Those are my three favorite comics, too! Pretty freaky.... I wonder how many other hackers are into these three? A cultural phenomenon, perhaps?
Errr, it might be a cultural phenomenon, except for the small fact that "Dilbert, Calvin & Hobbes, & Bloom County" are/were three of THE most popular comic strips in the United States.
It's like saying, "Oh, you like Coca-Cola, Star Wars, and having sex, too?! So do I! Hack3rs ru13!"
You realize that's bullshit, right? Jobs and Gassee are both notoriously hard to deal with. Someone got rankled.
You're damn right someone got rankled -- Jobs did.
Saying that their OS was running apps slower is kindof silly when it's not preemptively multitasked.
I never said the apps run slower on MacOS. Freudian slip?
And Apple stopped sharing specs because they didn't want harware competition.
Your history is a little screwed up. It went like this:
Be created BeOS for their own hardware, using Hobbit processors. (The BeBox.)
These did not sell well.
They scrapped the idea of selling hardware and ported BeOS to PPC. BeOS began to win acclaim as it smoked, esp. compared to MacOS on the SAME EXACT HARDWARE.
G3 came out and Be could not get Apple to release the specs for G3 hardware that prevented BeOS from running on the hardware.
Be ported to the more open architecture of x86, for better or worse, and their user base grew beyond what they achieved as PPC-only.
I think it's pretty clear Be was no longer competing on hardware. Apple did not share the specs because they were tired of getting shown up on their own hardware.
That said, Be didn't stop porting because they needed the specs. They didn't need the specs. They stopped porting because they wanted to stop. Perhaps because they wanted to know that Apple would support them in the future, but whatever.
But my initial point stands - are the search engines independent?
Uhhh... WHICH search engines? There are many. Independent from WHAT? The government? Uhhh, yeah I would say there's a pretty good chance that the American search engines are not in cahoots with the government. Call it a hunch.
it could indeed be a problem to the credibility of the web if say 99% of the information being returned by search engines is returned from engines controlled by one government.
First, the "web" has no credibility, it is not a person or even a single entity like a company.
Second, there would only be a problem if the dominant search engines were in countries without free speech rights. I'll go out on a limb and say the U.S. has one of the better standards of free speech in the world. The dominant search engines like Yahoo, Google, Altavista, etc. are all in the U.S. I don't see any problem with "credibility."
Centralized control over information (or, pointers to information in this case) is a potential problem.
Please explain how there is any centralized control over the search engines? They are all separate entities.
Am I wrong ?
About what? I can't figure out your argument.
So, how do we deal with this ? As a regular joe-user there's pretty darn little one can do to prevent this centralization from happening - or ?
It's pretty simple. The internet is enjoying a free-market economy. You use the search engines that give the best results. The search engine with most users wins. The search engine that returns illegitimate results, if there was such a search engine, would not be popular.
These things can work themselves out in a free market.
Latency is also better on the Mac, and that's very important in audio.
Video, music and audio, graphics, encoding and encryption... the Mac is the best-performing machine for all of these. These are the tasks that Macs are BUILT FOR.
And if Apple really wanted to let you tap into that power, they would have shared their hardware specs with Be.
The primary reason Be ported to x86 was because Apple got pissed at them for showing up MacOS on the PPC architecture. Apple took its ball, and went home.
So if you really want a fair comparison of architectures, why not compare BeOS on x86 to MacOS on PPC? I realize it's not likely, the same types of apps are not available for BeOS and probably will never be... but let's not chalk up these so-called benchmarks to the CPU architecture quite yet...
In a nutshell this is saying "Someone said something, but it might be bogus, and the cycle speed really doesn't mean much anyways.". Alrighty then. This is like a "nothing to see here, move along!" type articles.
Except in this case there isn't even a really cool, splattered dead guy to stare at.
IRIX is a product of SGI. Entering IRIX gives me SGI. Entering Marlboro does not give me Phillip Morris.
