By getting outside unprotected you get third-degree burn in less than seven minutes.
This is so obviously untrue it sounds like the meat of a chain letter. The next line should be "So forward this to your 1700 closest friends, and Microsoft and AOL's email-o-matic collector will automatically submit it to your congressman and the UN."
Get a second Zip disk to backup the first, for the love of God! During the time it takes to go through medical school, you will eventually be sorry if you don't keep a complete second copy of everything.
ZIP drive is good alternative to floppy, of course.
I can't believe you just said that. Sure, floppies suck ass, but between the click-of-death and the fact that if you drop a ZIP three feet onto a concrete floor, it's 100MB DEAD, ZIP is at least as bad.
I'm with the folks that are pushing networking whenever possible, and when not, use inferior portable media, but be redundant. No portable medium will ever be truly reliable, by nature. Network servers are generally kept in a controlled, fairly clean, air-conditioned environment.
I've been biting my tongue on most of the other biased leaps of logic I've seen thus far in this thread, but this is ridiculous.
Microsoft seem to have gotten people to believe that being infected by an E-mail virus is kind of like being the victim of a robbery at gunpoint--something they can't do anything about.
Sure you can do something about that; you can carry a weapon yourself. Does this mean when you go to the tax-salaried police about it, you should be turned away for your lack of responsibility?
That would be like GM selling cars with no locks and then claiming it's the taxpayer's responsibility to find all the stolen cars.
Again, your leap in logic astounds me. GM doesn't sell cars without locks, but plenty of people don't lock their cars, and some of these unlocked cars become stolen. Taxpayer money goes towards tracking these stolen unlocked cars, and rightfully so . . . Whatever the circumstance, the criminal carries 100% of the responsibility for any crime, the victim 0%.
Regardless of your opinions about the practices of the victim or the quality of the property, this is theft. A crime has been committed, and Microsoft has both ethical and legal claims. If they can prove that stolen code was used in someone else's project, they will win in court. Not because they're Microsoft, or the judge is stupid, but because they are the victim of a crime.
George Bush's real feelings about the Internet came out during the second debate:
"But Columbine spoke to a larger issue, and it's really a matter of culture. It's a culture that somewhere along the line we begun to disrespect life, where a child can walk in and have their heart turn dark as a result of being on the Internet and walk in and decide to take somebody else's life."
The Internet is to blame for these murders. The Internet is evil. That's his opinion.
. . . that's why it's special. Gnutella was not designed to (immediately) be able to compete with Napster on performance. The key, and what makes Gnutella a true KA, is the fact that it can't be stopped.
Gnutella is certainly not the streamlined, centralized system that Napster is, but that's like arguing that underground 'zine distribution is not as efficient as the major publishing houses. Gnutella's beauty is in the fact that it is accessible to all, but is controlled by no one. Performance can be improved and tuned over time. What's exciting about Gnutella is that it is a "proof-of-concept" for unrestricted, unstoppable file transfer. Whether you like goatsex, Metallica, or Hemingway, you must admit that the concept is brilliant.
Gnutella is exactly what it is supposed to be . . . a successful experiment. Give the open-source folks some time to iron out the technical details (strangling off nodes that don't share, and automatically routing through faster hosts, for two simplistic examples), and Gnutella becomes the foundation for the future of file transfer. This is what science fiction imagined that computer networks could become; we are now watching (or helping) it happen!
Gnutella is not perfect. But it is the start of something big.
Many people here seem to be of the opinion that if speech recognition were perfected, it would end the hunt for the perfect interface. I disagree.
If I'm sitting in my cubicle at work, I just can't see myself speaking out loud "Dear Honeybunch: Smoochie smoochie. Love your teddy bear", or "Mom, the doctor says I have cancer", or "My account number is 235655324". Even normal, nonprivate communication would become a burden, if everyone is speaking to their machines aloud all day long. Noise levels would become unbearable.
The keyboard/mouse combo definitely isn't the ultimate interface, but voice isn't either. An argument could be made for thought-recognition, but I think we're a long way from that yet. For now, I'll stick to my keyboard and mouse.
If I'm understanding you correctly, the money for all this comes from the people who actually stamp out the CDs and sell them.
