Anyone who dates girls who only want to watch chickflicks is one pussy-whooped chump.
I personally would rather masterbate with a cheese grater than sit through hours of chickflicks...
And yes, there are sexually attractive/active women out there who enjoy watching things other than sap movies. You just need to have the balls to ask them out...
I keep hearing this stated, but no one goes into detail about it, so I'm gonna ask.
What restrictions are you referring to? I'm asking sincerely, no antagonism, I've just never heard this explained and I'd like to. I'd really appreciate an explanation or a link to a website that contains one. Thanks!
Is that the only Niven/Pournelle collaboration you're aware of? Some of Nivens best books were collaborations with Pournelle. That fact, in itself, answers your question quite well.
The Mote in God's Eye Lucifers Hammer Footfall to name my three favorites.
"I ask because clearly, only an idiot could have missed the dripping sarcasm of the post to which you replied."
When you're done wiping the drool from your chin, take a few breaths, and repeat after me:
I will not post a reply in which I call another an idiot, as a reply to the reply in which I call another an idiot.
You feel better yet genius?
Ya know clown, Sarcasm isn't always apparent. And yes I do read quite a bit, and write, and I also drip sarcasm at times myself.
But when you grow up and graduate high school, you'll recognize that Sarcasm isn't always apparent and that you yourself, will miss it at times. Let's hope you won't think yourself an idiot for doing so.
... are all full of shit. Don't put your faith in any of them, cuz none of them will be there for you when the shit hits the fan. Study the bible and other religious texts, start your own family, and get politically active, but make sure your faith is in God alone, and no other people/person.
Don't buy Kurt Saxon books, the guys a retard. Don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, he's full of shit. Don't work in the computer industry, because after 5 years in the industry, you'll lose your love of them and it will take you another 6 years of soul searching to find it again(although you still won't have found your love of gaming again).
Don't believe in any corp you work for, just do your job, keep your mouth shut, and be expecting them to try to screw you and everyone else who pours their lives into their mission. They don't give a damn about you, it doesn't matter what your charismatic CEOs have to say. You are nothing more than human fuel, and when they've gotten what they need from you, you will be discarded like human debris. No, it won't matter how good you are or how hard you work. Remember, ask for the sky, and while you won't get it, you'll do a lot better than asking them for what you think is fair, because they won't give you that if you do.
"I'm sure you meant to say, America and the USSR, right? We can share this particular blame."
You are right, the USSR definetly did such things too. I didn't mention it because I am one of those US centric Americans.:)
I want to point out that my point wasn't about blaming America... I was using a mistake that America made to demonstrate the need for well reasoned level headedness when developing new technologies.
Besides, when the commies do something stupid, that's just stupid old communism. When the US does something stupid, its just a grave error in judgement made out of the deepest sense of patriotic conviction that originates in the subcochle area... I think...
"I for one am glad to see the US government taking such a positive stance on potential problem substances and technologies."
Spoken like a true coward.
"Oh help me government, save me from the potential dangers in life! Please, for God sake! Ban shit now, before it's too late! But please, for the Love of God, don't stop doing all the jacked up things you've done to make me a target. Please don't! I just want to be less free, I don't really want you to do anything that could make me less a target."
"Anti-cloning zealots are going to have a ball with this"
I'm not a zealot either way on the issue, but I know this, had America listened to the Anti-Nuke zealots back in the 50's and not experimented in the atmosphere with nuclear weapons without fully understanding what they were doing, 15,000 people would not have died from the fallout, and some hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions, would not have had the vast increase in disease that occured as a result.
It is a headstrong fool that rushes forward without carefully considering all sides and perspectives of an issue. Logic would dictate that research should be conducted to find out if this is going to be a problem for clones in general, before anyone begins to attack others for their viewpoints.
I mean seriously, with the evidence available, your finding fault with "anti-cloning zealots" is itself, dogmatic zealotry, because you sure as hell don't know if they're wrong.
If you do, then by all means, shine your light that we may all share your insight.