Contrary to popular belief, Google cannot predict what you expect to appear at the top. It can only present the most highly rated content. And how it decides that is well known -- it gives more weight to URL's that are linked from more places. And the more popular sites carry more weight in their linkage (presumably).
Try searching for "marlboro" on google. What would you expect ? The marlboro home-page ? Oh, no; we have the Marlboro College, poems, but no tobacco company home page. Coincidence?
Considering that (a) Marlboro is not a tobacco company but a brand of cigarettes, (b) they do not appear to have an official website, NO I am not surprised by the Google results.
Try searching for Marlboro at other search engines like Altavista and Yahoo, and you will get similar results.
Now try searching for "Philip Morris," the maker of Marlboro cigarettes, and you will find they are the very first link -- just as expected.
I hit google specifically LOOKING FOR NEWSGROUP discussions on the topic. Granted, I dont need 50 mirrored copies, but I definitely do want to see newsgroup archives indexed.
The games themselves will only become a part of the social experience you're buying, you'll be able to wander around the "waiting rooms" with your avatar and talk to people. Exciting.
Let's see... is the cool part of the internet being able to use IRC, or being able to create your own, personal piece of cyberspace with which others around the world can interact?
THAT is the cool part about the Snow Crash metaverse. As soon as that feature is available in one of these goal-free universes, you'll see something much more exciting than people chatting.
Real life is already goal-free. Part of the allure of games is that they have goals. A goal-free virtual universe would at best be a novelty and a fad for a few moments.
Man you can really tell when someone has (a) no imagination and/or (b) never read a book (such as Snow Crash) that is detailed enough to supply them with a temporary imagination!
Let's see... a goal-free 3D world would be at best a novelty? A fad for a few moments? Is that also what you think of this goal-free 2D world we call the World Wide Web?
If you think that's a stretch, consider Snow Crash's "Metaverse":
- A virtual space that spans the global network of computers.
- Anyone can create their own personal space in the metaverse
- Anyone can write their own special programming used in the Metaverse to do cool things
- Those people that are better at design/programming create cooler and more useful spaces in the metaverse
- The metaverse is a great place to meet new people, encounter new ideas, and perform research
Now replace 'metaverse' with 'internet' and see if you can really call it a novelty or fad...
A goal-free 3D world GAME would suck, true. But a goal-free 3D world not controlled by any one company, expandable by anyone with the talent, would be unbelievably cool AND useful.
Now, of course, there is only one. But before we get too full of ourselves and assume we'll remain the world's most dominant force forever, consider that our bizarre unflinching adherance to ancient religious law rivals that of fundamentalist Islams .
Let's see... we still fight over the teaching of evolution because so many Americans have a bizarre
unflinching adherance to a literal belief in Genesis. That's not the whole story but it's not a bad place to start...
You conveniently left out that the fight, by some, is to INCLUDE the teaching of evolution.
You make it sound as though we are fighting for the right to teach science -- it's the other way around. People are fighting to teach non-science, and losing!
the aesthetically and functionally perfect curve of a katana doesn't form until the nearly-finished blade is quenched, and it forms naturally - it's not forged in. The differing hardness and thickness on either side of the blade causes it to cool and contract at different speeds, forming the curve.
So what you're saying is that it's the age-old blacksmith's retort when questioned about the curve in the katana blade:
There's been talk on places like CNN and CNet about software makers being held liable for serious defects in much the same way Ford and Firestone are for their recent tire troubles.
The major difference in this case, and the reason that any case against Microsoft would ultimately lose (at least for the Code Red attack), is that Microsoft released a patch well before Code Red came out.
Ford and Firestone, on the other hand, tried to cover it up for as long as possible.
The people who buy MS products THINK they're getting something secure, since it's one of the many buzzwords (READ: lies) that MS always uses.
The only people that think they are getting something secure when they buy/download any operating system are the unwashed masses. The ones that don't know any better. These are the same people that allow the Code Red-style worms to spread.
The rest of us applied the patch supplied by Microsoft more than a month before CR came out...
