It was one of those old games that didn't properly handle increased clock rates
Dude, even Warcraft 2, and -- the greatest game of all time -- Ultima 7 don't handle increased clockspeed gracefully.
Fortunately for you and I, there's Mo'Slo! (www.hpaa.com) You run it like moslo/xx c:\full\path\to.exe, and the xx is the percent of your processor speed you want.
So to run CGA games, you just run them using only 10% of the processor. (You have to fiddle with it to get the speed right.) Breathes new life into all your old nostalgia-inducing games. (And, it's free as in beer for the "Trial" version, which is more than good enough.)
If Yahoo! had more cash reserves, I'd agree with you one hundred percent. Unfortunately, all the internet companies are scraping by on skimpy if not non-existant profit margins these days. Sure, it's nobler and more chivalrous to die for a cause that one believes in. But in the business world, that makes little sense.
If Yahoo! could afford it, I'd say "yes. they should stick it to the Chinese gov't and stand up for what they believe in."
But given how dire their financial straights are, you can't really blame theme for trying to get 800,000,000 more customers...
Im not going to cry when I can't use music-swappers illegally anymore.
Just to play devil's advocate: What about all the people who did use the service legally? There were plenty of people (myself, for instance) who actually downloaded music to test it -- and then bought it. And I also downloaded music that wasn't owned by the RIAA -- the content authors agree to let their music be distributed.
No, you're only going to cry when they go after something you use. But by then, you'll be lucky if anybody's going to have a shoulder for you to cry on.
"They came for the communists, but I wasn't a communist. They came for the terrorists, but I wasn't a terrorist. They came for the hackers, but I wasn't a hacker. Then they came for me, because I was the last one left."
True. But who used the internet in the early days? Did most people know it existed? Most people in America didn't have computers in their homes til the '90s, which is well after the infrastructure of the internet was already well in place.
If the government hadn't spent "our" money on "their" internet 20 years before, we wouldn't have it to share, now.
Most colleges with a school or dept. of continuing education accept almost exclusively students who have jobs, kids, and little money, and don't neccessarily want degrees, but just want to pick up a little advanced math in night school.
In the difference between the supermarket example and the radio example is what we call "Anti-trust law."
If I wanted to, I could open up my own supermarket. Buy Coca-cola, hot dogs, etc, at wholesale prices, and then resell them to folks like you for more money.
I can not, however, start my own radio station. The bandwidth is owned by the FCC and is auctioned off to corporations and individuals for use in a given area. The media conglomerates can price me *WAY* out of the game, so I'll never get an FM band to use.
So here we are, stuck with a few major players, who use their monopoly status and deep pockets to strong-arm anyone else out of the business.
That's what makes it a problem worth talking about.
You talked about "shareholder interest." Well, I'm sure I could find several hundred or thousand people in my area (Philadelphia) that would like to listen to an "Alternative" music station that played other, more off-beat music, and I could make them shareholders in my corporation if I were to sell stock. But the fact of the matter is that since I can't even get into the bandwidth game, that's a moot point.
Their "shareholders" are stifling competition, destroying innovation in the industry, and wrecking a public resource. (Yes, the radio waves are owned by the public. The FCC merely chooses who may broadcast on them. In my mind, throwing monopoly weight around on the airwaves wrecks a public resource.)
For me, the ultimate eyeball would have the following features:
1. Fast focussing. I want my eyes to adjust to light and dark quickly, and focus on an object near or far fast.
2. Filters. Cut down glare during the day.
3. Light enhancement at night. (I'd settle for green outlines like the army night-vis goggles gets)
4. Enhanced depth-of-field. If you focus on something close to your eyes, everything far away gets blurry. I'd like to be able to see both near and far clearly at once. (That'd go along with #1 well, too)
5. Zoom. At least 16x.
6. Protective covering like goggles. So I could see underwater.
Do you know that the Debian distribution calls their Linux "GNU/Linux"?
Yes, they do, but they also release a distribution which uses the HURD kernel, e.g., "GNU/HURD".
Furthermore, since Debian is the official GNU distribution, it'd be fitting for them to call it GNU/Linux. But that would mean it'd be equally fitting to refer to, say, Red Hat Linux, or Caldera Linux, or -- oh. Wait. Like we already do.
From the basic feeling I get from most people, "GNU/Linux" as a sticking point on the name of the system is essentially limitted to RMS and a few others. The VAST OVERWHELMING majority just refer to "Linux."
