Re:Electronics/Computers are not the only items
on
Where Computers Go To Die
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
does an extremely good job raising public awareness and outright sabotaging the attempts to send them to third world breaker yards. Want no more ships to reach India and kill people there - give them some money (disclaimer - I do).
So when one of those out and out sabotage attempts actually ends up spreading asbestos in your hometown, you will have no problems with your neighbors conducting out and out sabotage of the earning potential of Greenpeace contributors (such as yourself), I hope. Fair is fair after all.
And go to jail. Messing with the military's computers even to do something in a better way is a severe Career Limiting Activity. The military isn't a democracy, and likes things done through the chain of command.
As someone who finally gave up after Morrowind, this does not suprise me at all. All of Bethesda's Elder Scrolls games have been buggy train wrecks on release day. In at least one of them (Daggerfall, if I recall correctly) the manual actually talked of the gods sometime getting angry with you and letting you "fall out of the world." That's right, the geometry was bad and they shipped it as a "feature" not a bug. Sheesh.
It also isn't the first time that save game corruption has reared its ugly head on the bug list either. That's great, you save a lot to avoid the crash bugs, and still have to do everything all over again because the game ate your saves. I paid money for this? Perhaps if quality control was put somewhere ahead of cleaning their toenails by the powers that be at Bethesda, I'd consider picking this up.
And, of course, if I decide to add BluRay/HDVD at some point in the future (i.e. when the market has decided which - if either - deserves to survive), I'll be able to do so for probably £30 or less.
Possibly not. There's been talk that the video cards needed to decode DRMed HD content simply will not be available to the home user. The copy control folks want to validate entire systems, not just components now. Since you are in the UK, you might avoid this, but this isn't being pushed as a legistlative matter, but rather a contractual one. Manufacturers simply don't get a set of keys if they don't agree to the terms.
Europeans just go around assimilating and killing throughout history - Microsoft is the pinnacle of this.
Oh, please. This remark is so ignorant that your diplomas should be revoked and you should be forced to repeat your education beginning with the third grade. Microsoft ain't the pinnacle of Western imperialism. As far as I know they lack the army and the record of dead bodies that the true contenders for that title share.
What you fail to realize is that all of the emacs features are already activated. After all, considering WoW's performance when I am in Ironforge on Cenarion Circle, the server side software is already running as an elisp macro.
Somehow I think IBM will have a side deal with Lenovo to get their machines without a Windows tax. After all, even Bill blinks when the butchers of Tianemen tell him to jump, so it's not like he's going to threaten them over it.
Property is what we define it (in the law) to be. Jefferson thought so, which is why he was able to hold blacks in bondage. For all his writings, and yes I do know the draft of the Declaration included the establishment of chattel slavery in America as one of the Throne's crimes, his feet didn't walk the talk.
Property is what we define it to be. While my definition is much closer to your (and RMS') than to the RIAA's, classic liberals were amongst the biggest proponents of the ideas of copyright and patents, which is where the entire idea of "intellectual property" flows from. One notable exception was Thomas Jefferson, but I have trouble calling a slave-holding rapist a true "liberal."
Classically, liberals have great respect for property rights. I think it would be far more accurate to describe RMS' positions as socialist or communitarian, with a fair amout of anarchism thrown in. Not that that makes his views necessarily wrong, it only describes them more accurately.
It's probably been already said, but the sense I get is that the machines are barely capable of capturing the video without dropping frames to begin with. The added CPU load of Norton CycleSuck, err antivirus, would cause the machines to fail to capture a clean image. I think this speaks more toward the lack of vision by the company in question, as they seem unwilling to actually spend what is needed to do the job.
One possible solution would be to connect the camera machines to the host server via VPN, and have that VPN connection tunneling those ports be the only internet connection for the machine. I have a feeling that this will cost too much however, and that the real goal is to find some free way to patch up the security mess that they are saddled with because of budget constraints.
Millions of subscribers seem to argue against it being "crap design." No good for you, perhaps, and that is fine. I do not enjoy first person shooters myself, but I don't call Half Life 2 or Medal of Honor "crap designs."
