No one here is seriously suggesting that a "continuous save" feature is impossible to implement, are they?
No. But they are saying that it has some flaws, depending on how you define "continuous". Every couple of minutes is fine for me and has minimal overhead. Every few characters (as the FA suggests) would have your drive seeking constantly. Remember, this is writing to *disk* bypassing any cache to ensure it can withstand power failure. Fine for a single-user, single-app machine, but I quite like being able to run something heavy (compile, encoding etc.) in the background without my disk(s) thrashing more than necessary.
Adding a process which writes, even tiny bits of data, almost constantly would have a significant impact on background tasks. And don't even think about what it would do if your app needed to use swap.
And the unlabeled foot pedals hanging underneath of a car dashboard do what now?
Man, I so know what you mean. Yesterday I clicked on this random icon to see what it did and my iBook threw me through a crowded shopping centre at 90mph killing 41 school kids and some guy selling baloons.
While there is not one aspect of the apple monitor that is a lot better, every aspect of it is a little better. From the touch "buttons" to the pane of glass seperating the lcd panel from the rest of the world to the sleek metal outer shell.
I've noticed this about all Apple products. Serious thought has gone into every little bit. The wings that fold out of the iBook power supply so you can wrap the cable, the button and LEDs on that battery so you can check charge without using the computer, everywhere you look there a nice touches which added together make for a far nicer experience. They are expensive, but they are worth it.
I got my first Mac, an iBook, a few weeks ago. A few odd things (this is a UK version, some may not apply to the rest of the world): @ and " are the wrong way round (@ is on the 2 key). There's no # key marked (it's ctrl 3). No Del key. Seriously, there is no Del key (it's Fn backspace). No disk activity light(s).
Apple say you can't run the iBook closed, which makes docking and using a separate keyboard/mouse/monitor a bit of a bugger. You can make it run closed with a bit of hacking, which I think I'll do, and just stick a fan on the dock pointing at the vent on the side and see how warm it gets.
If you want anything built-to-order (bigger HD, Bluetooth etc.) it takes 2-3 weeks.
The 12" iBook screen is nothing special. Not particularly bright and the vertical viewing angle isn't too great either. Perfectly useable, but not up to the standards of the Powerbooks or Cinema Displays.
All those things are pretty minor. Generally I've been very, very happy. I can find apps to do whatever I need, it's scarily easy to set up and customise using the GUI. It really does "just work".
By the way, you can hack it to make extended desktop (assuming you mean spanning desktop onto an external monitor) work.
I still have my Windows and Linux boxen, but the only thing I miss on OSX compared to them is the availability of games on the Windows box. My Mac running OS X is just a better computer than my Windows or Linux boxes (and yes, I do know how to use them both). More expensive (not just the hardware - there is more of a shareware than freeware community in the Mac world if you want native OSX apps rather than GPL/Linux ports), but worth every penny IMO.
I distinctly remember snapping the neck off a couple C64 joysticks when I was a kid out of frustration. I wonder if I'd stop doing that with this...
It looks remarkably like a Competition Pro 5000. I had one of them (it's probably still in the loft somewhere) and they are built to take some serious punishment. You'd have a job breaking the steel shaft on one of those suckers!
In those heady days only the better joysticks had such advanced features as auto-fire and microswitches. My current joystick is wireless, has 472 buttons, 16 degrees of freedom, four throttles and a Mini-George grill with bun warmer.
Just because life sucks for a lot of people doesn't mean it should suck for even more.
I seriously cannot belive you are equating not having clean drinking water with not being able to play HL2. Can you really not see the humungous practical, physical, emotional, medical, biological and philosophical differences between the two?
If you think your life sucks because you can't play HL2 you had no life to start with.
Can you list any proven anti-burgler devices for homes?
Are you trying to say there are no systems which are proven to reduce the probability of your house being broken in to?
I guess firewalls are useless as computers with them still get cracked. I guess seatbelts and airbags are useless as people still die in cars equipped with them.
Please, what you're saying is that only people "elite" enough in society to be lucky enough to have a top-grade internet connection deserve to enjoy things like this game.
Nobody "deserves" to have this game. It's a luxury. The people who created it decided you have to do X, Y, Z to legally use their work. It is their work remember, a game, it's not the only river flowing in to a city or the only supply of food to a nation.
