For one, you can buy legal downloads from Bleep, which Warp Records (Aphex Twin, Autechre, Non Prophets, Prefuse 73) started, and apparently also features artists on other labels, such as Ninja Tune, Domino, etc. Warp started out putting out electronic music, mostly IDM-ish stuff, but lately they've been putting out good music from across the board.
Uh, no. No it doesn't. It does mean that your kids can give them your personal info, though. Of course, that's only if it stores your personal data, and doesn't protect it in any way; I can't imagine that in this day and age any company would be so willfully negligent of security, however.
Right before I went to college (Fall of 2000), I bought an HP Pavillion something-or-other, set it up to dual-boot Linux 2.2.something-or-other, and took it to school. It took me under three days to bork up the Win98SE installation to the point that reformatting/reinstalling was easier. So I reformatted the Windows drive, popped in the HP Recovery Disc, restarted, and...Oops, Sorry! You needed to have Windows already installed for their recovery cd to work, essentially meaning that the recovery cd was no more than an installer for all the bloatware that the OEM thinks you might be really interested in having on your computer. What kind of recovery is that?
I'm still pretty pissed at HP, whatever their reasoning was. I hadn't any other OEM computer at the time not coming with a Windows install disc. I honestly wouldn't have minded if they sent a recovery disc that was locked to my computer, I just want to know that if I'm paying for an OEM license (even implicitly), I want the ability to reinstall the software on the same computer as many times as I want.
After all, do you see people expecting to buy and use a car with zero training, no licence or maintenance? Why do they apply a different standard to computers?
Especially since my computer was about twice as expensive as my first car.
How long before the RIAA gets permission to DDoS file-sharers, or entire P2P networks?
Didn't...this already happen? I can't find an article offhand (Googling mostly gives back results about the RIAA website getting DOSd. I'm not sure of the outcome, but I do know that a few years ago, the RIAA sought amnesty from laws regarding DOS attacks, so that they could DOS "known pirates". I'm not sure if they were ever granted anything relating to this though..but judging by the fact that I can't find anything relating to the subject, I'd guess that nothing ever came of it.
the "Underrated" modifier add to your karma without changing the tag on the comment score? I thought that was in the FAQ, but maybe it only modifies the comment score, and not your karma.
With Spider-Man 3 (May 2007) and the Transformers (July 2007) coming out in the same summer, it looks like I'll be spending a lot of time in the theatre in 2007!
Yes, precisely. I'd estimate about 4 hours, which beats the crap out of the number of hours I've spent at the theatre this summer.
The Creative Commons license is often heralded among certain music circles, because it affords an artist the ability to remix and mash licensed songs as they see fit for non-commercial purposes...personally, I can't wait to make my own 'remixed' versions of Cringely's show for my own nefarious purposes.
Oh man, that sucks! I guess I better turn off all caching in my browser, lest I get sued for copyright infringement, because it's storing and rebroadcasting copyrighted materials that you may no longer want me to see at later date.
However, if you RTFA'd, you'd know that lots of IP law firms use the Wayback Machine on a daily basis, and in fact, the company suing the Internet Archive is not suing them for republishing copyrighted information. Rather, the case is that they recently placed a robots.txt file on their site that disallows viewing historical versions of the website, and the Archive is being sued because the Wayback Machine apparently ignored the robots.txt file (which, I might note is a voluntary standard, and by no means implies a contract between the two parties), which the plaintiff claims violates the DMCA. This has nothing to do with copyright violation.
The _first_ sentence on the download page for AMD's CodeAnalyst: "The AMD CodeAnalyst(TM) Performance Analyzer is a suite of powerful tools that analyzes software performance on AMD microprocessors."
Also, note that no AMD processors are present on the list of supported processors on the Sys Reqs page for Intel's VTune.
Personally, I have no idea why on Earth you'd be downloading a trial for VTune, while using an AMD proc (as far as I can tell, CodeAnalyst, by comparison,is free). I do agree that they should have popped up a dialog saying "Hey, jerk! What do you think you're trying to pull?" or something along those lines, but in this case you blatantly disregarded: 1.) the clearly stated system requirements, and 2.) common sense.
