I kept looking for how it actual works but didn't see anything. Maybe I just don't have much Wi-Fi experience. Are the ads forced through the browser? Does a custom piece of software need to run first? I'm not quite sure how the ads are going to get onto my computer screen.
I think these port knockers could be setup much like master locks, each user has their own combination which needs to be entered in order to unlock that port. I don't know if some port smacker program would be able to find the right knocks.
Can't snoop network traffic without permission if someone is having a conversation. Does that apply to other forms of internet communications? IRCs? FTP? talk?
I view online messaging much like I do with email, if it's on my computer, I can keep it. Both parties wanted to talk as there was implied consent. Even if it's just to tell someone to *#@! off.
Is it any wonder that Walmart would be selling something like this? It seems to be on par with the things they do. I mean, I am a very proud owner of a special Walmart copy of Nirvana's In Utero where the fourth song has been renamed to "Waif Me". The lyrics haven't changed so some heathen can still hear what is really sung.
I do suppose however, if I want freedom to hear naughty langauge and explicit scenes, others have the freedom to not see it. Just think, you can finally watch porn without seeing any of that nasty sex stuff.
This is much along the lines of, "Honey, I only read the articles." Now it's "I only watch the porn for the wonderful dialog and breathtaking locations."
Yeah, when I first caught that.sig, I took it have a negative conation towards RMS and the FSF. Like they are poewr hungry monsters. And maybe that's how the author meant it. But control over freedom is power. As is not giving someone freedom is power. Given that, it seems more like a damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario.
You can use your power to grant and maintain one particular idea of freedom. Or you can use your power not give people certain freedoms. In software that would be if you have access to code or if you don't. And then there's all the varying degrees of freedom between or beyond.
I guess with that being said, can freedom have limitations and still be considered freedom? US citizens considers themselves free, and they might be freer then most, but there are still restriction upon it. Even software with the BSD license has certain restrictions about it.
This has piqued my curoiusity. What are some free alternatives to FAT? I wanted to do a little reading into the various file systems, nothing detailed, just an overview. So far I've seen FAT, NTFS, ext3 and jfss mentioned. Are there any other "popular" file systems?
Now that's not my point. It doesn't have to be relative to when the article was written but rather to when you found out about it.
It's news to some (like: holy fucking shit I didn't know you could do that!) but not news to others (like: i was doing that shit when I was fucking conceived.)
It can work both ways damnit!
Columbus: The world is round! The Queen: That's fucking news to me. The Earth: Umm, duh!!
Also, Joseph Campbell wasn't around to help Lucas with the new movies. Campbell spent a good part of his life learning about other cultures, traditions and finding common elements between them. He understood the things myths were made from. The original Star Wars movies had certain mythic elements that made it endearing, something which the new ones lack. It would have been nice if Campbell was around to help Lucas with his latest batch. I would have liked to see where it could have gone.
Or, collaborate with the other authors who write the various Star Wars novels for a living.
But that's the wonder of the freedom that they so enjoy. And you do for bitching about them bitching about GWB. Don't even get me started about me bitching about you bitching about them...
They used a signature on the application. It just happened to not be hers. It's not like they had a copy of her signature available to verify with. She's lucky that the card was send to their address and not someone elses.
But yeah, ask a lawyer. If her signature was forage (assuming they really needed a signature) then the application should still be on file. Otherwise it's your word against there.
Sure it does. Your comments for one. The questions she answered came from Slashdot. Of course there is going to be the obligatory geek questions and jokes. Her answers were playing towards the target crowd.
I disagree that she views marijuana being more important than restoring the California economy. If you read the content of her issues, instead of glancing at the bold subject heading, economic growth is a key point in each issue she lists. If marijuana were more important, she'd be mentioning that as a key point in her issues.
I don't mind discuss various issues and hearing what other people think, but you need to put some effort in order to obtain that.
Oh god, I completely understand. I can't tell you how many times I've received emails saying "You're receiving this email because you opted in..." And I never have. It makes me want to laugh (and light the world on fire).
That's an interesting point. I think for the fun of it, I'll write a quick perl script to try to harvest email addresses from slashdot, since they do a very good job at obscuring them. I just assumed it would be rather easy, but you are right, it's going to be harder than I thought. But unfortunately, not impossible.
