I vote for the second. Seems more useful. And while we are at it, we should also teach our boys how to also be caregivers and quiet little angels when they need to be.
You do expect that all doors will behave like doors. If you try the handle (assuming nothing stops you from physically reaching the door), you'll either open them or fail because they are locked. If they are locked, they'll usually make a noise (either because you pull and the lock won't let it open, or because the handle will not continue down).
The main complain about the whole door thing is that you find games that have what looks like a door and isn't: you click your action key and it does nothing because what you are seeing looks only like a door. It'd be fine if it behaved like a locked door, but not even that. It simply ISN'T a door. It's just a painting of a door.
Also, all doors open. Whether you need to unlock/unblock them first or not is another thing. But doors open.
If it is locked, then that implies that the door opens, but it's being blocked by a device (the lock). If the door wouldn't open (ever), then it's probably just a texture that looks like a door instead of an actual, in-game door that it's just locked.
I think it was in F.E.A.R. where there were doors whose sole purpose was to look pretty. They opened, except there were some boxes or stuff on the other side so you could never go through them. Perhaps you would go to the other side through another way, or perhaps you wouldn't. Either way, they behaved like doors instead of being just a texture on a wall that looks like a door.
Couldn't sys admins disable the heartbeat feature as a preventive measure while the patch was prepared? Please note that I'm rather ignorant on all the things involved, but AFAIK the feature in question in the very recent case was not crititcal and could be disabled with minimal damages to the functioning of the service.
I agree with you, though, that the developers should be informed of it first. But I also think that it depends on the issue. If you tell me that feature x in software a has a security issue and I can live without feature x while devs fix it, I think I would rather know so I can disable it instead of waiting for a patch. Just saying.
Let me put it this way: when I read Linus messages, I see a human behind them that believes what he is saying. It feels genuine and real. The alternative sometimes sounds like a prepared speech from somebody who may or may not care. Like a politician.
Man that sounds like a prepared statement. The kind I expect to hear from... a PR guy. It just feel so fake.
Not that I disagree that THAT is a more polite way to do it (and probably better). I would prefer a less PR way to say it, though. It feels wrong to me."
That's a fair point. While you could argument they could get together and buy a drone to help them hunt when in group, as an investment, chances are that if that were indeed to happen, I'm sure they could probably get an exception opened for them.
Double posting because can't edit: what I meant with that was that it all matters on whether or not your parent knows their shortcomings or not, and whether or not they realize they have forgotten high school already.
To be honest my mom never understood some of the things she helped me with. What she did was read the textbook, see what I was having issue with, have me explain to her what I was trying to accomplish and how, and if she still didn't have an insight, she would tell me to ask somebody else. She knew her limitations (perhaps because her education is high school, and a bad one).
I don't like their logic regarding functionality. "If only a small subset of our population uses that feature, then it belongs in a add-on". It makes sense to reduce as much as you can the many points of failure. Sure. But, it's kind of like the same complaint people point towards arma: they rely too much on add-ons and things like that, and the base experience turns out to be rather mediocre to a subset of people. On the bright side, since they rely so much on the community, add-ons do get made, forks exists and there is about something for everyone.
I don't think a 1000 years punishments would do much to... rehabilitate prisoners. If anything, it'll break them beyond breaking or turn them into madmen that will be your worst enemy on they get out.
The idea of "punishment" for a crime makes little sense beyond a certain point. Sure, you want to punish behaviors as a way to reduce them (the same way we punish kids for behaving incorrectly) but there gets a point where going beyond in the scale of punishment is futile and even counter productive, specially because most of the time all you are doing is giving the satisfaction to the victims that somebody is still being punished (paying for what they did), instead of becoming a better person (which should be the aim of jail time but isn't).
And, on topic: if living for 1000 years for a normal person would usually result in worse than bad results (loss of friends, lack of usual boundaries/inhibitions because you just need to wait), never mind them being locked up (imagine watching the same place and for years at a time, following the same routine over and over again, or in the case of the drug, watching a wall for the equivalent of months at a time)... It'd take a specially strong mind to withstand that and still be functional afterwards. And it's that kind of people that you don't want locked up ever (instead you want them following the law, or for the second option, dead). If you just lock them up, they are going to hate you afterwards for it, if they don't try to escape during sentence.
I wonder if those are good companies to work at. I understand that they probably use it to filter through applicants quickly, but ignoring a person with 20+ years of experience without even giving them the chance of, I don't know, presenting recommendation letters or even practical tests seems silly. Specially since you were already employed.
There is compressing, distorting, and cranking up to 11... and then there is brickwalls (which is the previous, except over 9000).
See, there is nothing wrong with compressing, distorting and cranking your guitar(or some other instrument) up to eleven. It's all right. However, you probably don't want to do that to all tracks. If you do, you are exposing yourself to ending with a dull, flat, boring result (I've heard a few. Sure, there was guitars and drums and stuff.. but it all sounded so dead and flat it sounded bad regardless of what was actually playing).
Now, I do agree that live is (or should be) better than a recording.
