I would say the "Crude Humor" and "Mild Violence" come from the "Enhanced Experience" which probably involves making a pass/grope at the stewardess and spanking unruly passengers back in coach.
While the above statement may be rightfully funny, it's also painfully true.
I have a plethora of OS images at my disposal, but I use XP the most. While I could easily buy (or pirate) a copy of Windows 7, and my current hardware configuration would more than support a migration, there's no real need for me to do so. Let's face it, the only thing Windows 7 actually offers is eye candy, a few slightly more drool-proof features for the Jerry's Kids of Computers and 64 bit support. The same basic security holes exist, and what ad-hoc implementations 7 does offer can easily be implemented with common sense by locking down certain aspects of the operating system in the first place and not running every executable you find on the internet at whim.
There's also no real reason for me to upgrade, since MS still hasn't dropped 32-bit support, and XP still takes up nearly half the market. A default XP install still has a reasonably small overhead (but not as small as it can be), and for the most part, it's more stable than most other OSes. When I do upgrade, it will be for an actual technological reason related to hardware and/or driver support, not because of a look-what-I-can-do-*spasm* reason that consists of groundless conjecture, marketing catchphrases/ideas, and half-baked ad hominems.
What does Heywood Sloane do for a living? Unless he's doing similar things his great grandfather did, then he's really in no position to speak for Thomas Edison, relation or not. Just sayin'.
Uhhh...how EXACTLY is that flamebait? doesn't anyone know their history anymore?
This is/.... When any amount of common sense indisputable fact is posted, it's usually marked troll or flamebait by The Armchair Committee of/., most of whom have spent years earning their PhDs at Assmad University. I think in retaliation, we should mark the retards' posts as "funny". At least that way, they'll have undivided attention, no matter how short lived or tongue-in-cheek it may be.
The "end" of ipv4 has been harped constantly for nearly 10 years. I remember in one of my classes, the big thing about learning ipv6 was because we were going to be completely out of ipv4 addresses in 2 years, no ifs, ands or buts. 10 years later, the same cries are heard far and wide across the internet. Sorry, but you can only cry wolf so many times before it's obvious that you're just plain full of shit.
Amusingly, what most don't realize is that ipv4 was designed from the ground up to be vastly subnetworked. The theoretical number of ipv4 addresses from the base network is a whopping total of 4294967296. We'll round that down and say it's 4 billion. From one subnet, while the mode of access is from one source ip address (given decent network hardware, this is not a problem), that's an additional ~4 billion addresses from ONE SUBNET. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I'll be surprised if we ever "run out" of ipv4 addresses.
Keep clanging your pots and pans, and shooting off fireworks. Nobody with an ounce of common sense believes that ipv4 addresses are an endangered species. Give it seven minutes and The Dragon From The Sky That Ate Teh Intarwebz will pass. Nothing of value will be lost; nothing of importance will be noted. Move along now, there really is nothing to see.
Everyone has the right to post things that clearly show they're a complete retard. Unfortunately, it doesn't mean that they have ability to comprehend the result of their actions.
Farmers used to do that. Net result : about 1% crop yield per square meter compared to what we have today. Do you seriously think a 100x reduction (oh wait, technology advanced... say 25x) in food supply would be survivable ?
Considering how many insecticides garlic contains, and that they can be artificially produced, yes it's a reasonable solution.
As for using it on humans to prevent disease, that method was in use during the plagues. Fat lot of good it did them.
During the middle ages, garlic wasn't used to treat anything. They held it to ward off evil spirits. All this aside, I do like your sense of humor. Have you considered trying a gig in standup comedy?
Everytime we've hailed a one-shot approach to these types of problems, the same thing happens. Look at antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria and the like. Do you really think this is going to be any different?
Actually, I do a lot of software development. Simply put, code doesn't just "vanish" because someone dies. Support and development for the application may die, yes, but the code itself and the compiled executables do not.
The researchers are essentially replacing the leap year with a leap week. This is essentially the same concept the Mayans used with their calendar, so it's not exactly revolutionary. On the gripping hand, I propose we make use of a completely new calender designed purposely to usher in a new era of madness, but to also serve as an effective barrier of understanding and reason between generations and species. Here is my proposal:
Rounding up from.2495756, we'll say that each earth year is approximately 365.25 days per year. How do we get rid of the leap year, you ask? Quite easy, we'll just get rid of that pesky fraction by multiplying by 4. Now we have 1461 days. In order to make sure that each month has the same number of days, we'll simply multiply the number of days by 4, and divide by 12. This ensures that each month consists of 487 days. Some would say that this is too long and/or complex to be feasible, but we'll merely dismiss their complaints, wailing, and gnashing of teeth with the wave of the hand. This first version of a calendar is "The Short Year".
To facilitate ease of use with astronomical calculations, we can create a "Long Year" in which each month consists of 1461 days, or 4 Gregorian Years. The total number of days in a "Long Year" will consist of 17532 days, or 48 Gregorian Years. Both of these newly proposed calendards of mine present several advantages over the inefficent, short-sighted calendars crafted by heathen and barbarian cultures of aeons past. We'll start with The Short Year first.
