Good point, I think you've hit upon one of the flaws in using a quote out of context.
Just like people claim Al Gore "invented the Internet", this quote isn't particularely useful. It's poorly structured (a few missing punctuation marks) but other than that, it's perfectly intelligible, given 1-5 above.
and I for some reason accidentally submitted that before I finished writing it...
computers can be a great tool, especially in a situation where they can be used effectively, and are taught by someone who knows how to use them as such (like yourself.)
As someone who was a victim of homeschooling myself, I wholely oppose it in any form and implementation.
Yours seem to be better than most, but my parents were the religious sort, and quite controlling in that aspect until I got older and forced them to enroll me in a public school. (This was....I dunno, 5-6 years ago. I've since graduated and moved on.)
When I was in high school, I at most had 2 computers (and some other random networking equipment) in my room...and the server and switches were there because there was nowhere else for them to go, not because I really wanted them. Now I'm a CS major at Georgia Tech. (Although, I am changing schools and majors, since I despise programming at this point.)
Not to make any judgements against you or anything, but if you've got that much equipment in your room, you probably don't go out very much. That'll hurt you in the long run...I've gotten job offers from people I've only spoken with briefly, because I knew how to talk to them and work with them, not just sit and post on/..
Not to pick a fight with someone who obviously actually has experience in this area, but,
the purpose of the chip isn't to tell your kids what they can see, it's to allow you to enforce what your kids can and can't see.
You set its rating level, then the television itself enforces the rule you set.
Your experience was a malfunction of sorts.
The rating system itself isn't that good (ratings can change with shows...it wouldn't be too difficult to manipulate the rating information embedded in a broadcast to change ratings at more "Racy" parts of a broadcast, I think) but it and the chip exist as a tool for you to use to enforce your rules; nobody else is enforcing them for you.
I concur, I long stopped using the Kazaa network (or, for that matter, any public P2P networks -- when I want music, I generally rip or copy the physical CD from a friend now) long ago. The signal to noise ratio is just too low...for any media type. MP3s are RIAAfied, adult-oriented graphical material frequently tends to return the particularely unsavory sort, and audiovisual productions are sorely mislabeled.
Dr. Watson at this point is the application incident report agent. It's actually useful in XP, as it provides links to MSKB articles, patches, etc. based on what information it finds.
There wasn't a single thing I hated more, my entire childhood and through high school, than eating with my family.
Even now, in college, I dread "coming home" like I dread finals, the plague, etc.
My mother and I don't see eye-to-eye on pretty much everything. She's very religious, I am not. She is strongly republican, I'm a bit more left-of-center. I've been sexually active at other points in my life (although, not currently, been single for a while followed by a new girlfriend that hasn't gone anywhere yet) and she is morally opposed to that. I was always encouraged to "think for myself" and it didn't quite turn out the way she wanted it to, and as such, we have a lot of disagreements, to the point where I try to avoid seeing her at all costs.
I'm trying to mend it somewhat, since I don't really *like* having a bad relationship with my mother. We started, yesterday in fact, by having a long discussion about politics, in which we managed to avoid raising our voices or using phrases such as "imoral" and "heathen." Thus, a step in the right direction.
Eating with your kids can be a good thing, but sometimes it just causes more problems than anything else. 85% of meals my family ate together, nobody would talk about anything, because the atmosphere was too tense from my mother being on my case about one thing or another. In the end, it kind of hurt the cohesiveness.
My friends from high school were all fairly "preppy" or indie/punkish kind of people...but all insanely intelligent, and not afraid to show it: as such, we'd have good conversations about politics, religion, literature, etc. as well as the normal teenage goofing off. Went to a ton of concerts and shows, played some rec sports, parties, etc.
At college, the only people I notice that are willing to be "smart" in their daily lives, are the nerds with no social abiltiies at all.
(so, as a consequence, while I had a ton of friends in high school, we split ways when it came time for college, and I have very few friends now. It's kind of depressing.)