You see, as an admin in charge of machines running IIS and other Microsoft software, I am subscribed to several alert lists, including Microsoft's security list. And when Microsoft releases a patch for anything that can be used to "arbitrarily execute code of the attacker's choice" on a port not blocked by my firewall, I immediately install that patch. The end.
I'm so sick of people blaming Microsoft. The released a patch well before Code Red. Get over it.
Re:Why are people so obsessed with Computer cases
on
Case Tweaking
·
· Score: 2
Well computers are to people now, what cars where used to be. first you get it running AFAP, then befor you know it everybodys is running AFAP and the only way to distinguish your car or computer is with chrome, lights, etc...
Yeah, pretty soon all the kids will be sticking "VTEC Inside" stickers on their computer cases... won't that be surreal?
Re:Paul Festa -- not MSNBC
on
Netscape 6.1
·
· Score: 2
The early version of IE were laughable, but laughable IE is not what allowed Netscape to assemble an overwhelming lead.
Correct. Netscape already had an overwhelming lead. IE's laughability was what allowed Netscape to keep that lead for a long, long time, and make it even stronger.
It is easy to lead when there are no real competitors.
Ahhh, I see you've taken a good lesson from Microsoft's camp. However, Netscape led well after Microsoft released their browser in 1995. Things didn't start getting interesting until well into the 3.x's, and Microsoft didn't match Netscape very well until 4.x. At that point, they took the gloves off, shoved MSIE into every single Microsoft application sold, forced admins to install it at every turn, and embedded it into all their new versions of operating systems.
The race didn't start until the release of IE 2.0 in 1995.
Much like Paul Festa, your remembrance of the history of the browsers is very sketchy...
Re:Paul Festa -- not MSNBC
on
Netscape 6.1
·
· Score: 2
Actually with all the "Netscape sucks" and "Mozilla sucks" every time they are brought up in a non confrontational context with IE (Such as when a new release is announced). You could say that/. is firmly on the side of Microsoft as well.
Considering that slashdot is not a single person, but many different people, in many different roles, I don't think treating it as a single entity is fair.
Why is it that MSNBC is biased when they say that Netscape 6.0 was buggy
MSNBC didn't say this, at least in this article. They posted a CNET article. Probably because they didn't want to appear biased. Strange that they chose a 3rd party review that is so negative towards Netscape, though, eh?
but when everyone on/. (and almost everywhere else on the net) says the same thing they're not?
Slashdot, again, is not a single entity. What's more, even if it were, it is not paid or presumed to be an unbiased source of journalistic integrity. CNET, and yes MSNBC, *are* supposed to be those kinds of sources.
That just shows that comments like the one above are the biased ones...
How exactly was I biased? I read yet another Paul Festa article on how much Netscape sucks, one-sided as usual, leaving out how much better Mozilla is than Netscape, etc. I write Paul Festa and the editors of CNET to complain about this so-called journalism. I see someone on slashdot agrees, and I point out that they should let CNET know how they feel.
You're right -- I guess I'm biased against crappy journalism.
Re:People are becoming consumers, not content crea
on
Broadband Crackdown
·
· Score: 2
I am also annoyed that, while Apache and other UNIX web servers are able make a web server without countless remote root exploits, all UNIX users on these cable modems suffer because Microsoft did not make a secure web server.
If you really think that this worm is the reason these ports are getting blocked, you are naive.
This worm is the perfect excuse to finally come in and enforce their unpopular TOS -- no servers should be running on cable/dsl connections (at least for the companies discussed here).
On a side note, I'd like to say PLEASE, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, DON'T LET TIME WARNER TAKE AWAY MY PORT 80!!
Slashdot Mirror
In other words, Be as a desktop OS is DEAD
Holy shit! Hide the women, children, and copies of BeOS 5 on your hard drive, because apparantly JLG will be comin' round to delete them!
(The copies of BeOS, not your women and children.)
(He might rape your women, though. He's French, you know.)
The port to x86 was a gamble, and the decision to drop PPC support came suspiciously quickly on the heels of a fat wad of financing from Intel.
Except that they never dropped support for PPC...
Hi! How are you?
I send you this file in order to "steal" your HDCP crack.