It's a computer game.
Only people elite enough to have a recent PC can play. Only people elite enough to have the time to spare from gathering food can play. Only people elite enough to have $50 to spare can play. Why should being elite enough to have broadband be any different?
Because if the RIAA released malware disguised as MP3's, and users who ran them had their speakers blown out, MP3 player firmware blanked or something like that you'd support it?
A better analogy would be you buying permanent season-ticket to a theme park. You play when you want, but you have to go there to do it. One day the theme park will close. It sucks, but by then there will be other theme parks. If you don't think the theme park will be there in a year then don't buy the ticket, but don't expect it to last for ever.
Hey, forget about an "expansion pack" you have to pay extra for--why not make you pay again for the game you already have? Put out a bug-fix patch and then say that "for support reasons" it's a required upgrade--we don't want anyone playing the unpatched version so if you try to install your copy of HL2 on a new computer you'll need to buy the Steam service (and hey, why not a support fee for the patch, too?) just to play the game.
If they do that I'll stop playing Valve games. I won't be the only one. I can't see them leveraging a monopoly in the same way MS have, so there will be a viable choice. It's only entertainment after all. You could always read a book or play with yourself instead.
I'm going to pirate the game because *I* don't want to wait. Screw them, my time is worth more than their time.
Why not buy it then play the hacked version without the hassles? It's easy enough to get round their restrictions while still rewarding them for their work. I think you're enough of a sheep to feel you need HL2 but too cheap to reward the developers for their work.
They aren't 'doing as they please' with your content.
Reproducing a work in its entirety goes way beyond fair use. I was talking about the Google cache, if you bothered to read.
They are linking to your content. No one is stealing your work.
Of course they aren't stealing it, that's not possible, it's not property. However, in the specific circumstances we were discussing Google would be reproducing protected works in violation of the legal protections afforded by copyright law.
You could just as well have said, "I can code an RFID key that will gain me access to your hotel room and there is nothing wrong with that (except perhaps ethically but even that is arguable)"
You have oficially been sucked in. You are equating the rights granted by copyright/patents/trademarks [delete as appropriate] with physical property. They are not the same.
Enjoy your time in 1984, but try to drag me there and I'll fight your stupid ass till you have me shot as a terrorist.
If that is so, its because they make "unauthorized" copies of the web page by retransmitting it to anyone who wants it.
Routers don't store the copies for more than fration of a second. Google stores them for weeks, months, years... Most routers don't do multicast (perhaps they can, but IPV4 still rules) so they don't retransmit it to "anyone who wants it" either. Typically they transmit a unique packet just once, then very soon forget the contents.
Well anything on the internet that doesn't have normal web server access controls blocking access, is open slather IMO. That's what makes the internet so cool. Doesn't mean you can't still copyright your material so others can't use it, but I think for search engine purposes there is an implied agreement between YOU and THEM - and I think there should be.
Absolutely. Indexing small portions of any page available on the web, or placing them withing results based on their copyright-protected content is, IMO, fair-use. Making the full content available from a cache (Google-style) is not fair-use. It's copyright violation.
I don't mind Google doing it, I like them, but if Microsoft try that shit they will get a letter from me, then a letter from my lawyer, then...
If don't want your site indexed or cached by google. Go here and follow the directions.
I shouldn't need to go and fill out some form for every search engine to protect my rights. One accepted standard way to say "do not index this" should be sufficient. This is an automated system. There is an accepted automated method to stop crawlers indexing your site (robots.txt). If they (Google or anyone else) take your copyrighted content and reproduce it automatically when their automatic system could have automatically respected your explicitly stated and legally protected rights they are knowlingly making a flagrant copyright violation.
No offense dude, but you are the one who put the site out their publically. Now if they are DoSing you then you have a valid complaint but robots.txt is just there as a friendly suggestion.
There's more to it than that. Google caches your pages and makes that cache of your copyright material available. Arguably if you have used your robots.txt file to tell it not to index (and therefore cache) your pages and it still does they are breaching copyright. OK, the Google cache is the world's largest breach of copyright anyway, but if you have told its spider not to index and it does regardless, that's a different ballgame.
Putting it out there on the web does not give anyone the right to do with it as they please.