I'm not sure what the point of this post was, something in yours triggered it, but by the time I finished writing, I forgot what that way.
Speaking as someone who lived that way for a while, then got over it, let me give you some advice:
(1) The worst possible thing you can do would be to monitor their activities online. Don't even snoop around in their history files, logs, etc. If there's something you don't want them doing (looking at porn, etc.) then make sure they know that "if they get caught" that bad things will happen -- but don't take any real steps to enforce it. Unless they do something dumb (leave porn on the screen while they leave the room, etc.) it's n not worth it. Monitoring just breeds an atmosphere of distrust anyway: you want them to trust you, and it's a mutual thing: if you want them to trust you, you have to trust them somewhat.
(2) Encourage them, but in a different way. For the first couple years I was in high school, it was difficult for me to see my friends due to geographic seperation (about 30 min. apart) and even then, my mother didn't really like my friends since she made various unfounded assumptions about the kind of people they were, based on stereotypes and rumor. So, even when I had the time to see them, frequently I couldn't. Assuming you don't think that your children's friends are satan incarnate, encourage them to invite people over. My last few years of high school (when I got fed up with the geographic seperation and found friends who were a lot closer to me) my parents liked the new set of friends a lot better, for whatever reason, and every other week or so I'd have 10-ish people over to my house, and we'd make a nuisance of ourselves, etc. My parents liked it for two reasons: (1) They got to meet my friends, or at least see them in person, rather than just hearing about them, and (2) I was socializing. Now, admittedly, when I had friends in the area, I would never stay home to be on the computer instead of going out with them, but they didn't really catch on to that. So, conclusion: encourage your children to invite their friends to your house. and don't give them too much trouble if the music is loud, or there's people running all over the place.
(3) Since you seem to be the Slashdot parent, I'm sure you've got considerably computer skills. Option 3 is a bit more nefarious: Make the Internet have "issues" whenever you think they've been on it for too much. Whether the issue is "I needed to cut your ethernet cable so I have the full connection, because I'm working from home on an important project" or the issue is "the Internet's been really flaky all day today, something must be wrong up the line somewhere" or "the modem burned out" or anything. Set up some kind of a BSD box...impose bandwidth limits, forced-latency, occasionally remove their NATting so they can't get anywhere, etc. Wage a covert war against it.
(3) is the worst thing you could do, but it is a viable last resort.
I didn't socialize much my first few years of high school, since it was difficult for me both in terms of time and transportation. Then, when I had transportation, I still didn't because my parents made it so difficult for me to do so: call every hour when you're with those people, you have to be back at 11, etc. The "management overhead" involved with seeing those friends was made so high, it was seldom worth it for me to do it, if I had to deal with phoning in every so often, and leave in time to be back by their deadline. Once I started disobeying their restrictions so often they gave up enforcing them, I went out a bit more, but even so the driving time was a pain. I didn't really start doing things in my free time outside of the house, until I found local friends. *shrug* Your milage may vary.
This was all a couple years ago, I'm since out of high school obviously, but those things were my experience.
Sounds good to me, if the phone number to call is the "Send a free legitimate copy of XP in exchange for telling them where you got the pirate one from."
In fact, I should hope they do this.
I'm not saying XP shouldn't be cheaper, but it's still wrong to use it without paying for it in some way. Plus, there's plenty of ways to obtain legitimate copies of the software: I have 20 copies of Windows XP Pro, SP1a and SP2 (10 of each) obtained legally, for the low low price of around $25 per copy. Direct from Microsoft themself.
This is, by the way, the unspoken (okay, well, I had it spoken to me by an executive of a relatively small software company that makes a closed-source produce I've heard people raving about on Slashdot before) rule about piracy: they don't really care about the home pirates (although they don't like it), they only care about instutional pirates: Those are the real threats to their market.
It's very reasonable of MS to want the customers to tell them who sold them a bad copy of Windows, and then replace it for free. MS wins, consumer wins, business doing something illegal loses.