And its not picking on RMS "just for the fun of it." Frankly, it's BAD P.R. for him to go around telling LUGs to change their names to "GNU/Linux User Groups", insulting CEOs to their faces by correcting them midsentence when they're asking him questions, etc.
If he wants to be the self-appointed "champion spokesman" for Linux, he should realllly take a lesson in courtesy. Which sometimes means holding your damn opinion about what you call something, to yourself.
Where I work, there are Gigs of data stored in massive Oracle SQL databases.
Obviously, if you are asking this question, you don't need such a high powered system as this (we have a big-iron Sun machine that does the serving).
However, buying a powerful Dell Server, and running Access on Win2K would give you a decent SQL system to work with.
Applets can be written for any platform which will all use SQL and can then translate the results of the query into native stuff for the computer its on.
Furthermore, look into Macromedia ColdFusion. CF can be used to quickly create web-based systems which interface with an SQL database rediculously easy. (My department does just this.)
You can use a web app and a database to retrieve data and upload data, perform authentication, all sorts of great stuff.
Hey, it's slashdot. Of course these sorts of opinions are valid:)
But at any rate... paintball games can vary a lot. If you're on offense, and are running the flag, you spend most of your time running like hell, and you don't shoot much.
When I'm camped out in defense and people are swarming my base, I'll go through 100-200 rounds in a fifteen minute match, and won't have moved at all.
Right now, any old bum can steal a credit card and run down to Safeway
Right. And then you say "Ah crap." You call the credit card company. They say "no biggie." And you're limited to $50 in liability. They give you a new 12-digit number, and everyone goes home happy. Not a big deal.
I fail to see why this is a "big step up" or an "improvement." At some point, your biometric information is reduced to a series of zeroes and ones. Kinda like a credit card holds on its magnetic stripe. Except that you can only get a "new number" 10 times.
So fine, maybe they can't steal your physical credit card any more. But you do a lot of purchases over the phone or internet, right? So now you get a thumbscanner for your serial port, and you scan yourself when you want to make a purchase instead of typing in your twelve digit PIN. Since a bunch of zeroes and ones fly over the Internet in either case, this is no more secure at all!
Whatever the reason, if you are renting their service, you must agree to their stipulations - not the other way around. It's just like when you rent an apartment and the landlord says "no loud parties!" You'd have a tough time convincing him "But I BOUGHT the apartment, I can do whatever I want in it!"
This analogy clearly fails. Your's is a logical fallacy known as a bait-and-switch.
The original question was: "Does my use of cel phones to look at porn over the web harm anyone else?" You tried to compare this to hosting loud parties in your apartment -- a completely different scenario. If I hold loud parties in my apartment, it degrades the apartment-dwelling experience for my neighbors. The people upstairs can't sleep at night with the noise, the people downstairs have beer cans thrown on their porch, and its all just a big mess.
What data I download, however, regardless of its (im)moral content, is irrelevant. Whether I download email containing the four byte string "CAKE" or the four byte string "F***", the load on the network has been the same. If I'm a businessman who downloads some eighty-odd messages to my cel phone every two hours, that's 30 Kb of data. 30,000 bytes.
If I'm a guy who likes looking at nude pictures once in a while, a 30,000 byte GIF image is still 30,000 bytes. The load on the network has been the same.
ISPs have no right to regulate the content trafficking its network based on "moral" or any other perceived "value." The information in the bytes is irrelevant to the performance of the network.
To further pick at your argument, you state that "those who watch porn are less likely to pay the bills." If they don't pay the bills, they get disconnected. Simple as that. How does blocking porn from their network improve the financial value to the ISP? I fail to see the connection.
On a tangent, as long as I'm in the comment box. If the network does claim some "moral value" to the content on its network, and polices incoming data, I'd say that this would leave them in a dangerous legal quandry. Do/did Al Quaida operatives use Verizon cel phones in the USA? Just because it's not porn doesn't make it moral. If they are going to start denying packets based on their moral value, they'd better examine their ability to feasably do so, before they find themselves in some sort of lawsuit regarding discrimination, IMO.
Are we to understand that post-it notes and sharpie pens are now contraband circumvention devices? 3M is not going to like this, not one bit.
You know, that just might be the ticket. Is there a way to tell a District Attourney that he should bring suit against somebody for illegal activity? Tip off the DA that 3M is marketting items which may be used as circumvention devices.
3M will bring in their lawerly guns blazing, and will throw lots of corporate resources at smacking on DMCA; we get our precident by making big business do our fighting for us.