Opera is becoming a serious contender in the mobile arena. This is an area that Microsoft cares a good deal about. Doing that to Mozilla would generate too much press, and as for Konqueror, that isn't even a real competitor on the windows platform or in the mobile arena.
They would do this. This is just the type of crap that monopolies pull, largely because they can.
"but it really looks like an honest typo in the style sheet. i can understand how they'd be pissed, but did they try contacting MS to get it fixed first? the fact that the server sends a client-specific style-sheet isn't exactly damning. it's a very common (though misguided) practice."
Why, you must be right. Microsoft doesn't have a well documented history of "competing" this way. I'm sure Bill Gates right now is working to fix the problem himself.
Those evil Opera bastards. How dare they reach conclusions based on Microsofts well documented past and accuse microsoft of malicious wrongdoing! When microsofts shit smells, looks, and feels like shit, it's just jumping to illogical and unreasonable conclusions to say it is shit.
Jeeze. People need to stop attributing malice to microsoft, that's not historically justified nor fair!
"Now that's a good response, punish everyone else because your ego got bruised becasue someone else did something the proper way."
Punish everyone else? Pardon me, but if I was spending my time maintaining a site out of genorisity, and someone sent me a legal notice(and I'm not a lawyer and really would rather not have to deal with one), I would do the same thing.
I have no problem with the rest of your reasoning, which I do find insightful, I just take issue with the way you phrased this, as if this guy is somehow punishing people and being illogical.
You gotta see it from the perspective of someone who just doesn't want to deal with legal headaches.
"My worry is the health of the planet in the mean time. I live in central Minnesota, USA. Our average high temperature this time of year is about 9 degrees F. Yesterday it was 55 degrees F. I know full well one warm winter does not global warming make, but we've had several bizzarely warm years lately. We're s--tting where we eat and it worries me."
Don't worry about it. I'm sure after the polar ice caps melt and we all have to get oxygen machines to compress the oxygen in the air to make it breatheable, someone in power will take it seriously.
In the mean time, just buy an SUV, vote for one of the big two political parties, and don't worry about it. That's what most Americans are doing, why shouldn't you?
"The actual name of the game is "which eyeballs". Ad targetting is where profit is made for content producers. Per-impression charges rise dramatically when you can tie the ad to a particular demograph."
Actually, I think "which eyeballs" would be a play in the game of eyeballs. That would depend, and I'll admit my ignorance here, on whether it's more important to have 2 million impressions in general, or have 2 thousand whose demographics you thoroughly understand.
I guess that's probably the question their asking themselves. I hope they do it as I'm pretty sure I can see what will happen. "Tie two birds together, and though they have four wings, they still can not fly.":)
"TW does not make money off of online content (or not much, anyway). They make it off of print adv. Online versions are supplements to the ones in print.
Ah, so that explains why they would consider this. I had no clue, thanks for hitting me with that beloved hammer.:)
Unless this hurts their print readership, this seems like a good idea.
I still think they will make themselves less relevant by this, which will hurt their readership in the long run. But, that is my opinion. I hope they do this.
"It doesn't matter whether or not they lose readers. It matters whether or not they make more money."
Um, when a media company loses readers or consumers of that media, that company will lose money, not to mention relevance, and power.
You are right, that *IF* they can get enough AOL subscribers to make up for their lost advertising revenue, then it might be worth it, but that seems like betting on a long shot. Anyone going to give up their DSL line to subscribe to AOL? Anyone going to pay an extra monthly fee to use AOL over their DSL lines, just to get access to their content? I'm asking this of slashdot readers, would anyone out there actually do this?
With the media, the name of the game is eyeballs. The more eyeballs you have, the more you can charge for advertising revenue. If you begin keeping people from your content, they will simply go elsewhere, and thus you will experience a lower demand for your advertising services. I seriously doubt anyone, beyond a few oddballs, are going to subscribe to AOL just to get access to a particular media outlet, especially one as commerical as that.
As far as I'm concerned, I hope they do do it. This is one company I have no warm fuzzy feelings for, so let them shoot themselves in the foot.
