The people in the pictures are criminals. They are breaking the law (e.g. setting fire to stolen property, destruction of property, etc.) The students that have been/will be identified are suspects. They are suspected of being the criminals pictured. The two are not equal until proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
You are only "innocent until proven guilty" in a court of law. The court of public opinion and the court of job interviews knows no such rules. (i.e. If a company doesn't want to hire somebody because they were even seen near a riot, that's their business.)
Er, no. Most planes today are still good airframes that can fly/glide by themselves with no computer assistance. The X-29 was unique in its requirement of constant computer assistance. Helicopters are different in that when the engines turn off, you don't exactly glide per se...
Which actually does relate to the Osprey crash. Many times code that works just fine for one purpose is applied to something it was never intended for, and something completely unexpected happens. Sometimes it's nothing, but when you're flying a helicopter, it can be Bad(tm).
This is why I shudder when I think about these same companies rewriting the air traffic control system. Yes, it has to be done, but I worry that some people are going to be unwittingly involved in some "real world testing."
Actually, watching people pour over manuals for hours, and searching the web for information for hours, and writing code
for days, is pretty boring stuff. Why would they want to show that?
Which is exactly why the hacker image has been so bad in movies. Not only do most people not understand what hackers/geeks/etc do, but what we do is boring to them.
Besides, when you go to the movies, people want excitement! Love! Romance! Danger! Stuff blowing up! It's only when you hear Shall we play a game? when things get interesting. (Although Wargames did a nice job of showing the research Lightman had to do, I think that was the only time I've ever seen it in a movie...)
And, most importantly, the article did a good job of saying how movies like the Net and Hackers were more than little unrealistic. (But that doesn't mean it's not what people still believe...)
No, they just want you to buy Quicktime Pro, which does let you save movies. This was marketing, the same kind used by drug dealers. Give you free samples so you get 'hooked' on the product, and then start charging whatever they want for it.
Of course, saving movies isn't quite the same thing as heroin, but it's the same marketing principle...
Now, if ReplayTV offered to restore the pause screen feature for a monthly fee of say, $5 (probably more than they make from the advertising screens), they would be doing the same thing as well.
Heh.. not a problem. All we need is for some young upstart company (or even a group of hardware geeks really) is to reverse engineer the damn thing, write their own version that uses Linux and sell it for cheap.
BZZT! Sorry! DMCA says you can't reverse engineer.
You know, it really just hit me that the Man is truly taking control...
And then we could all complain about the stupid filters are blocking us from sites containing cbea and frk. www.articbeauty.com comes to mind... (Yes, I know there's nothing there right now)
I think the biggest difference has to be in what's seen on the screen. In ST:ANH, yes, you see a whole planet get blown to bits. You don't see each individual person die a bloody death like in Robocop or Lethal Weapon. Similar to the Greek Chorus of old, violence is more acceptable when you don't actually see it happen.
But this wasn't for personal use! The guy was trying to communicate information about the companies' business practices to other people because they might have been breaking the law. While we could argue whether or not that's an official 'business' use, it's certainly not something completely unrelated.
And let's think here. If I was going to call the federal regulators to report my company, I probably wouldn't do it from my office because somebody might overhear me, the same way I wouldn't send e-mail from my office for the same reason. Yes, it takes more effort for somebody to 'overhear' an e-mail, but it's the same principle.
Slashdot Mirror
If you thought the Matrix was cool, you'll like this book. Now fork over the money.
People rarely mug for the camera at the exact moment of smashing a mailbox, especially when drunk or high.
The people in the pictures are criminals. They are breaking the law (e.g. setting fire to stolen property, destruction of property, etc.) The students that have been/will be identified are suspects. They are suspected of being the criminals pictured. The two are not equal until proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
You are only "innocent until proven guilty" in a court of law. The court of public opinion and the court of job interviews knows no such rules. (i.e. If a company doesn't want to hire somebody because they were even seen near a riot, that's their business.)
If your lover is a terrorist, yes.
Er, no. Most planes today are still good airframes that can fly/glide by themselves with no computer assistance. The X-29 was unique in its requirement of constant computer assistance. Helicopters are different in that when the engines turn off, you don't exactly glide per se...
No human being is panic-proof when falling from the sky. You can train 'em all you want, and they will do as their told, but they still get scared.
This is why I shudder when I think about these same companies rewriting the air traffic control system. Yes, it has to be done, but I worry that some people are going to be unwittingly involved in some "real world testing."
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Death is but a mere obstacle to lawyers.
Yeah, but Charlie's Angels used IE. ("Hot babes use our product!") Actually, that's probably not a bad marketing plan...
Actually, it's the slugs doing it to you, you just don't know it yet. Savor the irony.
Which is exactly why the hacker image has been so bad in movies. Not only do most people not understand what hackers/geeks/etc do, but what we do is boring to them.
Besides, when you go to the movies, people want excitement! Love! Romance! Danger! Stuff blowing up! It's only when you hear Shall we play a game? when things get interesting. (Although Wargames did a nice job of showing the research Lightman had to do, I think that was the only time I've ever seen it in a movie...)
And, most importantly, the article did a good job of saying how movies like the Net and Hackers were more than little unrealistic. (But that doesn't mean it's not what people still believe...)
"I want him in the stores until he dies paying" - MCPAA
Could it be that fats are composed mostly of water? (Serious question...)
lynx -dump [pasted-link] > movie.mov
Saves time and all...
Of course, saving movies isn't quite the same thing as heroin, but it's the same marketing principle... Now, if ReplayTV offered to restore the pause screen feature for a monthly fee of say, $5 (probably more than they make from the advertising screens), they would be doing the same thing as well.
BZZT! Sorry! DMCA says you can't reverse engineer. You know, it really just hit me that the Man is truly taking control...
And then we could all complain about the stupid filters are blocking us from sites containing cbea and frk. www.articbeauty.com comes to mind... (Yes, I know there's nothing there right now)
Ironic that you tell the author to be quiet while at the same time resorting to the same style of misspelling trick...
If you want to show it on TV, yes.
I think the biggest difference has to be in what's seen on the screen. In ST:ANH, yes, you see a whole planet get blown to bits. You don't see each individual person die a bloody death like in Robocop or Lethal Weapon. Similar to the Greek Chorus of old, violence is more acceptable when you don't actually see it happen.
And let's think here. If I was going to call the federal regulators to report my company, I probably wouldn't do it from my office because somebody might overhear me, the same way I wouldn't send e-mail from my office for the same reason. Yes, it takes more effort for somebody to 'overhear' an e-mail, but it's the same principle.
All your beowulf are belong to us?
The actual Guardian article is on-line and has some of today's submissions, plus the official rules and some hints.