A simple, fun story is one thing. Standing in line for hours, waiting to purchase a simple, fun (but utterly unfulfilling and contentless) story is something else entirely.
All.NET code is interpreted by the Common Language Runtime Just-in-time compiler, and ngen can compile all necessary code to native binary. AFAIK, you'll still need the CLR on-site, since it doesn't package system libraries...yeah, it can be done.
Yeah, I read an article on either Tomshardware or Anandtech at least a year and a half ago, comparing the Opteron and the Itanium, and I was thoroughly impressed with the technology surrounding the Itanium, straight down to the IA64 instruction set's design.
GMusic store will allow you search 7 billion recordings using lyrics, instruments used, and sound patterns.
"Man, I've had these three PCM frames stuck in my head all day: 21C9, 94C2, 1D32! I can't wait till I can get home to GMusic and figure out what song it is!"
..just because I'm an electronic music geek. Programs that add micro-quantization errors are definitely key, actually, I think I remember Cakewalk being able to "mess up" the quantization of midi notes pretty far back in the version history.
In addition, I had a professor for an electronic music class that had written a genetic algorithm system for jazz improvisation, and would use it to back himself up on trumpet.
"Imperfectness"? Check. Improvisation? Check. Next question?
The problem with your logic here, and it's not necessarily a fault, it sounds like you're a physical scientist, is that you're not all that up on "best practices" among software engineers, a quality that Microsoft [at least believes its] employees exemplify. What most people cry about with regard to Microsoft interviews are the "CS 101" questions, which _are_ to some degree utterly banal to ask. The truth is, especially with regard to Microsoft, you're virtually never going to have to reverse a string, nor insert a node into a linked list that you define yourself. Between the Windows API, MFC, COM,.NET, et al there are a myriad of "more safe" ways to do these things that are more practical, and even in the event that you're working for a project writing code beneath the published APIs, you're certainly working with internal function libraries; writing quicksort on a whiteboard in front of people is really not analogous whatsoever. As has been mentioned elsewhere, modern software engineering is only moderately associated with "coding", a lot of it is integration, we're finally just getting over the hump of constantly reinventing the wheel.
I'm not suggesting that you should be able to make a snap decision on someone after five minutes of technical shit-shooting; but honestly, if you're an established expert in your field, and the interviewing company has done the smallest measure of fact-checking and review of your resume, inane proficiency tests are demeaning to the everyone involved (IMO, it even marginalizes the field itself).
Similarly, when my parents finally made the switch to broadband, I had to come over and set up their computer, etc. I deleted the IE icon from the desktop and changed the name of the Firefox shortcut to "THE INTERNET".
Pish posh, that is sooo 80's. Today we sample everything to digital, and improv it with something like Ableton Live, or better yet, make our own samplers in Reaktor or Max/Msp.
Why exactly is that allowed? At least make the bastards advertise it on par with the 'features'.
Because for legal purposes, they're implicitly required to make you agree to a license agreement, which in most cases does state that, by default, or sometimes as a requirement of the license, they'll be installing the adware on your system.
By contrast, there's no requirement for a company to offer a "feature set" on their website, or anywhere else. I suppose you're proposing something like a Surgeon General's warning on cigarettes, but that seems like overkill to me, and I do hate ad/malware.
But more importantly, this sort of thing is exactly how the legislative branch of the US government works: "Sure, you can have this bill, but we're going to tack on some of our own additions that you probably haven't had time to read." Adware in EULAs Riders on bills. While again, I do hate adware, I really suggest we rout this process from our respective lawmaking bodies before we concentrate on [wah, wah] consumer electronics.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, Firefox extensions are written in XUL, which is inherently cross-platform. So yes, you get to enjoy it as well...if you have GreaseMonkey installed. Which, judging by the fact that you didn't know that Firefox extensions were cross-platform, I'm guessing you don't.