The first, and foremost of these is that there would be no leap hour, day, week, or year. Everything is consolidated into a single calendar of grotesque efficiency. The Short Year calendar pretty much guarantees that you'll have two birthdays per month. Since each month consists of a prime number of days (487), this also reduces the need to split up a month by the concept of "weeks". Two inefficient concepts are now eliminated.
Moving along to The Long Year, the major advantage of having a calendar of this length is that the average life expectancy of a human in developed nations is approximately 75 years. This ensures that most people will never have the misfortune or inconvenience of buying a second calendar. Also, given that The Long Year consists of 17532, there should be plenty of days for future holidays, that way, nobody gets offended because of overlapping festivities.
I have to disagree with you on this one. Without there being existing code in the first place, there's nothing to be implemented. Therefore, code does have a value, but it depends on the environment and context that it's being used.
"Without those people, it dies."
Generally speaking, code does not magically disappear when someone kicks the bucket. That's probably one of the more ridiculous blanket statements I've heard in a while.
Do you believe in working for free (i.e. not getting paid)? If so, then you should have no problem handing over your work without compensation in return. Any sane person will tell you that you're a fool for doing so. Unless it's your own personal project that you're doing for fun, then expect some kind of compensation, preferably monetary.
But I would venture to guess that the average person also uses wysiwig editors and/or templates, which tend to be horribly bloated from the getgo. Most templates I've experimented with can be easily reduced up to 60% of their original size while delivering the exact same look, feel and functionality, and a significant amount of the HTML code that's spawned from the aforementioned methods is entirely unnecessary.
Slashdot Mirror
Same thing, really. They're still made by Apple.
Looks like a pretty good reason not to buy windows 8. I don't need an OS to nanny my hardware and/or software. If I wanted that, I'd just buy a mac.
Let's not also forget that less lines of code also means that, generally, it's also easier to track down and fix bugs.
"Get used to running DOS again."
Got tired of paying yearly subscription fees, so I've spent over 10 years developing my own scanner (http://www.tot-ltd.org).
http://www.tot-ltd.org/blacklist/0-F - Info obtained from pretty much any site that makes honeynet/honeypot, malware md5 information available online.
http://www.tot-ltd.org/whitelist/0-F - Info obtained from National Software Resourece Library (http://www.nsrl.nist.gov/) public archive, along with archives of legit applications and os installation files.
http://www.tot-ltd.org/installation.db - Default malware install paths/file names.
http://www.tot-ltd.org/ports/ - Default trojan ports. Only returns a positive hit if file fails detection in the blacklist database.
http://www.tot-ltd.org/API/ API based heuristics.
And there's more info at http://www.tot-ltd.org/techinf.html and http://www.tot-ltd.org/techinf2.html
Does it come in a fun-sized package?
I would say the "Crude Humor" and "Mild Violence" come from the "Enhanced Experience" which probably involves making a pass/grope at the stewardess and spanking unruly passengers back in coach.
I don't think this technique is doing yahoo any bit of good.
While the above statement may be rightfully funny, it's also painfully true.
I have a plethora of OS images at my disposal, but I use XP the most. While I could easily buy (or pirate) a copy of Windows 7, and my current hardware configuration would more than support a migration, there's no real need for me to do so. Let's face it, the only thing Windows 7 actually offers is eye candy, a few slightly more drool-proof features for the Jerry's Kids of Computers and 64 bit support. The same basic security holes exist, and what ad-hoc implementations 7 does offer can easily be implemented with common sense by locking down certain aspects of the operating system in the first place and not running every executable you find on the internet at whim.
There's also no real reason for me to upgrade, since MS still hasn't dropped 32-bit support, and XP still takes up nearly half the market. A default XP install still has a reasonably small overhead (but not as small as it can be), and for the most part, it's more stable than most other OSes. When I do upgrade, it will be for an actual technological reason related to hardware and/or driver support, not because of a look-what-I-can-do-*spasm* reason that consists of groundless conjecture, marketing catchphrases/ideas, and half-baked ad hominems.
What does Heywood Sloane do for a living? Unless he's doing similar things his great grandfather did, then he's really in no position to speak for Thomas Edison, relation or not. Just sayin'.
Uhhh...how EXACTLY is that flamebait? doesn't anyone know their history anymore?
/. ... When any amount of common sense indisputable fact is posted, it's usually marked troll or flamebait by The Armchair Committee of /., most of whom have spent years earning their PhDs at Assmad University. I think in retaliation, we should mark the retards' posts as "funny". At least that way, they'll have undivided attention, no matter how short lived or tongue-in-cheek it may be.
This is
The "end" of ipv4 has been harped constantly for nearly 10 years. I remember in one of my classes, the big thing about learning ipv6 was because we were going to be completely out of ipv4 addresses in 2 years, no ifs, ands or buts. 10 years later, the same cries are heard far and wide across the internet. Sorry, but you can only cry wolf so many times before it's obvious that you're just plain full of shit.