While I am sure that obscured email addresses will get more unique, how far behind will be those harvesters? I'd hope forever, but who knows.
I think I might be the one of the few people posting on topic. And I do this only because I missed my change on the previous articles. Like they say, "If you haven't seen it, it's new to you."
It seems to me the reason the obscured email addresses, e.g. normalforcekills at hotmail dot com, haven't been spammed is because a small portion of the internet savvy do this. For it isn't hard to modify a spider to grab these. Given time these spiders will start grabbing these addresses.
If anything, obscuring email addresses will only delay the inevitable from entering inboxes. Finding the spammers and stopping them (read: tar and feather them) should be the focus.
At least in press coverage, there is a difference between an unmanned rocket exploding and one of the Space Shuttles exploding. Anyway, the news sources I followed had articles about the unmanned rocket blowing up.
I don't like to break this to you, but nanotubules simply do not have the tensile strength to support a space elevator (the studies carried out on this were in New Scientist about 3 years ago, I don't recall the exact date). The only substance strong enough to build a space elevator with is neutronium,
What are you talking about? According to this article, the tensile strength needed for a space elevator is 62GPa. Which is fucking insane for anyone who understands stress and strain of materials. And according to this site, carbon nanotubes have a tensile strength of 150 to 200GPa. Which is even insaner (if I can use that word!)
Now, the process for producing nanotubes is expansive, and the nanotubes that are produced are very small. To make miles of nanotube cable (to the knowledge) is not possible, but they are working on it. Well, not miles of nanotubes, but longer strands.
Carbon nanotubes can definitely support the weight, as well as the temperatures needed to support a space elevator.
Slashdot Mirror
I kept looking for how it actual works but didn't see anything. Maybe I just don't have much Wi-Fi experience. Are the ads forced through the browser? Does a custom piece of software need to run first? I'm not quite sure how the ads are going to get onto my computer screen.
I think these port knockers could be setup much like master locks, each user has their own combination which needs to be entered in order to unlock that port. I don't know if some port smacker program would be able to find the right knocks.
Can't snoop network traffic without permission if someone is having a conversation. Does that apply to other forms of internet communications? IRCs? FTP? talk?
I view online messaging much like I do with email, if it's on my computer, I can keep it. Both parties wanted to talk as there was implied consent. Even if it's just to tell someone to *#@! off.
Is it any wonder that Walmart would be selling something like this? It seems to be on par with the things they do. I mean, I am a very proud owner of a special Walmart copy of Nirvana's In Utero where the fourth song has been renamed to "Waif Me". The lyrics haven't changed so some heathen can still hear what is really sung.
I do suppose however, if I want freedom to hear naughty langauge and explicit scenes, others have the freedom to not see it. Just think, you can finally watch porn without seeing any of that nasty sex stuff.
This is much along the lines of, "Honey, I only read the articles." Now it's "I only watch the porn for the wonderful dialog and breathtaking locations."
What are some free software/open source alternatives to audio streaming, if there are any? Anyone have any experience with them?
Or just make reverse engineering tools that much more sophisticated.
Yeah, when I first caught that .sig, I took it have a negative conation towards RMS and the FSF. Like they are poewr hungry monsters. And maybe that's how the author meant it. But control over freedom is power. As is not giving someone freedom is power. Given that, it seems more like a damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario.
You can use your power to grant and maintain one particular idea of freedom. Or you can use your power not give people certain freedoms. In software that would be if you have access to code or if you don't. And then there's all the varying degrees of freedom between or beyond.
I guess with that being said, can freedom have limitations and still be considered freedom? US citizens considers themselves free, and they might be freer then most, but there are still restriction upon it. Even software with the BSD license has certain restrictions about it.
This has piqued my curoiusity. What are some free alternatives to FAT? I wanted to do a little reading into the various file systems, nothing detailed, just an overview. So far I've seen FAT, NTFS, ext3 and jfss mentioned. Are there any other "popular" file systems?
Now that's not my point. It doesn't have to be relative to when the article was written but rather to when you found out about it.
It's news to some (like: holy fucking shit I didn't know you could do that!) but not news to others (like: i was doing that shit when I was fucking conceived.)
It can work both ways damnit!
Columbus: The world is round!
The Queen: That's fucking news to me.
The Earth: Umm, duh!!