I agree they've made it tough to block if you're just targeting AOLs resource(as in time) sucking software. My experience is that most of the time for most offices (not counting tech companies), you don't want your users running ANY of the many time/bandwidth suckers out there. In that case, the following is extremely effective.
Block all internet traffic for your desktop machines at the router/firewall/whatever, and force all web browsing through a squid proxy on a server that is not blocked. This breaks virtually all messaging and file sharing software, while also generally accelerating web browsing. Any users with special needs can be explicitly allowed through the router.
Be sure to have a cache only dns server on your side of the link, and voila: Instant messanger stops working (and Aol doesn't get jack), you improve the web browsing experience for your users, and any new messaging programs/file sharing programs won't work. Win win win!
Then you can spend that 35 bucks times X number of employees, which in my case comes to over 10 thousand bucks, on new hardware like switch upgrades, router upgrades, and the like, which will really make you look good.
"The message has gone out - illegally monopolise, and we'll drag you through a trial, but we will not do anything at all that might actually remove you from that monopoly. Keep your prices high enough to pay for the trial, and you'll be fine."
You missed a critical part of the message. My additions in all CAPS because I'm too lazy to use html to make them italics:
The message has gone out - illegally monopolise AND SO LONG AS YOU GREASE THE PALMS OF WASHINGTONS POLITICAL POWER BROKERS, WE'LL MERELY drag you through a trial, but we will not do anything at all that might actually remove you from that monopoly. Keep your prices high enough to pay for the trial AND TO FUND THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS OF WASHINGTONS POWER BROKERS, and you'll be fine. IN SHORT, THERE ARE NO CRIMES IN AMERICA SO LONG AS YOU CAN AFFORD TO BRIBE THE "LEADERS".
"It is too bad that an alternate registry cannot gain enough momentum to actually compete versus ICANN."
Is that really true? Or is that just the way you've chosen to see it? I don't mean to sound like I'm attacking you, I'm not. Exercising your faith in this manner makes it true for you, thus making sure that you won't even bother to try to bring about the needed change. Thinking like this is why we are owned by the corps. Everyone just throws up their hands and says "Oh, there is no easy way around this, I guess we lost since there isn't an easy way to win." Then we all pretend we tried, when in reality, we didn't do jack but bitch and moan.
Be careful how you exercise your faith. For better or worse, it is to you according to your ability to believe.
"Or am I just out of touch with the politics here?"
No, you've obviously have been hit way too hard by a clue hammer.
Unfortunately, to understand ICANN, you have to be hopelessly without clue and/or possessed with the knowledge that whoever disagrees with you is wrong. It also helps to be on the corporate dole...
Squirrels tend to go for neutral colored lures, while birds like brightly colored lures, worms, and salmon eggs. Dogs will bite on just about any type of meat/meat byproduct, and humans, well, you just put a dollar on the hook and you see if you don't nab yourself a couple...
You'll also find it hard to digest food you don't have when our unmitigated over run of nature changes the climate and causes crops to fail in areas whose weather is changing as a result. Or to breathe when the things that put Oxygen in our atmosphere in the first place are wiped out to the point that their numbers can no longer sustain Human life in the numbers we currently enjoy.
But then, you could just subscribe to that school of "thought" that says that we can do whatever we want without any type of care or caution and nothing bad will ever happen. This would of course be in spite of a fairly detailed history of human beings bringing the worst tragedies on themselves, either through action, or through inaction.
But yeah, screw animals and the environment. They aren't humans!
"I have many friends who are part of the US Armed Services and have traveled the World quite extensively in just a few short years."
I got the idea that he wanted to see the world, not destroy it. Oh, I know, the military doesn't really destroy the world. They just destroy the people that the corporations tell the leaders to destroy. My bad...
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone who dates girls who only want to watch chickflicks is one pussy-whooped chump.
I personally would rather masterbate with a cheese grater than sit through hours of chickflicks...
And yes, there are sexually attractive/active women out there who enjoy watching things other than sap movies. You just need to have the balls to ask them out...