Re:I'm guessing that was a joke.
on
Halo 2 Reviews
·
· Score: 3, Funny
It was the story in Halo that I loved.
Me too. Those red and blue guys standing about making jokes cracked me up. Are they still in Halo 2?
One solution that would greatly reduce the amount of fraudulent credit card use, and this may be in the works at the moment, is to assign a PIN to each credit card, just like ATM cards.
This is currently being rolled-out across the UK. Magnetics strips and signatures are being replaced by smart-cards and PINs. Card readers with keypads on the customer side of the till are appearing all over the place.
There is a website as part of the campaign letting people know about the new system.
I'm not all that convinved. At least a signature can be hard to forge (they do check properly sometimes at least), but it's all too easy to watch someone type in their PIN then mug them outside for their card, then buy stuff in the few minutes before they ring and get the card cancelled.
If they want DIFFERENT women they shouldn't go for a goth.
Being a goth is not different. You can spot a goth, right? How can they be different when they are so, well, similar? I'm not saying all goths are goths because they want to be different, just the stupid "teenage rebellion" ones.
Clue: If you want to be different, don't try to be different in exactly the same fucking way as a whole bunch of other people.
Slashdot Mirror
No. But they are saying that it has some flaws, depending on how you define "continuous". Every couple of minutes is fine for me and has minimal overhead. Every few characters (as the FA suggests) would have your drive seeking constantly. Remember, this is writing to *disk* bypassing any cache to ensure it can withstand power failure. Fine for a single-user, single-app machine, but I quite like being able to run something heavy (compile, encoding etc.) in the background without my disk(s) thrashing more than necessary.
Adding a process which writes, even tiny bits of data, almost constantly would have a significant impact on background tasks. And don't even think about what it would do if your app needed to use swap.
Man, I so know what you mean. Yesterday I clicked on this random icon to see what it did and my iBook threw me through a crowded shopping centre at 90mph killing 41 school kids and some guy selling baloons.
I've noticed this about all Apple products. Serious thought has gone into every little bit. The wings that fold out of the iBook power supply so you can wrap the cable, the button and LEDs on that battery so you can check charge without using the computer, everywhere you look there a nice touches which added together make for a far nicer experience. They are expensive, but they are worth it.
Apple say you can't run the iBook closed, which makes docking and using a separate keyboard/mouse/monitor a bit of a bugger. You can make it run closed with a bit of hacking, which I think I'll do, and just stick a fan on the dock pointing at the vent on the side and see how warm it gets.
If you want anything built-to-order (bigger HD, Bluetooth etc.) it takes 2-3 weeks.
The 12" iBook screen is nothing special. Not particularly bright and the vertical viewing angle isn't too great either. Perfectly useable, but not up to the standards of the Powerbooks or Cinema Displays.
All those things are pretty minor. Generally I've been very, very happy. I can find apps to do whatever I need, it's scarily easy to set up and customise using the GUI. It really does "just work".
By the way, you can hack it to make extended desktop (assuming you mean spanning desktop onto an external monitor) work.
I still have my Windows and Linux boxen, but the only thing I miss on OSX compared to them is the availability of games on the Windows box. My Mac running OS X is just a better computer than my Windows or Linux boxes (and yes, I do know how to use them both). More expensive (not just the hardware - there is more of a shareware than freeware community in the Mac world if you want native OSX apps rather than GPL/Linux ports), but worth every penny IMO.
It looks remarkably like a Competition Pro 5000. I had one of them (it's probably still in the loft somewhere) and they are built to take some serious punishment. You'd have a job breaking the steel shaft on one of those suckers!
In those heady days only the better joysticks had such advanced features as auto-fire and microswitches. My current joystick is wireless, has 472 buttons, 16 degrees of freedom, four throttles and a Mini-George grill with bun warmer.
RTFA
It says he's already got the 13th root, that's 12 more than required!
Then why do I laugh my ass off when I have some?
I seriously cannot belive you are equating not having clean drinking water with not being able to play HL2. Can you really not see the humungous practical, physical, emotional, medical, biological and philosophical differences between the two?
If you think your life sucks because you can't play HL2 you had no life to start with.
Are you trying to say there are no systems which are proven to reduce the probability of your house being broken in to?