See you later. Thanks
Those are my three favorite comics, too! Pretty freaky. ... I wonder how many other hackers are into these three? A cultural phenomenon, perhaps?
Errr, it might be a cultural phenomenon, except for the small fact that "Dilbert, Calvin & Hobbes, & Bloom County" are/were three of THE most popular comic strips in the United States.
It's like saying, "Oh, you like Coca-Cola, Star Wars, and having sex, too?! So do I! Hack3rs ru13!"
You realize that's bullshit, right? Jobs and Gassee are both notoriously hard to deal with. Someone got rankled.
You're damn right someone got rankled -- Jobs did.
Saying that their OS was running apps slower is kindof silly when it's not preemptively multitasked.
I never said the apps run slower on MacOS. Freudian slip?
And Apple stopped sharing specs because they didn't want harware competition.
Your history is a little screwed up. It went like this:
Be created BeOS for their own hardware, using Hobbit processors. (The BeBox.)
These did not sell well.
They scrapped the idea of selling hardware and ported BeOS to PPC. BeOS began to win acclaim as it smoked, esp. compared to MacOS on the SAME EXACT HARDWARE.
G3 came out and Be could not get Apple to release the specs for G3 hardware that prevented BeOS from running on the hardware.
Be ported to the more open architecture of x86, for better or worse, and their user base grew beyond what they achieved as PPC-only.
I think it's pretty clear Be was no longer competing on hardware. Apple did not share the specs because they were tired of getting shown up on their own hardware.
That said, Be didn't stop porting because they needed the specs. They didn't need the specs. They stopped porting because they wanted to stop. Perhaps because they wanted to know that Apple would support them in the future, but whatever.
Gee, what an eloquent argument.
But my initial point stands - are the search engines independent?
Uhhh... WHICH search engines? There are many. Independent from WHAT? The government? Uhhh, yeah I would say there's a pretty good chance that the American search engines are not in cahoots with the government. Call it a hunch.
it could indeed be a problem to the credibility of the web if say 99% of the information being returned by search engines is returned from engines controlled by one government.
First, the "web" has no credibility, it is not a person or even a single entity like a company.
Second, there would only be a problem if the dominant search engines were in countries without free speech rights. I'll go out on a limb and say the U.S. has one of the better standards of free speech in the world. The dominant search engines like Yahoo, Google, Altavista, etc. are all in the U.S. I don't see any problem with "credibility."
Centralized control over information (or, pointers to information in this case) is a potential problem.
Please explain how there is any centralized control over the search engines? They are all separate entities.
Am I wrong ?
About what? I can't figure out your argument.
So, how do we deal with this ? As a regular joe-user there's pretty darn little one can do to prevent this centralization from happening - or ?
It's pretty simple. The internet is enjoying a free-market economy. You use the search engines that give the best results. The search engine with most users wins. The search engine that returns illegitimate results, if there was such a search engine, would not be popular.
These things can work themselves out in a free market.
Latency is also better on the Mac, and that's very important in audio.
... the Mac is the best-performing machine for all of these. These are the tasks that Macs are BUILT FOR.
Video, music and audio, graphics, encoding and encryption
And if Apple really wanted to let you tap into that power, they would have shared their hardware specs with Be.
The primary reason Be ported to x86 was because Apple got pissed at them for showing up MacOS on the PPC architecture. Apple took its ball, and went home.
So if you really want a fair comparison of architectures, why not compare BeOS on x86 to MacOS on PPC? I realize it's not likely, the same types of apps are not available for BeOS and probably will never be... but let's not chalk up these so-called benchmarks to the CPU architecture quite yet...
In a nutshell this is saying "Someone said something, but it might be bogus, and the cycle speed really doesn't mean much anyways.". Alrighty then. This is like a "nothing to see here, move along!" type articles.
Except in this case there isn't even a really cool, splattered dead guy to stare at.
IRIX is a product of SGI. Entering IRIX gives me SGI. Entering Marlboro does not give me Phillip Morris.