I keep hearing this stated, but no one goes into detail about it, so I'm gonna ask.
What restrictions are you referring to? I'm asking sincerely, no antagonism, I've just never heard this explained and I'd like to. I'd really appreciate an explanation or a link to a website that contains one. Thanks!
"Do you regret Lucifer's Hammer et al?"
Is that the only Niven/Pournelle collaboration you're aware of? Some of Nivens best books were collaborations with Pournelle. That fact, in itself, answers your question quite well.
The Mote in God's Eye
Lucifers Hammer
Footfall
to name my three favorites.
Do you advocate Rishathra and if so, could you recommend a species that is particularly good at it?
My, uh, friend wants to know...
The sign of too much education: One vainly imagines themself better than others.
Result? They do something idiotic like posting replies to themselves, with the original post they're replying to as the "reply".
Bravo, non-idiot, bravo.
"No offense, but are you an idiot?"
At times, yes.
"I ask because clearly, only an idiot could have missed the dripping sarcasm of the post to which you replied."
When you're done wiping the drool from your chin, take a few breaths, and repeat after me:
I will not post a reply in which I call another an idiot, as a reply to the reply in which I call another an idiot.
You feel better yet genius?
Ya know clown, Sarcasm isn't always apparent. And yes I do read quite a bit, and write, and I also drip sarcasm at times myself.
But when you grow up and graduate high school, you'll recognize that Sarcasm isn't always apparent and that you yourself, will miss it at times. Let's hope you won't think yourself an idiot for doing so.
... are all full of shit. Don't put your faith in any of them, cuz none of them will be there for you when the shit hits the fan. Study the bible and other religious texts, start your own family, and get politically active, but make sure your faith is in God alone, and no other people/person.
Don't buy Kurt Saxon books, the guys a retard. Don't listen to Rush Limbaugh, he's full of shit. Don't work in the computer industry, because after 5 years in the industry, you'll lose your love of them and it will take you another 6 years of soul searching to find it again(although you still won't have found your love of gaming again).
Don't believe in any corp you work for, just do your job, keep your mouth shut, and be expecting them to try to screw you and everyone else who pours their lives into their mission. They don't give a damn about you, it doesn't matter what your charismatic CEOs have to say. You are nothing more than human fuel, and when they've gotten what they need from you, you will be discarded like human debris. No, it won't matter how good you are or how hard you work. Remember, ask for the sky, and while you won't get it, you'll do a lot better than asking them for what you think is fair, because they won't give you that if you do.
"I'm sure you meant to say, America and the USSR, right? We can share this particular blame."
:)
You are right, the USSR definetly did such things too. I didn't mention it because I am one of those US centric Americans.
I want to point out that my point wasn't about blaming America... I was using a mistake that America made to demonstrate the need for well reasoned level headedness when developing new technologies.
Besides, when the commies do something stupid, that's just stupid old communism. When the US does something stupid, its just a grave error in judgement made out of the deepest sense of patriotic conviction that originates in the subcochle area... I think...
"I for one am glad to see the US government taking such a positive stance on potential problem substances and technologies."
Spoken like a true coward.
"Oh help me government, save me from the potential dangers in life! Please, for God sake! Ban shit now, before it's too late! But please, for the Love of God, don't stop doing all the jacked up things you've done to make me a target. Please don't! I just want to be less free, I don't really want you to do anything that could make me less a target."
"Anti-cloning zealots are going to have a ball with this"
I'm not a zealot either way on the issue, but I know this, had America listened to the Anti-Nuke zealots back in the 50's and not experimented in the atmosphere with nuclear weapons without fully understanding what they were doing, 15,000 people would not have died from the fallout, and some hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions, would not have had the vast increase in disease that occured as a result.
It is a headstrong fool that rushes forward without carefully considering all sides and perspectives of an issue. Logic would dictate that research should be conducted to find out if this is going to be a problem for clones in general, before anyone begins to attack others for their viewpoints.