Can something like this work this way?
(As a manufacturer of floppy disks, e.g., media which would be forced to have circumvention protection systems built in if CDTBPA (Is that the right 'nym?), etc, are passed, I'm sure that 3M is interested in getting rid of these laws...)
Well, clearly everybody here is correct, however nobody's specifying the speed of light through what. The speed of light particles through a pure vacuum is 3.0e+8 meters per second, however it is thought to be slower through air or other dense media. Everyone's just responding in their own frame of reference.:)
There was a time when it was called usenet. Unless you have been living in a cave you will know that Google bought the usenet and renamed it to google groups.
Uhm. Here, I must disagree with you. They didn't "Buy the USENET" in the same way that it is impossible to "Buy the web" or "Buy Email."
They did, however, successfully purchase an archive of the last twenty years of USENET posts, and currently archive all USENET posts made today. Their copy/mirror of USENET is called "Google Groups."
Thats like requiring car manufacturers to make sure all their vehicles can use diesel, gasoline, petroleum, electricity, fuel cells and ethenol, and have them interchangable.
No, it's like telling a gas station that regardless of if you're driving a Chevy Impala, a Ford Mustang, or a Mercedes that they have to be able to fill your tank up.
"Oh, sorry, we're allied with GM. Did you consider selling your VW and buying a Geo? That way, we could sell you fuel."
If you're in a town where only general motors cars can get fuel, and you really need gas for your BMW, you're S.O.L., even though there's not a good reason why you can't buy fuel there: it'll still work in your car.
If a place only sells diesel fuel and you need regular unleaded, that's one thing. But two cars that both can use premium should be able to buy premium from the same vendor.
Slashdot Mirror
Scotty: "I just can't do it captain! I don't have the power!"
:)
"It's not the size of the render farm, it's how you use it."
And of course, let's all imagine a Beowulf cluster of... oh. wait. Right.
(Obligatory. Didn't say it was funny)
It was one of those old games that didn't properly handle increased clock rates
/xx c:\full\path\to.exe, and the xx is the percent of your processor speed you want.
Dude, even Warcraft 2, and -- the greatest game of all time -- Ultima 7 don't handle increased clockspeed gracefully.
Fortunately for you and I, there's Mo'Slo! (www.hpaa.com) You run it like moslo
So to run CGA games, you just run them using only 10% of the processor. (You have to fiddle with it to get the speed right.) Breathes new life into all your old nostalgia-inducing games. (And, it's free as in beer for the "Trial" version, which is more than good enough.)
If Yahoo! had more cash reserves, I'd agree with you one hundred percent. Unfortunately, all the internet companies are scraping by on skimpy if not non-existant profit margins these days. Sure, it's nobler and more chivalrous to die for a cause that one believes in. But in the business world, that makes little sense.
If Yahoo! could afford it, I'd say "yes. they should stick it to the Chinese gov't and stand up for what they believe in."
But given how dire their financial straights are, you can't really blame theme for trying to get 800,000,000 more customers...
Im not going to cry when I can't use music-swappers illegally anymore.
Just to play devil's advocate: What about all the people who did use the service legally? There were plenty of people (myself, for instance) who actually downloaded music to test it -- and then bought it. And I also downloaded music that wasn't owned by the RIAA -- the content authors agree to let their music be distributed.
No, you're only going to cry when they go after something you use. But by then, you'll be lucky if anybody's going to have a shoulder for you to cry on.
"They came for the communists, but I wasn't a communist. They came for the terrorists, but I wasn't a terrorist. They came for the hackers, but I wasn't a hacker. Then they came for me, because I was the last one left."
True. But who used the internet in the early days? Did most people know it existed? Most people in America didn't have computers in their homes til the '90s, which is well after the infrastructure of the internet was already well in place.
If the government hadn't spent "our" money on "their" internet 20 years before, we wouldn't have it to share, now.
Pun not intended, right? :)
Most colleges with a school or dept. of continuing education accept almost exclusively students who have jobs, kids, and little money, and don't neccessarily want degrees, but just want to pick up a little advanced math in night school.
Right. Because viruses *never* hijack the functionality of closed-source software. Computer viruses only make open-source programs malfunction.
What? You mean people don't go to LAN parties to play ADVENT anymore?
In the difference between the supermarket example and the radio example is what we call "Anti-trust law."
If I wanted to, I could open up my own supermarket. Buy Coca-cola, hot dogs, etc, at wholesale prices, and then resell them to folks like you for more money.