A quick listen to a something I found on Xerath resulted in this: I hear clipping (could be from where I found it, or could also be present on the CD). It's also loud, but it's not uncomfortable to listen to. Different instruments feel like distinct, and the audio doesn't sound like an indistinct mass. Which is quite nice. And it doesn't all exactly sound like it's at the same volume all the time.
"During presentations and hands-on demos at Crytek's GDC booth, attendees can see for the first time ever full native Linux support in the new CRYENGINE.
That's what the summary says. I assume it's not that one, but the newest (which would be 4, according to wikipedia).
Well... I suppose I mostly saw that passwords managers as an extension of my brain. Also, because I usually trust the systems I use my passwords managers. Also because I trust from where I got the binary. And because I trust the implementation.
I will consider it, though, in the future. I'm not entirely sure what I'll do to solve the "learn all those randomly generated passwords AND remember exactly which one is for what" issue of having unique, as strong as universally possible passwords for every website (that matters). And no, the horsestaplecorrect is NOT a valid option for me. There are websites that limit password length to 16 characters, and the example above is larger.
The thing is, there is the general public definition of hacker (ie a criminal), and then there is the definition of hacker by other people that is something along the lines of: somebody who likes to take things apart, exploring the system's limits; an expert on the field. The later definition includes people like the Elf Lord you mentioned, Abby (from the same show), most security consultants, criminals, etc.
Therefore, his comment is valid for a certain definition of hacker (and most hackers don't reach the news because they are security consultants, or work in IT in a company, or report the issues to the companies who don't go "YOU HACKED INTO MY SYSTEM NEED TO SUE"). And thus: the biggest problem IT people have when communicating with the rest is that neither side really talks the same language. How are we going to communicate effectively and solve issues if we don't really share the same language?
Seems like a sensible idea, to be honest. At least you could then let them know, (and it should be recorded) that you don't like any of them but voted anyway for the one that seems less bad to you.
Of course, the fact that if nobody buys what you are selling, there isn't much you can do does not mean you should stop trying. Even if it isn't much, something will get through. Somebody will change their mind. Maybe that somebody will be able to reach further than what the/. crowd would have reached. If you don't try and get more involved, however... well..
Slashdot Mirror
I vote for the second. Seems more useful. And while we are at it, we should also teach our boys how to also be caregivers and quiet little angels when they need to be.
You do expect that all doors will behave like doors. If you try the handle (assuming nothing stops you from physically reaching the door), you'll either open them or fail because they are locked. If they are locked, they'll usually make a noise (either because you pull and the lock won't let it open, or because the handle will not continue down).
The main complain about the whole door thing is that you find games that have what looks like a door and isn't: you click your action key and it does nothing because what you are seeing looks only like a door. It'd be fine if it behaved like a locked door, but not even that. It simply ISN'T a door. It's just a painting of a door.
Also, all doors open. Whether you need to unlock/unblock them first or not is another thing. But doors open.
If it is locked, then that implies that the door opens, but it's being blocked by a device (the lock). If the door wouldn't open (ever), then it's probably just a texture that looks like a door instead of an actual, in-game door that it's just locked.
I think it was in F.E.A.R. where there were doors whose sole purpose was to look pretty. They opened, except there were some boxes or stuff on the other side so you could never go through them. Perhaps you would go to the other side through another way, or perhaps you wouldn't. Either way, they behaved like doors instead of being just a texture on a wall that looks like a door.
But isn't the Heartbeat feature a part of the software that is optional and can be disabled?
Couldn't sys admins disable the heartbeat feature as a preventive measure while the patch was prepared? Please note that I'm rather ignorant on all the things involved, but AFAIK the feature in question in the very recent case was not crititcal and could be disabled with minimal damages to the functioning of the service.
I agree with you, though, that the developers should be informed of it first. But I also think that it depends on the issue. If you tell me that feature x in software a has a security issue and I can live without feature x while devs fix it, I think I would rather know so I can disable it instead of waiting for a patch. Just saying.
But that goes for about everything, doesn't it? While you are busy X, somebody with a club will just smack you and take it.
No. Courier New is a pretty nice font for some things. Just not the /. comment section.
Let me put it this way: when I read Linus messages, I see a human behind them that believes what he is saying. It feels genuine and real. The alternative sometimes sounds like a prepared speech from somebody who may or may not care. Like a politician.
Man that sounds like a prepared statement. The kind I expect to hear from... a PR guy. It just feel so fake.
Not that I disagree that THAT is a more polite way to do it (and probably better). I would prefer a less PR way to say it, though. It feels wrong to me."
Care to share a link to that memo?
That's a fair point. While you could argument they could get together and buy a drone to help them hunt when in group, as an investment, chances are that if that were indeed to happen, I'm sure they could probably get an exception opened for them.
Five, ten minutes seems like an eternity for me, one who does not hunt.
Double posting because can't edit: what I meant with that was that it all matters on whether or not your parent knows their shortcomings or not, and whether or not they realize they have forgotten high school already.