I mean seriously, with the evidence available, your finding fault with "anti-cloning zealots" is itself, dogmatic zealotry, because you sure as hell don't know if they're wrong.
If you do, then by all means, shine your light that we may all share your insight.
"Why would Microsoft care about Opera?"
Opera is becoming a serious contender in the mobile arena. This is an area that Microsoft cares a good deal about. Doing that to Mozilla would generate too much press, and as for Konqueror, that isn't even a real competitor on the windows platform or in the mobile arena.
They would do this. This is just the type of crap that monopolies pull, largely because they can.
"but it really looks like an honest typo in the style sheet. i can understand how they'd be pissed, but did they try contacting MS to get it fixed first? the fact that the server sends a client-specific style-sheet isn't exactly damning. it's a very common (though misguided) practice."
Why, you must be right. Microsoft doesn't have a well documented history of "competing" this way. I'm sure Bill Gates right now is working to fix the problem himself.
Those evil Opera bastards. How dare they reach conclusions based on Microsofts well documented past and accuse microsoft of malicious wrongdoing! When microsofts shit smells, looks, and feels like shit, it's just jumping to illogical and unreasonable conclusions to say it is shit.
Jeeze. People need to stop attributing malice to microsoft, that's not historically justified nor fair!
"Now that's a good response, punish everyone else because your ego got bruised becasue someone else did something the proper way."
Punish everyone else? Pardon me, but if I was spending my time maintaining a site out of genorisity, and someone sent me a legal notice(and I'm not a lawyer and really would rather not have to deal with one), I would do the same thing.
I have no problem with the rest of your reasoning, which I do find insightful, I just take issue with the way you phrased this, as if this guy is somehow punishing people and being illogical.
You gotta see it from the perspective of someone who just doesn't want to deal with legal headaches.
"My worry is the health of the planet in the mean time. I live in central Minnesota, USA. Our average high temperature this time of year is about 9 degrees F. Yesterday it was 55 degrees F. I know full well one warm winter does not global warming make, but we've had several bizzarely warm years lately. We're s--tting where we eat and it worries me."
Don't worry about it. I'm sure after the polar ice caps melt and we all have to get oxygen machines to compress the oxygen in the air to make it breatheable, someone in power will take it seriously.
In the mean time, just buy an SUV, vote for one of the big two political parties, and don't worry about it. That's what most Americans are doing, why shouldn't you?
"The actual name of the game is "which eyeballs". Ad targetting is where profit is made for content producers. Per-impression charges rise dramatically when you can tie the ad to a particular demograph."
:)
Actually, I think "which eyeballs" would be a play in the game of eyeballs. That would depend, and I'll admit my ignorance here, on whether it's more important to have 2 million impressions in general, or have 2 thousand whose demographics you thoroughly understand.
I guess that's probably the question their asking themselves. I hope they do it as I'm pretty sure I can see what will happen. "Tie two birds together, and though they have four wings, they still can not fly."
"TW does not make money off of online content (or not much, anyway). They make it off of print adv. Online versions are supplements to the ones in print.
:)
Ah, so that explains why they would consider this. I had no clue, thanks for hitting me with that beloved hammer.
Unless this hurts their print readership, this seems like a good idea.
I still think they will make themselves less relevant by this, which will hurt their readership in the long run. But, that is my opinion. I hope they do this.
"It doesn't matter whether or not they lose readers. It matters whether or not they make more money."
Um, when a media company loses readers or consumers of that media, that company will lose money, not to mention relevance, and power.
You are right, that *IF* they can get enough AOL subscribers to make up for their lost advertising revenue, then it might be worth it, but that seems like betting on a long shot. Anyone going to give up their DSL line to subscribe to AOL? Anyone going to pay an extra monthly fee to use AOL over their DSL lines, just to get access to their content? I'm asking this of slashdot readers, would anyone out there actually do this?
With the media, the name of the game is eyeballs. The more eyeballs you have, the more you can charge for advertising revenue. If you begin keeping people from your content, they will simply go elsewhere, and thus you will experience a lower demand for your advertising services. I seriously doubt anyone, beyond a few oddballs, are going to subscribe to AOL just to get access to a particular media outlet, especially one as commerical as that.