If you don't enjoy it, by all means don't play. It is a game after all, and the point is to have fun. If you aren't then find something else. But please spare us the self-righteous insults, m'kay?
It may not make sense, but it is settled law. It is quite unusual for the Supreme Court to overturn precedent, which is one of the things that make Brown v. Board of Education such an unusual case. Furthermore, as currently constituted this court is far more likely to re-open Roe than to spend any time whatsoever making it harder for corporations to lobby. It is going to take a major sea change in Congress, followed by a veto-proof amendment, followed by state legislature approval to change this. As I stated earlier, it isn't likely and arguing otherwise is spitting futilely into the wind.
Then where's the Big E's avionics suite? There's nothing but blank panels in the cockpit according to a friend that works at Veazy. It needed those for its tests. NASA stripped every usuable part from that airframe save the frame and the tiles themselves. They even took the leading edge carbon-carbon panels for the Columbia investigation.
My understanding is that Enterprise is pretty much stripped at this point. A lot of Endeavor is actually Enterprise, and Enterprise never carried any propulsion parts as all that was needed was boilerplate parts of the same mass for the drop tests. What is sitting at Dulles is an airframe with some sheet metal and spare tiles slapped on it.
Would you like a pony while you are waving your imaginary magic wand around Gandork? We're dealing with reality here, not your fantasy world, and to get those rulings overturned, it's going to take an amendment or two. The courts ain't going to change them. They've been asked to for almost a century in the case of the corporations as people ruling.
Yes, but Canada's Constitution doesn't contain this line:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
The bold part is the problem. The courts have ruled contributions to be a form of petition as I understand it.
Now, with OSs that nearly force you to NOT know about computers (by hiding everything behind purty graphics) people know even less about how their computers interact with the OS.
Yeah, 'cause cars were so much better when everyone driving them needed to know how all about them rather than hiding everything behind purty dashboards. A computer is a tool and the simplest to use tool that completely accomplishes the job is the best one to use. I do not feel like going back to punch cards or flipping registers on the front panel to load bootstrap code, thank you very much. (And yes, I have done both as part of my employment. I guess that makes me an old fart.)
As long as you also ban all political contributions from non-individuals. That includes unions, the EFF, trade associations, and the political parties themselves. Might look nice in a utopian world, but it ain't going to happen. I will repeat: the Constitution specifically protects the idea of people coming together to express a viewpoint. The Supreme Court has ruled that contributing money is a protected form of such expression. You can rant about that all you want -- but it won't do one damn bit of good. Short of an amendment, this is settled law.
I propose that all media outlets be required to dedicate a certain percentage of their space to this purpose. It can be part of their licensing fees.
Including Slashdot? Or does "media" not include the net?
Furthermore, with the ruling that cash == speech, there is no way to cap or equalize spending. It's unconstitutional prior restraint. Yes, it sucks, but that is the law as written. You can force someone to forgo government assistance if they spend beyond a certain limit, but you cannot limit the amount of someone's personal fortune if they choose to spend it on their personal candidacy. I fully expect the next GOP candidate for President to reject matching funds so he can spend without restraint. There's no legal way to stop it from happening and they are the party of money.
Because its shareholders are largely voters. The Supreme Court has ruled money to be speech, and the Right of the People to assemble to petition the government for redress of grievances is in the Constitution. Like it or not, a corporation is an assembly of some of the People, just like a union, or political party.
I agree it stinks, but I'm not exactly sure how we stop it short of a constitutional amendment, and if that amendment is too broadly worded, the cure could be worse than the disease.
I homebrew, and your argument is as full of gas as a primary fermenter about six hours after pitching.
In the developed world birthrates are falling. It appears that when tomorrow is somewhat assured through retirement pensions, medical care, and the like, the need to have many children to guarantee care in your old age vanishes. Furthermore, when birth control becomes readily available, it turns out that many women want to take advantage of it to limit the number of times they go through childbirth.
Mr. Malthus expected us to breed our way out of our resources back in the 1800s, and there is someone who comes up with that cannard every generation it seems. The Earth most definitely has a carrying capacity, but no one seems to know what that capacity actually is.
