Don't know about Advanced Server, but I've seen this feature on Win2K Pro. Every fifth time or so I run RealPlayer, my laptop suddenly reboots. I guess I should be grateful that Win2K doesn't just crash every now and then like NT did.
I've noticed that when this happens my screen goes blue for just a moment before the video resets. So, as promised, the Win2K refresh feature also eliminates the Blue Screen of Death! MS innovation at its best.
As if it wasn't bad enough putting up with American tourists coming up here and asking where our igloos are, we'll now have to put up with American tourists coming up here saying they want to see the North Pole before it leaves.
Yep, we're packing her up and trading her in for Pavel Bure, eh.
Amen, sibling. I just wish I could fit that on a bumper sticker.
I installed Slackware 7.1 a few months ago specifically because I wanted to get to know Linux better. I did learn quite a bit. But I struggled to get my WLAN working. I struggled to get my printer working. I struggled to upgrade XFree86 to v.4 and get TrueType fonts working. I never succeeded in getting the little mail icon in my taskbar to actually bring up Netscape mail. Almost everything I did required time to learn and a struggle to get it working. And when I saw what I had to do to get Nautilus installed from tarballs, set up sound for Doom, or just plain upgrade Slackware to the latest version, I had had enough.
It was all very interesting, but I've done nothing truly productive with that computer in all this time. And this is not the first distribution that's made me feel like Linux is an enormous piece of fritterware.
True, but like most things, the Truth (tm) falls somewhere in between the Collectivist and Objectivist philosophies. While Collectivists never succeeded in the real world, Objectivists wouldn't recognize the real world if it fell on them.
Why don't you take your big, glossy, ejaculate-encrusted posters of Ayn Rand and go live on a remote desert island somewhere, bonehead. See how far you get being your own man in a place without the support of a community. Don't forget, using survival techniques you learned from other human beings is cheating! You're a man! Make it all up yourself.
As I don't see you packing, I guess I'll have to wait for you to get out of highschool and get a real life before even hoping you'll understand that there is no such thing as an individual human being. We're all just parts of a larger organism called a society, directly and indirectly feeding, nurturing, and supporting one another. John Galt would've driven a train over his own mother, but without her tits to suck on he never would have made it to kindergarten. Grow up, boy!
It is a parent's responsibility to protect their kids from potentially harmful material and influences. If your children have their own computers, these computers should have NO 'net access at all.
Forget censorware, proxies, etc; software solutions are unreliable. Have one central, easily monitored family computer with 'net access, and only let them use it when you can sit there with them to monitor, guide, and teach.
Family is important? Really? So you plan on having children with your future husband, then farming them out to someone else to raise? Or are you really saying the wants of the two adults in your future family are important, whether those wants are a new car, a big screen TV, a poodle, or a cute little baby?
You want kids but don't want to give up your career? Then I hope your future husband isn't as selfish as you and stays home with your kids.
Hey, been there, done that, so don't tell me I'm not realistic.
This whole topic is a very good example of what is wrong with society. I am amazed but not surprised at the 1960s "I have the right to do anything I want, don't oppress me with responsibilities" nature of the vast majority of North Americans in general.
My wifey stays at home, but for a year we changed roles because she needed to go back to work and we had previously decided to raise our kids ourselves.
As a computer technician, I don't make squat compared to a coder, so don't tell me it's impossible to do this. We're doing it. It's about priorities. It's about taking responsibility for your children.
Yeah, it's not for everyone. But if you (and your spouse) can't handle it, then don't have kids. They're not pets. They're not possessions. They're people.
If you think your right to have kids is more important than your responsibility to raise them, then grow up, whiner.
The problem with your theory is that being a stay at home mom hasn't been the norm for many years. Perhaps these "layers of resentment and dissatisfaction" come from the conditioning of women in recent years to prove themselves as equal by rejecting the traditional female role, a role which may not have been a result so much of male oppression as female biology.
This is the message of modern feminism: you don't have a right to choose your role. You're expected to play with the boys. And when that involves what some might call "the right to self-fulfillment," but might more correctly be called "freedom from responsibility," children pay the price as they are cast aside like all the other toys "adults" want but soon tire of playing with.
Have you considered that you might be avoiding the difficulty (and it certainly is difficult) of raising a child full-time, rather than dealing with your problems?
One thing that came out of the '60s is this conviction that you have the right to everything. We are living in a society of adults who think like children, where their "wants" are all that matter. What ever happened to responsibility?
You want children? And you want a career? Take your pick! How dare anyone treat human beings as options, like a car or a big screen TV. Children are people, and especially in the formative years they need to be raised by someone who loves them.
My wife and I decided early on that one of us would always be home with the kids. For the most part it's been her, but for one year it was me, and as a result, I can't understand why anyone would have children just to farm them out to someone else to raise.
When I was a kid, my favorite retort was, "I didn't ask to be born." Well, I was right. Your children didn't ask to be born. Are you going to give something up for them, or just add them to your resume as one of your accomplishments?
Slashdot Mirror
...but I'll pass on the complimentary drinks, thanks.
I'll have Windows by the balls, for a change.