For one, you can buy legal downloads from Bleep, which Warp Records (Aphex Twin, Autechre, Non Prophets, Prefuse 73) started, and apparently also features artists on other labels, such as Ninja Tune, Domino, etc. Warp started out putting out electronic music, mostly IDM-ish stuff, but lately they've been putting out good music from across the board.
Uh, no. No it doesn't. It does mean that your kids can give them your personal info, though. Of course, that's only if it stores your personal data, and doesn't protect it in any way; I can't imagine that in this day and age any company would be so willfully negligent of security, however.
Right before I went to college (Fall of 2000), I bought an HP Pavillion something-or-other, set it up to dual-boot Linux 2.2.something-or-other, and took it to school. It took me under three days to bork up the Win98SE installation to the point that reformatting/reinstalling was easier. So I reformatted the Windows drive, popped in the HP Recovery Disc, restarted, and...Oops, Sorry! You needed to have Windows already installed for their recovery cd to work, essentially meaning that the recovery cd was no more than an installer for all the bloatware that the OEM thinks you might be really interested in having on your computer. What kind of recovery is that?
I'm still pretty pissed at HP, whatever their reasoning was. I hadn't any other OEM computer at the time not coming with a Windows install disc. I honestly wouldn't have minded if they sent a recovery disc that was locked to my computer, I just want to know that if I'm paying for an OEM license (even implicitly), I want the ability to reinstall the software on the same computer as many times as I want.
After all, do you see people expecting to buy and use a car with zero training, no licence or maintenance? Why do they apply a different standard to computers?
Especially since my computer was about twice as expensive as my first car.
How long before the RIAA gets permission to DDoS file-sharers, or entire P2P networks?
Didn't...this already happen? I can't find an article offhand (Googling mostly gives back results about the RIAA website getting DOSd. I'm not sure of the outcome, but I do know that a few years ago, the RIAA sought amnesty from laws regarding DOS attacks, so that they could DOS "known pirates". I'm not sure if they were ever granted anything relating to this though..but judging by the fact that I can't find anything relating to the subject, I'd guess that nothing ever came of it.
the "Underrated" modifier add to your karma without changing the tag on the comment score? I thought that was in the FAQ, but maybe it only modifies the comment score, and not your karma.
With Spider-Man 3 (May 2007) and the Transformers (July 2007) coming out in the same summer, it looks like I'll be spending a lot of time in the theatre in 2007!
Yes, precisely. I'd estimate about 4 hours, which beats the crap out of the number of hours I've spent at the theatre this summer.
The Creative Commons license is often heralded among certain music circles, because it affords an artist the ability to remix and mash licensed songs as they see fit for non-commercial purposes. ..personally, I can't wait to make my own 'remixed' versions of Cringely's show for my own nefarious purposes.
Oh man, that sucks! I guess I better turn off all caching in my browser, lest I get sued for copyright infringement, because it's storing and rebroadcasting copyrighted materials that you may no longer want me to see at later date.
However, if you RTFA'd, you'd know that lots of IP law firms use the Wayback Machine on a daily basis, and in fact, the company suing the Internet Archive is not suing them for republishing copyrighted information. Rather, the case is that they recently placed a robots.txt file on their site that disallows viewing historical versions of the website, and the Archive is being sued because the Wayback Machine apparently ignored the robots.txt file (which, I might note is a voluntary standard, and by no means implies a contract between the two parties), which the plaintiff claims violates the DMCA. This has nothing to do with copyright violation.
It has everything to do with robots.txt. Read.
They need to read books, litereature, histroy, etc.
What...the....hell? I could have sworn we were just having a conversation on literacy..
You laugh now, some people have already responded that _seriously_ thought that was the case.
The _first_ sentence on the download page for AMD's CodeAnalyst: "The AMD CodeAnalyst(TM) Performance Analyzer is a suite of powerful tools that analyzes software performance on AMD microprocessors."
Also, note that no AMD processors are present on the list of supported processors on the Sys Reqs page for Intel's VTune.