I think it's pretty clearly anticompetitive, when you're pushing someone to write software that is specifically noncompliant with a competitors hardware.
Stupid perhaps, but hardly anticompetitive. It's not like someone couldn't launch a competitor to Skype that offers these features in a platform independent way. If you feel otherwise, then Apple should have sued Intel and AMD for funding software that did not run on the PowerPC platform, no? They didn't because they knew that there's nothing illegal going on here, just business decisions. (and poor ones at that, in my opinion).
Or is it a liability type thing -- "your computer was used, so it doesn't matter who used it, you pay either way" ?
Ding! This is not a criminal proceeding, but a civil suit. A far more extreme example would be suing someone who allowed a murderer to get a hold of an otherwise legally obtained gun. They can't prove you committed the murder, but they can argue that your lack of security on the firearm contributed to the crime so you have some civil liability. And in civil court you only need a preponderance of the evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
The analogy isn't perfect of course, but the important thing to remember is that these lawsuits are civil matters and have lower standards of proof.
Slashdot Mirror
So when one of those out and out sabotage attempts actually ends up spreading asbestos in your hometown, you will have no problems with your neighbors conducting out and out sabotage of the earning potential of Greenpeace contributors (such as yourself), I hope. Fair is fair after all.
Key word being "legacy." The original poster was suggesting a new deployment. That is what is barred by the reg from my reading of it.
And go to jail. Messing with the military's computers even to do something in a better way is a severe Career Limiting Activity. The military isn't a democracy, and likes things done through the chain of command.
It also isn't the first time that save game corruption has reared its ugly head on the bug list either. That's great, you save a lot to avoid the crash bugs, and still have to do everything all over again because the game ate your saves. I paid money for this? Perhaps if quality control was put somewhere ahead of cleaning their toenails by the powers that be at Bethesda, I'd consider picking this up.
After the fifth patch. Just to be sure.
Possibly not. There's been talk that the video cards needed to decode DRMed HD content simply will not be available to the home user. The copy control folks want to validate entire systems, not just components now. Since you are in the UK, you might avoid this, but this isn't being pushed as a legistlative matter, but rather a contractual one. Manufacturers simply don't get a set of keys if they don't agree to the terms.
Oh, please. This remark is so ignorant that your diplomas should be revoked and you should be forced to repeat your education beginning with the third grade. Microsoft ain't the pinnacle of Western imperialism. As far as I know they lack the army and the record of dead bodies that the true contenders for that title share.
On a Coleco Adam.
Somehow I think IBM will have a side deal with Lenovo to get their machines without a Windows tax. After all, even Bill blinks when the butchers of Tianemen tell him to jump, so it's not like he's going to threaten them over it.
Property is what we define it (in the law) to be. Jefferson thought so, which is why he was able to hold blacks in bondage. For all his writings, and yes I do know the draft of the Declaration included the establishment of chattel slavery in America as one of the Throne's crimes, his feet didn't walk the talk.
Property is what we define it to be. While my definition is much closer to your (and RMS') than to the RIAA's, classic liberals were amongst the biggest proponents of the ideas of copyright and patents, which is where the entire idea of "intellectual property" flows from. One notable exception was Thomas Jefferson, but I have trouble calling a slave-holding rapist a true "liberal."
Classically, liberals have great respect for property rights. I think it would be far more accurate to describe RMS' positions as socialist or communitarian, with a fair amout of anarchism thrown in. Not that that makes his views necessarily wrong, it only describes them more accurately.
One possible solution would be to connect the camera machines to the host server via VPN, and have that VPN connection tunneling those ports be the only internet connection for the machine. I have a feeling that this will cost too much however, and that the real goal is to find some free way to patch up the security mess that they are saddled with because of budget constraints.
If you don't enjoy it, by all means don't play. It is a game after all, and the point is to have fun. If you aren't then find something else. But please spare us the self-righteous insults, m'kay?