As we move closer to 100% digital distribution, with no physical product, where does the money come from?
Also, why would I pay any significant money for a CD when it's legal for someone to download and burn the CDs locally, charging only for resources consumed (with a slight markup)?
Slashdot Mirror
This is so obviously untrue it sounds like the meat of a chain letter. The next line should be "So forward this to your 1700 closest friends, and Microsoft and AOL's email-o-matic collector will automatically submit it to your congressman and the UN."
Get a second Zip disk to backup the first, for the love of God! During the time it takes to go through medical school, you will eventually be sorry if you don't keep a complete second copy of everything.
I can't believe you just said that. Sure, floppies suck ass, but between the click-of-death and the fact that if you drop a ZIP three feet onto a concrete floor, it's 100MB DEAD, ZIP is at least as bad.
I'm with the folks that are pushing networking whenever possible, and when not, use inferior portable media, but be redundant. No portable medium will ever be truly reliable, by nature. Network servers are generally kept in a controlled, fairly clean, air-conditioned environment.
Anti-alisasing makes all the difference . . .
Microsoft seem to have gotten people to believe that being infected by an E-mail virus is kind of like being the victim of a robbery at gunpoint--something they can't do anything about.
Sure you can do something about that; you can carry a weapon yourself. Does this mean when you go to the tax-salaried police about it, you should be turned away for your lack of responsibility?
That would be like GM selling cars with no locks and then claiming it's the taxpayer's responsibility to find all the stolen cars.
Again, your leap in logic astounds me. GM doesn't sell cars without locks, but plenty of people don't lock their cars, and some of these unlocked cars become stolen. Taxpayer money goes towards tracking these stolen unlocked cars, and rightfully so . . . Whatever the circumstance, the criminal carries 100% of the responsibility for any crime, the victim 0%.
Regardless of your opinions about the practices of the victim or the quality of the property, this is theft. A crime has been committed, and Microsoft has both ethical and legal claims. If they can prove that stolen code was used in someone else's project, they will win in court. Not because they're Microsoft, or the judge is stupid, but because they are the victim of a crime.
If you walk into a private business, you implicitly agree to be videotaped. If you visit a commercial website, logging is no different.
"But Columbine spoke to a larger issue, and it's really a matter of culture. It's a culture that somewhere along the line we begun to disrespect life, where a child can walk in and have their heart turn dark as a result of being on the Internet and walk in and decide to take somebody else's life."
The Internet is to blame for these murders. The Internet is evil. That's his opinion.
Gnutella is certainly not the streamlined, centralized system that Napster is, but that's like arguing that underground 'zine distribution is not as efficient as the major publishing houses. Gnutella's beauty is in the fact that it is accessible to all, but is controlled by no one. Performance can be improved and tuned over time. What's exciting about Gnutella is that it is a "proof-of-concept" for unrestricted, unstoppable file transfer. Whether you like goatsex, Metallica, or Hemingway, you must admit that the concept is brilliant.
Gnutella is exactly what it is supposed to be . . . a successful experiment. Give the open-source folks some time to iron out the technical details (strangling off nodes that don't share, and automatically routing through faster hosts, for two simplistic examples), and Gnutella becomes the foundation for the future of file transfer. This is what science fiction imagined that computer networks could become; we are now watching (or helping) it happen!
Gnutella is not perfect. But it is the start of something big.
Win2K Server includes Terminal Server.
If I'm sitting in my cubicle at work, I just can't see myself speaking out loud "Dear Honeybunch: Smoochie smoochie. Love your teddy bear", or "Mom, the doctor says I have cancer", or "My account number is 235655324". Even normal, nonprivate communication would become a burden, if everyone is speaking to their machines aloud all day long. Noise levels would become unbearable.
The keyboard/mouse combo definitely isn't the ultimate interface, but voice isn't either. An argument could be made for thought-recognition, but I think we're a long way from that yet. For now, I'll stick to my keyboard and mouse.
This gives the PrntScrn key a whole new meaning ;)
As we move closer to 100% digital distribution, with no physical product, where does the money come from?
Also, why would I pay any significant money for a CD when it's legal for someone to download and burn the CDs locally, charging only for resources consumed (with a slight markup)?