This would only double your framerate if the bottleneck framerate is 1/2 your vertical refresh.
"Visible" framerate is limited to the vertical refresh of your monitor, anyway: the electron gun will physically not draw more frames on your screen in 1 second than it is swept across. (This is where vsync in games comes into play, to prevent "tearing", where the image is being redrawn so quickly in the GPU that the scene doesn't remain constant even between vertical sweeps)
It would probably be about as efficient as scan-line or split-scene interleaving, since most hardware of the caliber you would run in SLI/SSI mode wouldn't be bottlenecked at half the vsync in the first place.
I'd much rather have DVHS than HDD-based recorders.
I'm thinking of purchasing one for my home theatre setup, actually. I find that price/performance wise, it's more of a "bang for my buck" than an HDD recorder. Even if it uses the tapes.
That, and the fact that CRT monitors lend themselves to horizontal divisions (top/bottom, not left/right) since they sweep top to bottom during refresh.
Every time I've had to reactivate my copies of anything, it's as simple as "yeah, I'm installing Office on my laptop now too." or "I reformatted" or (in my case) I'm an Action Pack subscriber, so I'm authorized to more activations than the autochecker knows about.
Slashdot Mirror
IIS 6 is one of the best web servers I have ever had the privlidge of using.
This coming from a hardline Apache man, even running Apache on Windows boxen.
Price point implies more than just a dollar amount. It's the overall value of the purchase.
Good point, I think you've hit upon one of the flaws in using a quote out of context.
Just like people claim Al Gore "invented the Internet", this quote isn't particularely useful. It's poorly structured (a few missing punctuation marks) but other than that, it's perfectly intelligible, given 1-5 above.
Mathematically/combinatorically, MD5(x_q_x_q) would reduce to MD5(x_q) anyway, as the q_x_q is taking the place of the appended term.
Thus you'd be nowhere better.
I'd pay $10 a month for modem speed Internet, if it were unmetered and hooked to my computer.
Unfortunately, it doesn't work like that. Verizon charges about $100 a month for 200ish kbps, metered.
You're a credit to your religion.
I'm not a religious individual, but at least you're not one of the pushy types.
and I for some reason accidentally submitted that before I finished writing it...
computers can be a great tool, especially in a situation where they can be used effectively, and are taught by someone who knows how to use them as such (like yourself.)
As someone who was a victim of homeschooling myself, I wholely oppose it in any form and implementation.
Yours seem to be better than most, but my parents were the religious sort, and quite controlling in that aspect until I got older and forced them to enroll me in a public school. (This was....I dunno, 5-6 years ago. I've since graduated and moved on.)
When I was in high school, I at most had 2 computers (and some other random networking equipment) in my room...and the server and switches were there because there was nowhere else for them to go, not because I really wanted them. Now I'm a CS major at Georgia Tech. (Although, I am changing schools and majors, since I despise programming at this point.)
/..
Not to make any judgements against you or anything, but if you've got that much equipment in your room, you probably don't go out very much. That'll hurt you in the long run...I've gotten job offers from people I've only spoken with briefly, because I knew how to talk to them and work with them, not just sit and post on
Not to pick a fight with someone who obviously actually has experience in this area, but,
the purpose of the chip isn't to tell your kids what they can see, it's to allow you to enforce what your kids can and can't see.
You set its rating level, then the television itself enforces the rule you set.
Your experience was a malfunction of sorts.
The rating system itself isn't that good (ratings can change with shows...it wouldn't be too difficult to manipulate the rating information embedded in a broadcast to change ratings at more "Racy" parts of a broadcast, I think) but it and the chip exist as a tool for you to use to enforce your rules; nobody else is enforcing them for you.
I hate that show...people seem to uphold it as the pinnacle of documentary research, and let it do the thinking for them, in my experience.
