Challenge - name ONE major religion which has NOT had many atrocities (sp?) carried out in its name (with the exception of Wicca. And no, Bhuddism doesn't count as that is a philosohpy, not a religion per se).
So you reckon that the CEO, who most likely knows zip about the coding and implementation of the software, has more effect on any potential back doors etc than the programmers who actually OMPLEMENT the code?
Hmmm.
As one of our anonymous friends remarks, you ain't a coder, are you!
I mean, how do the Germans know for certain that none of the software they use has been (even in part) written by someone who is involved in Scientology?
Are they now going to demand to know the "religious" (and I use that term in its loosest sence where scientology os concerned) inclinations of everybody involved with every company connected to any piece of software they use?
Sorry, as much as I dislike scientology and all the abuses that it stands for, I don't see the logic in this particular course of action.
"Can't have more than one monopoly in an industry"
Umm, actually, you can.
An industry does not necessarily produce ONE single product. For each product (or product type) produced, the producer can be a monopoly. Ergo, it is perfectly possible to have multiple monopolies in an industry.
Obligatory car analogy - you could have a monopoly on production of car engines, a different company having a monopoly on tyres, yet another company having the monopoly on windscreens - 3 monopolies in one industry.
True story - David Jason (UK actor) was filming in a city in teh US for a US-based storyline for a series in which he was starring.
At the end of the day, one of the film crew asked how he was, and he replied "I'm dying for a fag" and then wondered why they all kept giving him funny looks!
"I don't care about the logo, I'd just rather people call it the PSX2"
Too bad, because Sony (you remember, the makers of the PS2 - they can call it what the hell they like, it's their machine) call it the PS2. Seems they are ignoring you - maybe you should hassle them some more?
While you are here, have a look at www.sony.com and look at the pic on the top right - oh look! It refers to "PlayStation2" and "PS2" but not "PSX2".
Uh-hu. I suggest you had better discuss this with Sony (you know, the makers of the PS2). For after all, it is they themselves who refer to the product via the abbreviation "PS2". They even went as far as writing "PS2" in teh form of a logo on the PS2 itself!
However, I am sure that if you tell them you don't like it, they will change the name specially for you and recall all existing PS2s so they can change the logo...
I wouldn't worry - their cookie handling is so screwed up that it is not RFC compliant and only works on a small subset of browsers - I just tried (my browser accepts all cookies by default, I clear out periodically) and it told me I need to accept cookies!
My dear chap, the article doesn't have anything to do with infringements of freedom of speech, but that didn't seem to stop you from "shooting your mouht off", as you so elloquently put it...
How I wish for a return to the older days when Slashdot articles were rather more accurate and rather less sensationalised than of late:/
Actually, I did - did you? Presumably you did not, otherwise you would not have claimed that this is a violation of freedom of speech et al (hint - how long has it been since children were permitted access to X-rated movies at the cinema, Michael?)
No, it's not just you - the title is EXTREMELY (and deliberately?) misleading.
Seems like a certain person round here (you reading Michael?) has decided to sink to the levels of the gutter tabloids and use sensationalism to try to boost interest in stories:(
Hopefully someone will give him the slap he needs and normality can be resumed.
Restricting the sale of explicit material to those under the age of 18 - since when has that been censorship, Michael?
Presumably, Michael, we can look forward to you abusing your position in slashdot to further your campaign by highlighting other "abuses of freedom of speech" such as the disgraceful laws which are designed to prevent those below a certain age from seeing certain types of explicit films at the cinema, right?
Will you then follow that up by highlighting yet more censorship in the form of the refusal to allow minors to purchase alcohol?
Jeez, what the heck is UP with you Michael? How the heck do you equate a simple restriction of kids having access to explicit material with "banning"?
You stated 4-CPU computers were impossible today, then went on to say adding more CPUs does not increase the computerness of a computer. However, what you have STILL not done is explain why you believe a 4-CPU computer is impossible - care to explain WHY you believe a 4-CPU computer is impossible?
No analogies, no oranges, just a simple answer to a simple question - what is it about a 4-CPU computer that makes you believe that the ones which already exist cannot possibly exist?
I shalln't be holding my breath for a sensible answer, sadly:(
Slashdot Mirror
Oh dear. Yet Another Lamer who believes the marketing bullshit that MHz is THE indicator of performance.
You'd have thought that by now people would have realised that MHz comparisons between disimilar architectures is completely and utterly meaningless.
Exactly!
Challenge - name ONE major religion which has NOT had many atrocities (sp?) carried out in its name (with the exception of Wicca. And no, Bhuddism doesn't count as that is a philosohpy, not a religion per se).
So you reckon that the CEO, who most likely knows zip about the coding and implementation of the software, has more effect on any potential back doors etc than the programmers who actually OMPLEMENT the code?
Hmmm.
As one of our anonymous friends remarks, you ain't a coder, are you!
I mean, how do the Germans know for certain that none of the software they use has been (even in part) written by someone who is involved in Scientology?
Are they now going to demand to know the "religious" (and I use that term in its loosest sence where scientology os concerned) inclinations of everybody involved with every company connected to any piece of software they use?
Sorry, as much as I dislike scientology and all the abuses that it stands for, I don't see the logic in this particular course of action.
Yes, it does compile.
Yes, it does work.
Next?