Contrary to popular belief, Google cannot predict what you expect to appear at the top. It can only present the most highly rated content. And how it decides that is well known -- it gives more weight to URL's that are linked from more places. And the more popular sites carry more weight in their linkage (presumably).
Try searching for "marlboro" on google. What would you expect ? The marlboro home-page ? Oh, no; we have the Marlboro College, poems, but no tobacco company home page. Coincidence?
Considering that (a) Marlboro is not a tobacco company but a brand of cigarettes, (b) they do not appear to have an official website, NO I am not surprised by the Google results.
Try searching for Marlboro at other search engines like Altavista and Yahoo, and you will get similar results.
Now try searching for "Philip Morris," the maker of Marlboro cigarettes, and you will find they are the very first link -- just as expected.
Conspiracy theories... how quaint.
I hit google specifically LOOKING FOR NEWSGROUP discussions on the topic. Granted, I dont need 50 mirrored copies, but I definitely do want to see newsgroup archives indexed.
See, there's this thing called groups.google.com, and...
The games themselves will only become a part of the social experience you're buying, you'll be able to wander around the "waiting rooms" with your avatar and talk to people. Exciting.
... is the cool part of the internet being able to use IRC, or being able to create your own, personal piece of cyberspace with which others around the world can interact?
Let's see
THAT is the cool part about the Snow Crash metaverse. As soon as that feature is available in one of these goal-free universes, you'll see something much more exciting than people chatting.
Real life is already goal-free. Part of the allure of games is that they have goals. A goal-free virtual universe would at best be a novelty and a fad for a few moments.
Man you can really tell when someone has (a) no imagination and/or (b) never read a book (such as Snow Crash) that is detailed enough to supply them with a temporary imagination!
Let's see... a goal-free 3D world would be at best a novelty? A fad for a few moments? Is that also what you think of this goal-free 2D world we call the World Wide Web?
If you think that's a stretch, consider Snow Crash's "Metaverse":
- A virtual space that spans the global network of computers.
- Anyone can create their own personal space in the metaverse
- Anyone can write their own special programming used in the Metaverse to do cool things
- Those people that are better at design/programming create cooler and more useful spaces in the metaverse
- The metaverse is a great place to meet new people, encounter new ideas, and perform research
Now replace 'metaverse' with 'internet' and see if you can really call it a novelty or fad...
A goal-free 3D world GAME would suck, true. But a goal-free 3D world not controlled by any one company, expandable by anyone with the talent, would be unbelievably cool AND useful.
Doh, I meant 'creation' not 'evolution'!
You conveniently left out that the fight, by some, is to INCLUDE the teaching of evolution.
Now, of course, there is only one. But before we get too full of ourselves and assume we'll remain the world's most dominant force forever, consider that our bizarre unflinching adherance to ancient religious law rivals that of fundamentalist Islams .
... we still fight over the teaching of evolution because so many Americans have a bizarre
...
Let's see
unflinching adherance to a literal belief in Genesis. That's not the whole story but it's not a bad place to start
You conveniently left out that the fight, by some, is to INCLUDE the teaching of evolution.
You make it sound as though we are fighting for the right to teach science -- it's the other way around. People are fighting to teach non-science, and losing!
the aesthetically and functionally perfect curve of a katana doesn't form until the nearly-finished blade is quenched, and it forms naturally - it's not forged in. The differing hardness and thickness on either side of the blade causes it to cool and contract at different speeds, forming the curve.
So what you're saying is that it's the age-old blacksmith's retort when questioned about the curve in the katana blade:
It's not a bug, it's a feature!
There's been talk on places like CNN and CNet about software makers being held liable for serious defects in much the same way Ford and Firestone are for their recent tire troubles.
The major difference in this case, and the reason that any case against Microsoft would ultimately lose (at least for the Code Red attack), is that Microsoft released a patch well before Code Red came out.
Ford and Firestone, on the other hand, tried to cover it up for as long as possible.
The people who buy MS products THINK they're getting something secure, since it's one of the many buzzwords (READ: lies) that MS always uses.