I can not, however, start my own radio station. The bandwidth is owned by the FCC and is auctioned off to corporations and individuals for use in a given area. The media conglomerates can price me *WAY* out of the game, so I'll never get an FM band to use.
So here we are, stuck with a few major players, who use their monopoly status and deep pockets to strong-arm anyone else out of the business.
That's what makes it a problem worth talking about.
You talked about "shareholder interest." Well, I'm sure I could find several hundred or thousand people in my area (Philadelphia) that would like to listen to an "Alternative" music station that played other, more off-beat music, and I could make them shareholders in my corporation if I were to sell stock. But the fact of the matter is that since I can't even get into the bandwidth game, that's a moot point.
Their "shareholders" are stifling competition, destroying innovation in the industry, and wrecking a public resource. (Yes, the radio waves are owned by the public. The FCC merely chooses who may broadcast on them. In my mind, throwing monopoly weight around on the airwaves wrecks a public resource.)
For me, the ultimate eyeball would have the following features:
;)
1. Fast focussing. I want my eyes to adjust to light and dark quickly, and focus on an object near or far fast.
2. Filters. Cut down glare during the day.
3. Light enhancement at night. (I'd settle for green outlines like the army night-vis goggles gets)
4. Enhanced depth-of-field. If you focus on something close to your eyes, everything far away gets blurry. I'd like to be able to see both near and far clearly at once. (That'd go along with #1 well, too)
5. Zoom. At least 16x.
6. Protective covering like goggles. So I could see underwater.
7. Image enhancement to cut through fog or smoke.
That's about it for now
Alright, I got karma to burn.
Flamesuit: engaged.
Do you know that the Debian distribution calls their Linux "GNU/Linux"?
Yes, they do, but they also release a distribution which uses the HURD kernel, e.g., "GNU/HURD".
Furthermore, since Debian is the official GNU distribution, it'd be fitting for them to call it GNU/Linux. But that would mean it'd be equally fitting to refer to, say, Red Hat Linux, or Caldera Linux, or -- oh. Wait. Like we already do.
From the basic feeling I get from most people, "GNU/Linux" as a sticking point on the name of the system is essentially limitted to RMS and a few others. The VAST OVERWHELMING majority just refer to "Linux."
And its not picking on RMS "just for the fun of it." Frankly, it's BAD P.R. for him to go around telling LUGs to change their names to "GNU/Linux User Groups", insulting CEOs to their faces by correcting them midsentence when they're asking him questions, etc.
If he wants to be the self-appointed "champion spokesman" for Linux, he should realllly take a lesson in courtesy. Which sometimes means holding your damn opinion about what you call something, to yourself.
Where I work, there are Gigs of data stored
in massive Oracle SQL databases.
Obviously, if you are asking this question,
you don't need such a high powered system
as this (we have a big-iron Sun machine that
does the serving).
However, buying a powerful Dell Server, and
running Access on Win2K would give you a
decent SQL system to work with.
Applets can be written for any platform
which will all use SQL and can then translate
the results of the query into native stuff
for the computer its on.
Furthermore, look into Macromedia ColdFusion.
CF can be used to quickly create web-based
systems which interface with an SQL database
rediculously easy. (My department does just
this.)
You can use a web app and a database to
retrieve data and upload data, perform
authentication, all sorts of great stuff.
I'm thinking that was supposed to be to the tune of "American Pie," right? (Quite cool, I thought).
;)
I just think it needs a verse in there somewhere saying "Bye Bye, _______..." so we'd all know
Otherwise, superelite work!
I don't play paintball, but I imagine...
:)
Hey, it's slashdot. Of course these sorts of opinions are valid
But at any rate... paintball games can vary a lot. If you're on offense, and are running the flag, you spend most of your time running like hell, and you don't shoot much.
When I'm camped out in defense and people are swarming my base, I'll go through 100-200 rounds in a fifteen minute match, and won't have moved at all.
Right now, any old bum can steal a credit card and run down to Safeway
Right. And then you say "Ah crap." You call the credit card company. They say "no biggie." And you're limited to $50 in liability. They give you a new 12-digit number, and everyone goes home happy. Not a big deal.
I fail to see why this is a "big step up" or an "improvement." At some point, your biometric information is reduced to a series of zeroes and ones. Kinda like a credit card holds on its magnetic stripe. Except that you can only get a "new number" 10 times.