Personally, I have no idea why on Earth you'd be downloading a trial for VTune, while using an AMD proc (as far as I can tell, CodeAnalyst, by comparison,is free). I do agree that they should have popped up a dialog saying "Hey, jerk! What do you think you're trying to pull?" or something along those lines, but in this case you blatantly disregarded: 1.) the clearly stated system requirements, and 2.) common sense.
A simple, fun story is one thing. Standing in line for hours, waiting to purchase a simple, fun (but utterly unfulfilling and contentless) story is something else entirely.
...And I've got a little TIP for you, get the POINT?
ngen dot exe
.NET code is interpreted by the Common Language Runtime Just-in-time compiler, and ngen can compile all necessary code to native binary. AFAIK, you'll still need the CLR on-site, since it doesn't package system libraries...yeah, it can be done.
All
Yeah, I read an article on either Tomshardware or Anandtech at least a year and a half ago, comparing the Opteron and the Itanium, and I was thoroughly impressed with the technology surrounding the Itanium, straight down to the IA64 instruction set's design.
GMusic store will allow you search 7 billion recordings using lyrics, instruments used, and sound patterns.
"Man, I've had these three PCM frames stuck in my head all day: 21C9, 94C2, 1D32! I can't wait till I can get home to GMusic and figure out what song it is!"
..just because I'm an electronic music geek. Programs that add micro-quantization errors are definitely key, actually, I think I remember Cakewalk being able to "mess up" the quantization of midi notes pretty far back in the version history.
In addition, I had a professor for an electronic music class that had written a genetic algorithm system for jazz improvisation, and would use it to back himself up on trumpet.
"Imperfectness"? Check. Improvisation? Check.
Next question?
The problem with your logic here, and it's not necessarily a fault, it sounds like you're a physical scientist, is that you're not all that up on "best practices" among software engineers, a quality that Microsoft [at least believes its] employees exemplify. What most people cry about with regard to Microsoft interviews are the "CS 101" questions, which _are_ to some degree utterly banal to ask. The truth is, especially with regard to Microsoft, you're virtually never going to have to reverse a string, nor insert a node into a linked list that you define yourself. Between the Windows API, MFC, COM, .NET, et al there are a myriad of "more safe" ways to do these things that are more practical, and even in the event that you're working for a project writing code beneath the published APIs, you're certainly working with internal function libraries; writing quicksort on a whiteboard in front of people is really not analogous whatsoever. As has been mentioned elsewhere, modern software engineering is only moderately associated with "coding", a lot of it is integration, we're finally just getting over the hump of constantly reinventing the wheel.
I'm not suggesting that you should be able to make a snap decision on someone after five minutes of technical shit-shooting; but honestly, if you're an established expert in your field, and the interviewing company has done the smallest measure of fact-checking and review of your resume, inane proficiency tests are demeaning to the everyone involved (IMO, it even marginalizes the field itself).
someone's got a case of the Thursdays.
Similarly, when my parents finally made the switch to broadband, I had to come over and set up their computer, etc. I deleted the IE icon from the desktop and changed the name of the Firefox shortcut to "THE INTERNET".
Pish posh, that is sooo 80's. Today we sample everything to digital, and improv it with something like Ableton Live, or better yet, make our own samplers in Reaktor or Max/Msp.
Why exactly is that allowed? At least make the bastards advertise it on par with the 'features'.
Because for legal purposes, they're implicitly required to make you agree to a license agreement, which in most cases does state that, by default, or sometimes as a requirement of the license, they'll be installing the adware on your system.
By contrast, there's no requirement for a company to offer a "feature set" on their website, or anywhere else. I suppose you're proposing something like a Surgeon General's warning on cigarettes, but that seems like overkill to me, and I do hate ad/malware.
But more importantly, this sort of thing is exactly how the legislative branch of the US government works: "Sure, you can have this bill, but we're going to tack on some of our own additions that you probably haven't had time to read." Adware in EULAs Riders on bills. While again, I do hate adware, I really suggest we rout this process from our respective lawmaking bodies before we concentrate on [wah, wah] consumer electronics.