(Hint - I have it working on my Sol 7 system right next to me.)
Guess what? Nobody cares!
So some politician decided to Have A Life before entering politics - big deal!
Umm, actually, you can.
An industry does not necessarily produce ONE single product. For each product (or product type) produced, the producer can be a monopoly. Ergo, it is perfectly possible to have multiple monopolies in an industry.
Obligatory car analogy - you could have a monopoly on production of car engines, a different company having a monopoly on tyres, yet another company having the monopoly on windscreens - 3 monopolies in one industry.
Since you ask, yes ;-P
it's "Alas, Poor Yorrick, I knew him well..." "
Actually, you are wrong and the original poster was correct.
It is a common misconception, but the ACTUALY line is, indeed,
"Alas, poor Yorick; I knew him, Horatio..."
I wish people would check their facts before posting from time to time!
"Thats funny, I always had the impression that they were all 'jocks' - eg ex-air force, gung-ho all-American heroes"
Yoiu mean like that ex-air force, gung-ho all-American heroe Yuri Gargarin, perhaps?
True story - David Jason (UK actor) was filming in a city in teh US for a US-based storyline for a series in which he was starring.
At the end of the day, one of the film crew asked how he was, and he replied "I'm dying for a fag" and then wondered why they all kept giving him funny looks!
Actually, I wanna play again.
US for "pavement" : "sidewalk"
UK for "pavement" : "pavement"
French for "pavement" : "pavemment".
I guess that means that UK-English and French are not two different languages then, huh?
"I don't care about the logo, I'd just rather people call it the PSX2"
Too bad, because Sony (you remember, the makers of the PS2 - they can call it what the hell they like, it's their machine) call it the PS2. Seems they are ignoring you - maybe you should hassle them some more?
While you are here, have a look at www.sony.com and look at the pic on the top right - oh look! It refers to "PlayStation2" and "PS2" but not "PSX2".
Now do a search on the Sony site for "PSX2" - to save you the hassle, here is the link to the results of such a search - Sorry, there were no matches for your search.
Looks like you are outvoted by Sony themselves, I'm afraid.
"Don't call it a PS2!!!
I prefer PSX2"
Uh-hu. I suggest you had better discuss this with Sony (you know, the makers of the PS2). For after all, it is they themselves who refer to the product via the abbreviation "PS2". They even went as far as writing "PS2" in teh form of a logo on the PS2 itself!
However, I am sure that if you tell them you don't like it, they will change the name specially for you and recall all existing PS2s so they can change the logo...
My turn to play...
US for weekend : weekend
UK for weekend : weekend
French for weekend : weekend.
US for condom : condom
UK for condom : condom
French for condom : condom
Oh look! By your argument, UK English,m US English and French are not different languages!
Umm, no they don't. Kindly point to the relevant piece of legislation - what's that? You can't? I wonder why...
No, RMS only stands for zero compromise when it suits him.
Want proof of this?
LGPL.
Read it and then tell me RMS doesn't tolerate compromise. He certainly tolerates his own double-standards when it suits him...
ROTFL!
That would have been funny if I didn't think you were so serious!
Erm, it's only a story! It's not supposed to be a factually-accurate "historical" drama...
Besides, if you are going to startpicking holes in plots and factual inaccuracies, you'll be at it forever!
I wouldn't worry - their cookie handling is so screwed up that it is not RFC compliant and only works on a small subset of browsers - I just tried (my browser accepts all cookies by default, I clear out periodically) and it told me I need to accept cookies!
:(
Ho hum
My dear chap, the article doesn't have anything to do with infringements of freedom of speech, but that didn't seem to stop you from "shooting your mouht off", as you so elloquently put it...
:/
How I wish for a return to the older days when Slashdot articles were rather more accurate and rather less sensationalised than of late
Actually, I did - did you? Presumably you did not, otherwise you would not have claimed that this is a violation of freedom of speech et al (hint - how long has it been since children were permitted access to X-rated movies at the cinema, Michael?)
No, it's not just you - the title is EXTREMELY (and deliberately?) misleading.
:(
Seems like a certain person round here (you reading Michael?) has decided to sink to the levels of the gutter tabloids and use sensationalism to try to boost interest in stories
Hopefully someone will give him the slap he needs and normality can be resumed.
Restricting the sale of explicit material to those under the age of 18 - since when has that been censorship, Michael?
Presumably, Michael, we can look forward to you abusing your position in slashdot to further your campaign by highlighting other "abuses of freedom of speech" such as the disgraceful laws which are designed to prevent those below a certain age from seeing certain types of explicit films at the cinema, right?
Will you then follow that up by highlighting yet more censorship in the form of the refusal to allow minors to purchase alcohol?
Jeez, what the heck is UP with you Michael? How the heck do you equate a simple restriction of kids having access to explicit material with "banning"?
/me shakes his head.
Thought so - you have no answer.
:(
You stated 4-CPU computers were impossible today, then went on to say adding more CPUs does not increase the computerness of a computer. However, what you have STILL not done is explain why you believe a 4-CPU computer is impossible - care to explain WHY you believe a 4-CPU computer is impossible?
No analogies, no oranges, just a simple answer to a simple question - what is it about a 4-CPU computer that makes you believe that the ones which already exist cannot possibly exist?
I shalln't be holding my breath for a sensible answer, sadly