I concur, I long stopped using the Kazaa network (or, for that matter, any public P2P networks -- when I want music, I generally rip or copy the physical CD from a friend now) long ago. The signal to noise ratio is just too low...for any media type. MP3s are RIAAfied, adult-oriented graphical material frequently tends to return the particularely unsavory sort, and audiovisual productions are sorely mislabeled.
The network is basically useless.
Dr. Watson at this point is the application incident report agent. It's actually useful in XP, as it provides links to MSKB articles, patches, etc. based on what information it finds.
Purely for paranoia's sake, the log-to file on my Apache is nul: (Windows system)
There wasn't a single thing I hated more, my entire childhood and through high school, than eating with my family.
Even now, in college, I dread "coming home" like I dread finals, the plague, etc.
My mother and I don't see eye-to-eye on pretty much everything. She's very religious, I am not. She is strongly republican, I'm a bit more left-of-center. I've been sexually active at other points in my life (although, not currently, been single for a while followed by a new girlfriend that hasn't gone anywhere yet) and she is morally opposed to that. I was always encouraged to "think for myself" and it didn't quite turn out the way she wanted it to, and as such, we have a lot of disagreements, to the point where I try to avoid seeing her at all costs.
I'm trying to mend it somewhat, since I don't really *like* having a bad relationship with my mother. We started, yesterday in fact, by having a long discussion about politics, in which we managed to avoid raising our voices or using phrases such as "imoral" and "heathen." Thus, a step in the right direction.
Eating with your kids can be a good thing, but sometimes it just causes more problems than anything else. 85% of meals my family ate together, nobody would talk about anything, because the atmosphere was too tense from my mother being on my case about one thing or another. In the end, it kind of hurt the cohesiveness.
My friends from high school were all fairly "preppy" or indie/punkish kind of people...but all insanely intelligent, and not afraid to show it: as such, we'd have good conversations about politics, religion, literature, etc. as well as the normal teenage goofing off. Went to a ton of concerts and shows, played some rec sports, parties, etc.
At college, the only people I notice that are willing to be "smart" in their daily lives, are the nerds with no social abiltiies at all.
(so, as a consequence, while I had a ton of friends in high school, we split ways when it came time for college, and I have very few friends now. It's kind of depressing.)
I'm not sure what the point of this post was, something in yours triggered it, but by the time I finished writing, I forgot what that way.
Speaking as someone who lived that way for a while, then got over it, let me give you some advice:
(1) The worst possible thing you can do would be to monitor their activities online. Don't even snoop around in their history files, logs, etc. If there's something you don't want them doing (looking at porn, etc.) then make sure they know that "if they get caught" that bad things will happen -- but don't take any real steps to enforce it. Unless they do something dumb (leave porn on the screen while they leave the room, etc.) it's n not worth it. Monitoring just breeds an atmosphere of distrust anyway: you want them to trust you, and it's a mutual thing: if you want them to trust you, you have to trust them somewhat.
(2) Encourage them, but in a different way. For the first couple years I was in high school, it was difficult for me to see my friends due to geographic seperation (about 30 min. apart) and even then, my mother didn't really like my friends since she made various unfounded assumptions about the kind of people they were, based on stereotypes and rumor. So, even when I had the time to see them, frequently I couldn't. Assuming you don't think that your children's friends are satan incarnate, encourage them to invite people over. My last few years of high school (when I got fed up with the geographic seperation and found friends who were a lot closer to me) my parents liked the new set of friends a lot better, for whatever reason, and every other week or so I'd have 10-ish people over to my house, and we'd make a nuisance of ourselves, etc. My parents liked it for two reasons: (1) They got to meet my friends, or at least see them in person, rather than just hearing about them, and (2) I was socializing. Now, admittedly, when I had friends in the area, I would never stay home to be on the computer instead of going out with them, but they didn't really catch on to that. So, conclusion: encourage your children to invite their friends to your house. and don't give them too much trouble if the music is loud, or there's people running all over the place.