So fine, maybe they can't steal your physical credit card any more. But you do a lot of purchases over the phone or internet, right? So now you get a thumbscanner for your serial port, and you scan yourself when you want to make a purchase instead of typing in your twelve digit PIN. Since a bunch of zeroes and ones fly over the Internet in either case, this is no more secure at all!
If it ain't broke... don't fix it!
This analogy clearly fails. Your's is a logical fallacy known as a bait-and-switch.
The original question was: "Does my use of cel phones to look at porn over the web harm anyone else?" You tried to compare this to hosting loud parties in your apartment -- a completely different scenario. If I hold loud parties in my apartment, it degrades the apartment-dwelling experience for my neighbors. The people upstairs can't sleep at night with the noise, the people downstairs have beer cans thrown on their porch, and its all just a big mess.
What data I download, however, regardless of its (im)moral content, is irrelevant. Whether I download email containing the four byte string "CAKE" or the four byte string "F***", the load on the network has been the same. If I'm a businessman who downloads some eighty-odd messages to my cel phone every two hours, that's 30 Kb of data. 30,000 bytes.
If I'm a guy who likes looking at nude pictures once in a while, a 30,000 byte GIF image is still 30,000 bytes. The load on the network has been the same.
ISPs have no right to regulate the content trafficking its network based on "moral" or any other perceived "value." The information in the bytes is irrelevant to the performance of the network.
To further pick at your argument, you state that "those who watch porn are less likely to pay the bills." If they don't pay the bills, they get disconnected. Simple as that. How does blocking porn from their network improve the financial value to the ISP? I fail to see the connection.
On a tangent, as long as I'm in the comment box. If the network does claim some "moral value" to the content on its network, and polices incoming data, I'd say that this would leave them in a dangerous legal quandry. Do/did Al Quaida operatives use Verizon cel phones in the USA? Just because it's not porn doesn't make it moral. If they are going to start denying packets based on their moral value, they'd better examine their ability to feasably do so, before they find themselves in some sort of lawsuit regarding discrimination, IMO.
(#include<std/disclaimer.h>, IANAL, etc.)
Are we to understand that post-it notes and sharpie pens are now contraband circumvention devices? 3M is not going to like this, not one bit.
You know, that just might be the ticket. Is there a way to tell a District Attourney that he should bring suit against somebody for illegal activity? Tip off the DA that 3M is marketting items which may be used as circumvention devices.
3M will bring in their lawerly guns blazing, and will throw lots of corporate resources at smacking on DMCA; we get our precident by making big business do our fighting for us.
Can something like this work this way?
(As a manufacturer of floppy disks, e.g., media which would be forced to have circumvention protection systems built in if CDTBPA (Is that the right 'nym?), etc, are passed, I'm sure that 3M is interested in getting rid of these laws...)
Well, clearly everybody here is correct, however nobody's specifying the speed of light through what. The speed of light particles through a pure vacuum is 3.0e+8 meters per second, however it is thought to be slower through air or other dense media. Everyone's just responding in their own frame of reference. :)
(FWIW, I calculate it as 7.7e+8 mi/hr)
Uhm. Here, I must disagree with you. They didn't "Buy the USENET" in the same way that it is impossible to "Buy the web" or "Buy Email."
They did, however, successfully purchase an archive of the last twenty years of USENET posts, and currently archive all USENET posts made today. Their copy/mirror of USENET is called "Google Groups."
i'm sure someone will correct me
:)
It's slashdot. You bet they will.
Now if they know what they're talking about, that's another story.
(Oh sure, mod me down. It's a damn joke.)
Shouldn't you be "blacking out" slashdot right about now?
Thats like requiring car manufacturers to make sure all their vehicles can use diesel, gasoline, petroleum, electricity, fuel cells and ethenol, and have them interchangable.
No, it's like telling a gas station that regardless of if you're driving a Chevy Impala, a Ford Mustang, or a Mercedes that they have to be able to fill your tank up.
"Oh, sorry, we're allied with GM. Did you consider selling your VW and buying a Geo? That way, we could sell you fuel."
If you're in a town where only general motors cars can get fuel, and you really need gas for your BMW, you're S.O.L., even though there's not a good reason why you can't buy fuel there: it'll still work in your car.
If a place only sells diesel fuel and you need regular unleaded, that's one thing. But two cars that both can use premium should be able to buy premium from the same vendor.
What was it?
And I've never heard of anyone buying anything from Cheapbytes.
I've purchased three versions of Slackware from Cheapbytes.
Mighty good customer service, too, I might add: when one CD came with a defect on it, they mailed me a replacement copy the next day.