Amusingly, what most don't realize is that ipv4 was designed from the ground up to be vastly subnetworked. The theoretical number of ipv4 addresses from the base network is a whopping total of 4294967296. We'll round that down and say it's 4 billion. From one subnet, while the mode of access is from one source ip address (given decent network hardware, this is not a problem), that's an additional ~4 billion addresses from ONE SUBNET. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I'll be surprised if we ever "run out" of ipv4 addresses.
Keep clanging your pots and pans, and shooting off fireworks. Nobody with an ounce of common sense believes that ipv4 addresses are an endangered species. Give it seven minutes and The Dragon From The Sky That Ate Teh Intarwebz will pass. Nothing of value will be lost; nothing of importance will be noted. Move along now, there really is nothing to see.
Well played, sir. Well played indeed.
What do you think the "I" in IT stands for?
Everyone has the right to post things that clearly show they're a complete retard. Unfortunately, it doesn't mean that they have ability to comprehend the result of their actions.
Farmers used to do that. Net result : about 1% crop yield per square meter compared to what we have today. Do you seriously think a 100x reduction (oh wait, technology advanced ... say 25x) in food supply would be survivable ?
Considering how many insecticides garlic contains, and that they can be artificially produced, yes it's a reasonable solution.
As for using it on humans to prevent disease, that method was in use during the plagues. Fat lot of good it did them.
During the middle ages, garlic wasn't used to treat anything. They held it to ward off evil spirits. All this aside, I do like your sense of humor. Have you considered trying a gig in standup comedy?
For starters....
http://en.howtopedia.org/wiki/How_to_Use_Garlic_as_a_Natural_Pesticide
While that may be the case, one can't feasibly expect only a single compound to work for long, let alone indefinitely.
Everytime we've hailed a one-shot approach to these types of problems, the same thing happens. Look at antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria and the like. Do you really think this is going to be any different?
Actually, I do a lot of software development. Simply put, code doesn't just "vanish" because someone dies. Support and development for the application may die, yes, but the code itself and the compiled executables do not.
The researchers are essentially replacing the leap year with a leap week. This is essentially the same concept the Mayans used with their calendar, so it's not exactly revolutionary. On the gripping hand, I propose we make use of a completely new calender designed purposely to usher in a new era of madness, but to also serve as an effective barrier of understanding and reason between generations and species. Here is my proposal:
.2495756, we'll say that each earth year is approximately 365.25 days per year. How do we get rid of the leap year, you ask? Quite easy, we'll just get rid of that pesky fraction by multiplying by 4. Now we have 1461 days. In order to make sure that each month has the same number of days, we'll simply multiply the number of days by 4, and divide by 12. This ensures that each month consists of 487 days. Some would say that this is too long and/or complex to be feasible, but we'll merely dismiss their complaints, wailing, and gnashing of teeth with the wave of the hand. This first version of a calendar is "The Short Year".
Rounding up from
To facilitate ease of use with astronomical calculations, we can create a "Long Year" in which each month consists of 1461 days, or 4 Gregorian Years. The total number of days in a "Long Year" will consist of 17532 days, or 48 Gregorian Years. Both of these newly proposed calendards of mine present several advantages over the inefficent, short-sighted calendars crafted by heathen and barbarian cultures of aeons past. We'll start with The Short Year first.
The first, and foremost of these is that there would be no leap hour, day, week, or year. Everything is consolidated into a single calendar of grotesque efficiency. The Short Year calendar pretty much guarantees that you'll have two birthdays per month. Since each month consists of a prime number of days (487), this also reduces the need to split up a month by the concept of "weeks". Two inefficient concepts are now eliminated.
Moving along to The Long Year, the major advantage of having a calendar of this length is that the average life expectancy of a human in developed nations is approximately 75 years. This ensures that most people will never have the misfortune or inconvenience of buying a second calendar. Also, given that The Long Year consists of 17532, there should be plenty of days for future holidays, that way, nobody gets offended because of overlapping festivities.
I have to disagree with you on this one. Without there being existing code in the first place, there's nothing to be implemented. Therefore, code does have a value, but it depends on the environment and context that it's being used.
"Without those people, it dies."
Generally speaking, code does not magically disappear when someone kicks the bucket. That's probably one of the more ridiculous blanket statements I've heard in a while.
Do you believe in working for free (i.e. not getting paid)? If so, then you should have no problem handing over your work without compensation in return. Any sane person will tell you that you're a fool for doing so. Unless it's your own personal project that you're doing for fun, then expect some kind of compensation, preferably monetary.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-57348511-281/godaddy-accused-of-interfering-with-anti-sopa-exodus/?tag=mncol;mlt_related
But I would venture to guess that the average person also uses wysiwig editors and/or templates, which tend to be horribly bloated from the getgo. Most templates I've experimented with can be easily reduced up to 60% of their original size while delivering the exact same look, feel and functionality, and a significant amount of the HTML code that's spawned from the aforementioned methods is entirely unnecessary.