(3) Since you seem to be the Slashdot parent, I'm sure you've got considerably computer skills. Option 3 is a bit more nefarious: Make the Internet have "issues" whenever you think they've been on it for too much. Whether the issue is "I needed to cut your ethernet cable so I have the full connection, because I'm working from home on an important project" or the issue is "the Internet's been really flaky all day today, something must be wrong up the line somewhere" or "the modem burned out" or anything. Set up some kind of a BSD box...impose bandwidth limits, forced-latency, occasionally remove their NATting so they can't get anywhere, etc. Wage a covert war against it.
(3) is the worst thing you could do, but it is a viable last resort.
I didn't socialize much my first few years of high school, since it was difficult for me both in terms of time and transportation. Then, when I had transportation, I still didn't because my parents made it so difficult for me to do so: call every hour when you're with those people, you have to be back at 11, etc. The "management overhead" involved with seeing those friends was made so high, it was seldom worth it for me to do it, if I had to deal with phoning in every so often, and leave in time to be back by their deadline. Once I started disobeying their restrictions so often they gave up enforcing them, I went out a bit more, but even so the driving time was a pain. I didn't really start doing things in my free time outside of the house, until I found local friends. *shrug* Your milage may vary.
This was all a couple years ago, I'm since out of high school obviously, but those things were my experience.
Sounds good to me, if the phone number to call is the "Send a free legitimate copy of XP in exchange for telling them where you got the pirate one from."
In fact, I should hope they do this.
I'm not saying XP shouldn't be cheaper, but it's still wrong to use it without paying for it in some way. Plus, there's plenty of ways to obtain legitimate copies of the software: I have 20 copies of Windows XP Pro, SP1a and SP2 (10 of each) obtained legally, for the low low price of around $25 per copy. Direct from Microsoft themself.
www.microsoftactionpack.com
Sounds pretty fair!
This is, by the way, the unspoken (okay, well, I had it spoken to me by an executive of a relatively small software company that makes a closed-source produce I've heard people raving about on Slashdot before) rule about piracy: they don't really care about the home pirates (although they don't like it), they only care about instutional pirates: Those are the real threats to their market.
It's very reasonable of MS to want the customers to tell them who sold them a bad copy of Windows, and then replace it for free. MS wins, consumer wins, business doing something illegal loses.
This would only double your framerate if the bottleneck framerate is 1/2 your vertical refresh.
"Visible" framerate is limited to the vertical refresh of your monitor, anyway: the electron gun will physically not draw more frames on your screen in 1 second than it is swept across. (This is where vsync in games comes into play, to prevent "tearing", where the image is being redrawn so quickly in the GPU that the scene doesn't remain constant even between vertical sweeps)
It would probably be about as efficient as scan-line or split-scene interleaving, since most hardware of the caliber you would run in SLI/SSI mode wouldn't be bottlenecked at half the vsync in the first place.
I'd much rather have DVHS than HDD-based recorders.
I'm thinking of purchasing one for my home theatre setup, actually. I find that price/performance wise, it's more of a "bang for my buck" than an HDD recorder. Even if it uses the tapes.
Vertical sweep is measured in Hz.
Horizontal sweep is measured in kHz.
That, and the fact that CRT monitors lend themselves to horizontal divisions (top/bottom, not left/right) since they sweep top to bottom during refresh.
Every time I've had to reactivate my copies of anything, it's as simple as "yeah, I'm installing Office on my laptop now too." or "I reformatted" or (in my case) I'm an Action Pack subscriber, so I'm authorized to more activations than the autochecker knows about.
Quite simple, really.
How hard is it to get elected to Congress?
I want to serve the people, by passing laws to protect personal freedoms, privacy, free speech, and consumer rights.
This is the feeler of interest for my campaign; the real campaign will take place in about 10 years.
What are you talking about?
McAfee enterprise editon over here (patched off my school's server) says nothing of the sort.
Maybe you're running the paranoia-prone home version of it, that thinks anything that touches the registry is a worm.