To be honest my mom never understood some of the things she helped me with. What she did was read the textbook, see what I was having issue with, have me explain to her what I was trying to accomplish and how, and if she still didn't have an insight, she would tell me to ask somebody else. She knew her limitations (perhaps because her education is high school, and a bad one).
I don't like their logic regarding functionality. "If only a small subset of our population uses that feature, then it belongs in a add-on". It makes sense to reduce as much as you can the many points of failure. Sure. But, it's kind of like the same complaint people point towards arma: they rely too much on add-ons and things like that, and the base experience turns out to be rather mediocre to a subset of people. On the bright side, since they rely so much on the community, add-ons do get made, forks exists and there is about something for everyone.
I don't think a 1000 years punishments would do much to... rehabilitate prisoners. If anything, it'll break them beyond breaking or turn them into madmen that will be your worst enemy on they get out.
The idea of "punishment" for a crime makes little sense beyond a certain point. Sure, you want to punish behaviors as a way to reduce them (the same way we punish kids for behaving incorrectly) but there gets a point where going beyond in the scale of punishment is futile and even counter productive, specially because most of the time all you are doing is giving the satisfaction to the victims that somebody is still being punished (paying for what they did), instead of becoming a better person (which should be the aim of jail time but isn't).
And, on topic: if living for 1000 years for a normal person would usually result in worse than bad results (loss of friends, lack of usual boundaries/inhibitions because you just need to wait), never mind them being locked up (imagine watching the same place and for years at a time, following the same routine over and over again, or in the case of the drug, watching a wall for the equivalent of months at a time)... It'd take a specially strong mind to withstand that and still be functional afterwards. And it's that kind of people that you don't want locked up ever (instead you want them following the law, or for the second option, dead). If you just lock them up, they are going to hate you afterwards for it, if they don't try to escape during sentence.
I wonder if those are good companies to work at. I understand that they probably use it to filter through applicants quickly, but ignoring a person with 20+ years of experience without even giving them the chance of, I don't know, presenting recommendation letters or even practical tests seems silly. Specially since you were already employed.
There is compressing, distorting, and cranking up to 11... and then there is brickwalls (which is the previous, except over 9000).
See, there is nothing wrong with compressing, distorting and cranking your guitar(or some other instrument) up to eleven. It's all right. However, you probably don't want to do that to all tracks. If you do, you are exposing yourself to ending with a dull, flat, boring result (I've heard a few. Sure, there was guitars and drums and stuff.. but it all sounded so dead and flat it sounded bad regardless of what was actually playing).
Now, I do agree that live is (or should be) better than a recording.
A quick listen to a something I found on Xerath resulted in this: I hear clipping (could be from where I found it, or could also be present on the CD). It's also loud, but it's not uncomfortable to listen to. Different instruments feel like distinct, and the audio doesn't sound like an indistinct mass. Which is quite nice. And it doesn't all exactly sound like it's at the same volume all the time.
I think it's the new one:
"During presentations and hands-on demos at Crytek's GDC booth, attendees can see for the first time ever full native Linux support in the new CRYENGINE.
That's what the summary says. I assume it's not that one, but the newest (which would be 4, according to wikipedia).
You want OpenAL for audio.
Well... I suppose I mostly saw that passwords managers as an extension of my brain. Also, because I usually trust the systems I use my passwords managers. Also because I trust from where I got the binary. And because I trust the implementation.
I will consider it, though, in the future. I'm not entirely sure what I'll do to solve the "learn all those randomly generated passwords AND remember exactly which one is for what" issue of having unique, as strong as universally possible passwords for every website (that matters). And no, the horsestaplecorrect is NOT a valid option for me. There are websites that limit password length to 16 characters, and the example above is larger.
The thing is, there is the general public definition of hacker (ie a criminal), and then there is the definition of hacker by other people that is something along the lines of: somebody who likes to take things apart, exploring the system's limits; an expert on the field. The later definition includes people like the Elf Lord you mentioned, Abby (from the same show), most security consultants, criminals, etc.
Therefore, his comment is valid for a certain definition of hacker (and most hackers don't reach the news because they are security consultants, or work in IT in a company, or report the issues to the companies who don't go "YOU HACKED INTO MY SYSTEM NEED TO SUE"). And thus: the biggest problem IT people have when communicating with the rest is that neither side really talks the same language. How are we going to communicate effectively and solve issues if we don't really share the same language?
I was not aware of the second rule. Which is broken by all those password manager software, btw.
It's not a bad advice, to be honest, but it also depends on the fact that you are writing (storing) your passwords already.
Seems like a sensible idea, to be honest. At least you could then let them know, (and it should be recorded) that you don't like any of them but voted anyway for the one that seems less bad to you.
Of course, the fact that if nobody buys what you are selling, there isn't much you can do does not mean you should stop trying. Even if it isn't much, something will get through. Somebody will change their mind. Maybe that somebody will be able to reach further than what the /. crowd would have reached. If you don't try and get more involved, however... well..
Note: I am not in USA