hosting account does not give you the right to blow through 30G of bandwidth without hearing any complaints. That's not using what you've paid for, that's abuse, plain and simple. If, using your suggestion, ISPs billed by kb-hours, it still means that they need a 100Mb connection and server power from here to the moon to ensure there's enough headroom to satisfy their potentially abusive client base at the times of heaviest use. What kind of moron would want to start a local ISP involving that kind of investment? No one, that's who. It's like requiring every new fast-food restaurant to have seating for 2,000. Suddenly, since nobody's dumb enough to bite, AOL and @Home are the only games in town.
---
Well, I give you that much, but you can't possibly expect smallish ISPs to allow users to do whatever they like without bounds, can you? If you were to fire up an ISP and pay for the T3 (or whatever) connectivity, then had some kid plow through 30GB in a month with his warez site, not to mention the load on the servers, you'd have to solve the problem.
Maybe (I certainly do not know this as fact), MP3s weren't "all the rage" when this ISP drew up the original TOS. There was no provision because it wasn't an issue. Suddenly, bandwidth hogging, mostly pirated MP3s are everywhere, and the ISP saw the need to amend the service agreement. Are you telling me that they shouldn't have that right? Jimmy's ISP and Tire Shop doesn't have the money to fight a RIAA lawsuit, so what else can they do? They make MP3 storage a service violation, just like any other smart business owner would do when faced with the potential of harboring activity that will get them in hot water or lose quantities of money.
Obviously you disagree with the course of action taken in this case, so what would you have done in their shoes? I don't like the "tyranny" any more than the next jackass, but I can't afford to bankroll a free-for-all ISP, can you?
---
signe nailed it with his "all you have is the power of your money" quote. You, on the other hand, are wrong.
---
---
---
---
---
It's funny how you're accusing me of having no original thoughts when the post I replied to (again, probably by you) is essentially a carbon-copy of 40,000 other alarmist posts around here. Frankly, I don't care how relevant my comment was, because you tinfoil-hat wearers bore the snot out of me.
---
---
---
You have got to be kidding me. Have you ever actually worked in an office that is predominantly MS? Suggesting some (in the opinion of your boss) cheap freebee calendar off a web site is just asking for trouble. Is there an 800 number for support? What - it doesn't even come with a CD? Why doesn't it work with Word?
I'm jealous of your idealism, but that's just not the way things work in an office full of Wired reading management.
---
No, because it's most likely they who are behind the garbage AOL accounts that are distributing spam in a nice even spray around the web. It's they who are most likely to use the contact information for evil instead of good.
Look around pal, the problems of the web still existed when it was the domain of the geek, but certainly not to the levels of today. The more that the ham n' eggers think they know, the more they try to put it to use. It sounds elitist of me to say so, but if you were around in the late 80s or early 90s, it's an easy comparison to make.
---
Not at all, I agree fully. I'm using MSIE 5.5 right now, and don't even bother having NN installed on my home PC anymore.
---
Fine, then use whatever works best for you.
This is not a good topic to discuss when there are at least four other browsers available in the same (or higher) league as this new failure from Netscape. Don't like the ads? I've got a secret patch that Netscape doesn't want you to know about -
It's called "uninstall".
---
Stallman is a prick, and with drones like yourself swinging from his testicles, it's just more reason to inflate his filthy head even further. He has no reason at all to actually become approachable and helpful when there are sheep like you on the frontline defending his embarassing actions. Being a world-class coder is not enough, especially when he wants to evangelize Linux to a world of nonbelievers, and it doesn't mean I have to put up with his endless political crap because I use his software. If you were to use a single Microsoft product by choice (heaven forbid it's the best choice for any job), does that mean that you lose the right to criticise Gates' business tactics or personality? Oh, but that's different because he's the head of a corporation while Stallman is just a hippie with a bad attitude, right?
By the way, if the "dungflies" you're referring to are people who aren't interested in toeing the Linux corporate line at all costs, you nailed it. You're probably one of those dorks who calls for an embargo on MSIE use just to spite Microsoft, aren't you?
Now, it's time to give this the big "flamebait" moderation because I have the audacity to criticise Pope Stallman.
---
---
If indeed JSP is competative in speed, then tell me why it seems to get destroyed in any benchmark I've ever seen! Granted, I don't go out of my way to find such benchmarks, but it's tough to miss as I'm trolling the geek-news boards during the day. Please - point me to an unbiased test that proves your assertion.
What bothers me the most, and is the reason for my smart-assed comment to you originally, is that Java pundits tend to tell me that Java is now competative in speed, but the actual examples I have of Java are slower than evolution. Please, show me an application of any real size that is written in Java and is quick and stable, and I'll happily eat these words.
I await your reply.
---
I had no idea Bush was involved in the development of the graphical user interface. If only I was an American!
---
---