That wasn't a useful comment.
-- I love recursion!
Oh christ, people and their semantics. New is relative, not a constant.
To paraphrase NBC, "if you haven't seen it, it's new to you!"
Also, Joseph Campbell wasn't around to help Lucas with the new movies. Campbell spent a good part of his life learning about other cultures, traditions and finding common elements between them. He understood the things myths were made from. The original Star Wars movies had certain mythic elements that made it endearing, something which the new ones lack. It would have been nice if Campbell was around to help Lucas with his latest batch. I would have liked to see where it could have gone.
Or, collaborate with the other authors who write the various Star Wars novels for a living.
The ability to filter out a single bit/flag is relatively easy. I see this as just an inconvenience and nothing more.
But that's the wonder of the freedom that they so enjoy. And you do for bitching about them bitching about GWB. Don't even get me started about me bitching about you bitching about them...
;-)
Oh and get a life.
They used a signature on the application. It just happened to not be hers. It's not like they had a copy of her signature available to verify with. She's lucky that the card was send to their address and not someone elses.
But yeah, ask a lawyer. If her signature was forage (assuming they really needed a signature) then the application should still be on file. Otherwise it's your word against there.
It makes me want to train a monkey to download songs all day. I want to see them sue my fucking pet hamster.
"Oh no Baxter! Looks like you're going to do some hard time unless you don't come up with $150 million dollars quick."
That's 1000 songs at $150,000 a pop. Makes the $20 you're paying for 10 or so songs seem cheap, now doesn't it?
Is downloading music illegal? Sure seems that way, Baxter. But is it fun? Oh yeah!
It doesn't get any more idiotic than this.
Sure it does. Your comments for one. The questions she answered came from Slashdot. Of course there is going to be the obligatory geek questions and jokes. Her answers were playing towards the target crowd.
I disagree that she views marijuana being more important than restoring the California economy. If you read the content of her issues, instead of glancing at the bold subject heading, economic growth is a key point in each issue she lists. If marijuana were more important, she'd be mentioning that as a key point in her issues.
I don't mind discuss various issues and hearing what other people think, but you need to put some effort in order to obtain that.
Why do you say she is a hack?
Why is she a commie?
I'd like to think that computer code is not quite as ambigious as the English language.
Oh god, I completely understand. I can't tell you how many times I've received emails saying "You're receiving this email because you opted in..." And I never have. It makes me want to laugh (and light the world on fire).
That's an interesting point. I think for the fun of it, I'll write a quick perl script to try to harvest email addresses from slashdot, since they do a very good job at obscuring them. I just assumed it would be rather easy, but you are right, it's going to be harder than I thought. But unfortunately, not impossible.
While I am sure that obscured email addresses will get more unique, how far behind will be those harvesters? I'd hope forever, but who knows.
I think I might be the one of the few people posting on topic. And I do this only because I missed my change on the previous articles. Like they say, "If you haven't seen it, it's new to you."
It seems to me the reason the obscured email addresses, e.g. normalforcekills at hotmail dot com, haven't been spammed is because a small portion of the internet savvy do this. For it isn't hard to modify a spider to grab these. Given time these spiders will start grabbing these addresses.
If anything, obscuring email addresses will only delay the inevitable from entering inboxes. Finding the spammers and stopping them (read: tar and feather them) should be the focus.
At least in press coverage, there is a difference between an unmanned rocket exploding and one of the Space Shuttles exploding. Anyway, the news sources I followed had articles about the unmanned rocket blowing up.
I don't like to break this to you, but nanotubules simply do not have the tensile strength to support a space elevator (the studies carried out on this were in New Scientist about 3 years ago, I don't recall the exact date). The only substance strong enough to build a space elevator with is neutronium,
What are you talking about? According to this article, the tensile strength needed for a space elevator is 62GPa. Which is fucking insane for anyone who understands stress and strain of materials. And according to this site, carbon nanotubes have a tensile strength of 150 to 200GPa. Which is even insaner (if I can use that word!)
Now, the process for producing nanotubes is expansive, and the nanotubes that are produced are very small. To make miles of nanotube cable (to the knowledge) is not possible, but they are working on it. Well, not miles of nanotubes, but longer strands.
Carbon nanotubes can definitely support the weight, as well as the temperatures needed to support a space elevator.