I've noticed that when this happens my screen goes blue for just a moment before the video resets. So, as promised, the Win2K refresh feature also eliminates the Blue Screen of Death! MS innovation at its best.
President Clinton? I'm glad I got a hold of you, 'cause I figure you'd know where to get some Tang.
Yep, we're packing her up and trading her in for Pavel Bure, eh.
...what is this "liberty" thing you Americans keep saying you're so proud of?
I installed Slackware 7.1 a few months ago specifically because I wanted to get to know Linux better. I did learn quite a bit. But I struggled to get my WLAN working. I struggled to get my printer working. I struggled to upgrade XFree86 to v.4 and get TrueType fonts working. I never succeeded in getting the little mail icon in my taskbar to actually bring up Netscape mail. Almost everything I did required time to learn and a struggle to get it working. And when I saw what I had to do to get Nautilus installed from tarballs, set up sound for Doom, or just plain upgrade Slackware to the latest version, I had had enough.
It was all very interesting, but I've done nothing truly productive with that computer in all this time. And this is not the first distribution that's made me feel like Linux is an enormous piece of fritterware.
Okay, so I misspelled "gundam." Is it really necessary to start casting aspersions on my hygiene?
Maybe the Japanese should have opted for a Mobile Suit Gundham instead of an Experiment Module Kibo.
True, but like most things, the Truth (tm) falls somewhere in between the Collectivist and Objectivist philosophies. While Collectivists never succeeded in the real world, Objectivists wouldn't recognize the real world if it fell on them.
...I vote for Neither.
Why don't you take your big, glossy, ejaculate-encrusted posters of Ayn Rand and go live on a remote desert island somewhere, bonehead. See how far you get being your own man in a place without the support of a community. Don't forget, using survival techniques you learned from other human beings is cheating! You're a man! Make it all up yourself.
As I don't see you packing, I guess I'll have to wait for you to get out of highschool and get a real life before even hoping you'll understand that there is no such thing as an individual human being. We're all just parts of a larger organism called a society, directly and indirectly feeding, nurturing, and supporting one another. John Galt would've driven a train over his own mother, but without her tits to suck on he never would have made it to kindergarten. Grow up, boy!
It is a parent's responsibility to protect their kids from potentially harmful material and influences. If your children have their own computers, these computers should have NO 'net access at all.
Forget censorware, proxies, etc; software solutions are unreliable. Have one central, easily monitored family computer with 'net access, and only let them use it when you can sit there with them to monitor, guide, and teach.
I don't think your penis can get any smaller.
Family is important? Really? So you plan on having children with your future husband, then farming them out to someone else to raise? Or are you really saying the wants of the two adults in your future family are important, whether those wants are a new car, a big screen TV, a poodle, or a cute little baby?
You want kids but don't want to give up your career? Then I hope your future husband isn't as selfish as you and stays home with your kids.
Hey, been there, done that, so don't tell me I'm not realistic.
This whole topic is a very good example of what is wrong with society. I am amazed but not surprised at the 1960s "I have the right to do anything I want, don't oppress me with responsibilities" nature of the vast majority of North Americans in general.
My wifey stays at home, but for a year we changed roles because she needed to go back to work and we had previously decided to raise our kids ourselves.
As a computer technician, I don't make squat compared to a coder, so don't tell me it's impossible to do this. We're doing it. It's about priorities. It's about taking responsibility for your children.
Yeah, it's not for everyone. But if you (and your spouse) can't handle it, then don't have kids. They're not pets. They're not possessions. They're people.
If you think your right to have kids is more important than your responsibility to raise them, then grow up, whiner.
The problem with your theory is that being a stay at home mom hasn't been the norm for many years. Perhaps these "layers of resentment and dissatisfaction" come from the conditioning of women in recent years to prove themselves as equal by rejecting the traditional female role, a role which may not have been a result so much of male oppression as female biology.
This is the message of modern feminism: you don't have a right to choose your role. You're expected to play with the boys. And when that involves what some might call "the right to self-fulfillment," but might more correctly be called "freedom from responsibility," children pay the price as they are cast aside like all the other toys "adults" want but soon tire of playing with.
Depression is normal. It can be dealt with.
Dependency raises red flags as '90s psychobabble.
Have you considered that you might be avoiding the difficulty (and it certainly is difficult) of raising a child full-time, rather than dealing with your problems?
One thing that came out of the '60s is this conviction that you have the right to everything. We are living in a society of adults who think like children, where their "wants" are all that matter. What ever happened to responsibility?
You want children? And you want a career? Take your pick! How dare anyone treat human beings as options, like a car or a big screen TV. Children are people, and especially in the formative years they need to be raised by someone who loves them.
My wife and I decided early on that one of us would always be home with the kids. For the most part it's been her, but for one year it was me, and as a result, I can't understand why anyone would have children just to farm them out to someone else to raise.
When I was a kid, my favorite retort was, "I didn't ask to be born." Well, I was right. Your children didn't ask to be born. Are you going to give something up for them, or just add them to your resume as one of your accomplishments?
It's understandable. After all, we're talking implants here, right?
Rickards Red is great, but when I can get it, I get Tree beer (microbrewed in the Okanagan). It's even better.