I guess firewalls are useless as computers with them still get cracked. I guess seatbelts and airbags are useless as people still die in cars equipped with them.
Nobody "deserves" to have this game. It's a luxury. The people who created it decided you have to do X, Y, Z to legally use their work. It is their work remember, a game, it's not the only river flowing in to a city or the only supply of food to a nation.
It's a computer game.
Only people elite enough to have a recent PC can play. Only people elite enough to have the time to spare from gathering food can play. Only people elite enough to have $50 to spare can play. Why should being elite enough to have broadband be any different?
A better analogy would be you buying permanent season-ticket to a theme park. You play when you want, but you have to go there to do it. One day the theme park will close. It sucks, but by then there will be other theme parks. If you don't think the theme park will be there in a year then don't buy the ticket, but don't expect it to last for ever.
If they do that I'll stop playing Valve games. I won't be the only one. I can't see them leveraging a monopoly in the same way MS have, so there will be a viable choice. It's only entertainment after all. You could always read a book or play with yourself instead.
Why not buy it then play the hacked version without the hassles? It's easy enough to get round their restrictions while still rewarding them for their work. I think you're enough of a sheep to feel you need HL2 but too cheap to reward the developers for their work.
I think his point is that you shouldn't call cart.addItem(), you should call item.addToCart().
That's disgusting! Don't they have any public toilets?
Reproducing a work in its entirety goes way beyond fair use. I was talking about the Google cache, if you bothered to read.
Of course they aren't stealing it, that's not possible, it's not property. However, in the specific circumstances we were discussing Google would be reproducing protected works in violation of the legal protections afforded by copyright law.
You have oficially been sucked in. You are equating the rights granted by copyright/patents/trademarks [delete as appropriate] with physical property. They are not the same.
Enjoy your time in 1984, but try to drag me there and I'll fight your stupid ass till you have me shot as a terrorist.
Routers don't store the copies for more than fration of a second. Google stores them for weeks, months, years... Most routers don't do multicast (perhaps they can, but IPV4 still rules) so they don't retransmit it to "anyone who wants it" either. Typically they transmit a unique packet just once, then very soon forget the contents.
Absolutely. Indexing small portions of any page available on the web, or placing them withing results based on their copyright-protected content is, IMO, fair-use. Making the full content available from a cache (Google-style) is not fair-use. It's copyright violation.
I don't mind Google doing it, I like them, but if Microsoft try that shit they will get a letter from me, then a letter from my lawyer, then...
I'm not a monopoly or even a business, thank god.
IANAL
I shouldn't need to go and fill out some form for every search engine to protect my rights. One accepted standard way to say "do not index this" should be sufficient. This is an automated system. There is an accepted automated method to stop crawlers indexing your site (robots.txt). If they (Google or anyone else) take your copyrighted content and reproduce it automatically when their automatic system could have automatically respected your explicitly stated and legally protected rights they are knowlingly making a flagrant copyright violation.
There's more to it than that. Google caches your pages and makes that cache of your copyright material available. Arguably if you have used your robots.txt file to tell it not to index (and therefore cache) your pages and it still does they are breaching copyright. OK, the Google cache is the world's largest breach of copyright anyway, but if you have told its spider not to index and it does regardless, that's a different ballgame.
Putting it out there on the web does not give anyone the right to do with it as they please.
Me too. Those red and blue guys standing about making jokes cracked me up. Are they still in Halo 2?
This is currently being rolled-out across the UK. Magnetics strips and signatures are being replaced by smart-cards and PINs. Card readers with keypads on the customer side of the till are appearing all over the place.
There is a website as part of the campaign letting people know about the new system.
I'm not all that convinved. At least a signature can be hard to forge (they do check properly sometimes at least), but it's all too easy to watch someone type in their PIN then mug them outside for their card, then buy stuff in the few minutes before they ring and get the card cancelled.
But that's not ironic!
Oh, wait...
If they want DIFFERENT women they shouldn't go for a goth.
Being a goth is not different. You can spot a goth, right? How can they be different when they are so, well, similar? I'm not saying all goths are goths because they want to be different, just the stupid "teenage rebellion" ones.
Clue: If you want to be different, don't try to be different in exactly the same fucking way as a whole bunch of other people.