The only people that think they are getting something secure when they buy/download any operating system are the unwashed masses. The ones that don't know any better. These are the same people that allow the Code Red-style worms to spread.
The rest of us applied the patch supplied by Microsoft more than a month before CR came out...
You see, as an admin in charge of machines running IIS and other Microsoft software, I am subscribed to several alert lists, including Microsoft's security list. And when Microsoft releases a patch for anything that can be used to "arbitrarily execute code of the attacker's choice" on a port not blocked by my firewall, I immediately install that patch. The end.
I'm so sick of people blaming Microsoft. The released a patch well before Code Red. Get over it.
Michael writes, So, Microsoft has given you a mop to clean up the mess they made.
No, Microsoft gave us a mop to clean up after the mess the Code Red author(s) made.
You see, more than a month before Code Red came out, Microsoft gave us the patch for the security breach that allowed Code Red to take place.
Seriously, though... id Software makes great game ENGINES... they do NOT, however, make great games.
... they don't make great games, just the most popular games. Oops...
You are correct
As discussed on slashdot a little over 2 years ago (I still want one):
http://www.snowcrash.se/products/netsurfer/
Well computers are to people now, what cars where used to be. first you get it running AFAP, then befor you know it everybodys is running AFAP and the only way to distinguish your car or computer is with chrome, lights, etc...
Yeah, pretty soon all the kids will be sticking "VTEC Inside" stickers on their computer cases... won't that be surreal?
The early version of IE were laughable, but laughable IE is not what allowed Netscape to assemble an overwhelming lead.
Correct. Netscape already had an overwhelming lead. IE's laughability was what allowed Netscape to keep that lead for a long, long time, and make it even stronger.
It is easy to lead when there are no real competitors.
Ahhh, I see you've taken a good lesson from Microsoft's camp. However, Netscape led well after Microsoft released their browser in 1995. Things didn't start getting interesting until well into the 3.x's, and Microsoft didn't match Netscape very well until 4.x. At that point, they took the gloves off, shoved MSIE into every single Microsoft application sold, forced admins to install it at every turn, and embedded it into all their new versions of operating systems.
The race didn't start until the release of IE 2.0 in 1995.
Much like Paul Festa, your remembrance of the history of the browsers is very sketchy...
Actually with all the "Netscape sucks" and "Mozilla sucks" every time they are brought up in a non confrontational context with IE (Such as when a new release is announced). You could say that /. is firmly on the side of Microsoft as well.
/. (and almost everywhere else on the net) says the same thing they're not?
Considering that slashdot is not a single person, but many different people, in many different roles, I don't think treating it as a single entity is fair.
Why is it that MSNBC is biased when they say that Netscape 6.0 was buggy
MSNBC didn't say this, at least in this article. They posted a CNET article. Probably because they didn't want to appear biased. Strange that they chose a 3rd party review that is so negative towards Netscape, though, eh?
but when everyone on
Slashdot, again, is not a single entity. What's more, even if it were, it is not paid or presumed to be an unbiased source of journalistic integrity. CNET, and yes MSNBC, *are* supposed to be those kinds of sources.
That just shows that comments like the one above are the biased ones...
How exactly was I biased? I read yet another Paul Festa article on how much Netscape sucks, one-sided as usual, leaving out how much better Mozilla is than Netscape, etc. I write Paul Festa and the editors of CNET to complain about this so-called journalism. I see someone on slashdot agrees, and I point out that they should let CNET know how they feel.
You're right -- I guess I'm biased against crappy journalism.
I am also annoyed that, while Apache and other UNIX web servers are able make a web server without countless remote root exploits, all UNIX users on these cable modems suffer because Microsoft did not make a secure web server.
If you really think that this worm is the reason these ports are getting blocked, you are naive.
This worm is the perfect excuse to finally come in and enforce their unpopular TOS -- no servers should be running on cable/dsl connections (at least for the companies discussed here).
On a side note, I'd like to say PLEASE, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, DON'T LET TIME WARNER TAKE AWAY MY PORT 80!!
Ahem.