It may not make sense, but it is settled law. It is quite unusual for the Supreme Court to overturn precedent, which is one of the things that make Brown v. Board of Education such an unusual case. Furthermore, as currently constituted this court is far more likely to re-open Roe than to spend any time whatsoever making it harder for corporations to lobby. It is going to take a major sea change in Congress, followed by a veto-proof amendment, followed by state legislature approval to change this. As I stated earlier, it isn't likely and arguing otherwise is spitting futilely into the wind.
Then where's the Big E's avionics suite? There's nothing but blank panels in the cockpit according to a friend that works at Veazy. It needed those for its tests. NASA stripped every usuable part from that airframe save the frame and the tiles themselves. They even took the leading edge carbon-carbon panels for the Columbia investigation.
My understanding is that Enterprise is pretty much stripped at this point. A lot of Endeavor is actually Enterprise, and Enterprise never carried any propulsion parts as all that was needed was boilerplate parts of the same mass for the drop tests. What is sitting at Dulles is an airframe with some sheet metal and spare tiles slapped on it.
Would you like a pony while you are waving your imaginary magic wand around Gandork? We're dealing with reality here, not your fantasy world, and to get those rulings overturned, it's going to take an amendment or two. The courts ain't going to change them. They've been asked to for almost a century in the case of the corporations as people ruling.
The bold part is the problem. The courts have ruled contributions to be a form of petition as I understand it.
Yeah, 'cause cars were so much better when everyone driving them needed to know how all about them rather than hiding everything behind purty dashboards. A computer is a tool and the simplest to use tool that completely accomplishes the job is the best one to use. I do not feel like going back to punch cards or flipping registers on the front panel to load bootstrap code, thank you very much. (And yes, I have done both as part of my employment. I guess that makes me an old fart.)
As long as you also ban all political contributions from non-individuals. That includes unions, the EFF, trade associations, and the political parties themselves. Might look nice in a utopian world, but it ain't going to happen. I will repeat: the Constitution specifically protects the idea of people coming together to express a viewpoint. The Supreme Court has ruled that contributing money is a protected form of such expression. You can rant about that all you want -- but it won't do one damn bit of good. Short of an amendment, this is settled law.
Including Slashdot? Or does "media" not include the net?
Furthermore, with the ruling that cash == speech, there is no way to cap or equalize spending. It's unconstitutional prior restraint. Yes, it sucks, but that is the law as written. You can force someone to forgo government assistance if they spend beyond a certain limit, but you cannot limit the amount of someone's personal fortune if they choose to spend it on their personal candidacy. I fully expect the next GOP candidate for President to reject matching funds so he can spend without restraint. There's no legal way to stop it from happening and they are the party of money.
I agree it stinks, but I'm not exactly sure how we stop it short of a constitutional amendment, and if that amendment is too broadly worded, the cure could be worse than the disease.
In the developed world birthrates are falling. It appears that when tomorrow is somewhat assured through retirement pensions, medical care, and the like, the need to have many children to guarantee care in your old age vanishes. Furthermore, when birth control becomes readily available, it turns out that many women want to take advantage of it to limit the number of times they go through childbirth.
Mr. Malthus expected us to breed our way out of our resources back in the 1800s, and there is someone who comes up with that cannard every generation it seems. The Earth most definitely has a carrying capacity, but no one seems to know what that capacity actually is.
Stupid perhaps, but hardly anticompetitive. It's not like someone couldn't launch a competitor to Skype that offers these features in a platform independent way. If you feel otherwise, then Apple should have sued Intel and AMD for funding software that did not run on the PowerPC platform, no? They didn't because they knew that there's nothing illegal going on here, just business decisions. (and poor ones at that, in my opinion).
Ding! This is not a criminal proceeding, but a civil suit. A far more extreme example would be suing someone who allowed a murderer to get a hold of an otherwise legally obtained gun. They can't prove you committed the murder, but they can argue that your lack of security on the firearm contributed to the crime so you have some civil liability. And in civil court you only need a preponderance of the evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
The analogy isn't perfect of course, but the important thing to remember is that these lawsuits are civil matters and have lower standards of proof.