As far as I'm concerned, I hope they do do it. This is one company I have no warm fuzzy feelings for, so let them shoot themselves in the foot.
I agree they've made it tough to block if you're just targeting AOLs resource(as in time) sucking software. My experience is that most of the time for most offices (not counting tech companies), you don't want your users running ANY of the many time/bandwidth suckers out there. In that case, the following is extremely effective.
Block all internet traffic for your desktop machines at the router/firewall/whatever, and force all web browsing through a squid proxy on a server that is not blocked. This breaks virtually all messaging and file sharing software, while also generally accelerating web browsing. Any users with special needs can be explicitly allowed through the router.
Be sure to have a cache only dns server on your side of the link, and voila: Instant messanger stops working (and Aol doesn't get jack), you improve the web browsing experience for your users, and any new messaging programs/file sharing programs won't work. Win win win!
Then you can spend that 35 bucks times X number of employees, which in my case comes to over 10 thousand bucks, on new hardware like switch upgrades, router upgrades, and the like, which will really make you look good.
"The message has gone out - illegally monopolise, and we'll drag you through a trial, but we will not do anything at all that might actually remove you from that monopoly. Keep your prices high enough to pay for the trial, and you'll be fine."
You missed a critical part of the message. My additions in all CAPS because I'm too lazy to use html to make them italics:
The message has gone out - illegally monopolise AND SO LONG AS YOU GREASE THE PALMS OF WASHINGTONS POLITICAL POWER BROKERS, WE'LL MERELY drag you through a trial, but we will not do anything at all that might actually remove you from that monopoly. Keep your prices high enough to pay for the trial AND TO FUND THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS OF WASHINGTONS POWER BROKERS, and you'll be fine. IN SHORT, THERE ARE NO CRIMES IN AMERICA SO LONG AS YOU CAN AFFORD TO BRIBE THE "LEADERS".
There, now the message is crystal clear.
"It is too bad that an alternate registry cannot gain enough momentum to actually compete versus ICANN."
Is that really true? Or is that just the way you've chosen to see it? I don't mean to sound like I'm attacking you, I'm not. Exercising your faith in this manner makes it true for you, thus making sure that you won't even bother to try to bring about the needed change. Thinking like this is why we are owned by the corps. Everyone just throws up their hands and says "Oh, there is no easy way around this, I guess we lost since there isn't an easy way to win." Then we all pretend we tried, when in reality, we didn't do jack but bitch and moan.
Be careful how you exercise your faith. For better or worse, it is to you according to your ability to believe.
"Or am I just out of touch with the politics here?"
No, you've obviously have been hit way too hard by a clue hammer.
Unfortunately, to understand ICANN, you have to be hopelessly without clue and/or possessed with the knowledge that whoever disagrees with you is wrong. It also helps to be on the corporate dole...
Squirrels tend to go for neutral colored lures, while birds like brightly colored lures, worms, and salmon eggs. Dogs will bite on just about any type of meat/meat byproduct, and humans, well, you just put a dollar on the hook and you see if you don't nab yourself a couple...
You'll also find it hard to digest food you don't have when our unmitigated over run of nature changes the climate and causes crops to fail in areas whose weather is changing as a result. Or to breathe when the things that put Oxygen in our atmosphere in the first place are wiped out to the point that their numbers can no longer sustain Human life in the numbers we currently enjoy.
But then, you could just subscribe to that school of "thought" that says that we can do whatever we want without any type of care or caution and nothing bad will ever happen. This would of course be in spite of a fairly detailed history of human beings bringing the worst tragedies on themselves, either through action, or through inaction.
But yeah, screw animals and the environment. They aren't humans!
"I have many friends who are part of the US Armed Services and have traveled the World quite extensively in just a few short years."
I got the idea that he wanted to see the world, not destroy it. Oh, I know, the military doesn't really destroy the world. They just destroy the people that the corporations tell the leaders to destroy. My bad...