I don't think a MiniDisc holds anything near 400Mb; from memory, I believe it's more like 140Mb. They get 74 minutes of music into that using ATRAC (lossy) compression.
In this age of information, terrorism need not be physical. With most wealth existing as information outside of physical reality, and companies founded on the shuffling of bits, an "infowar" attack against a strategic economic target could do much more damage than any reasonable number of car bombs. Why blow up the Yoyodyne building when you can instead shoot down their stock price, decimating their value and causing much more damage? Or if that's not spectacular enough, cripple their communications system.
Which is not to say that Melissa is a political or economic terrorist attack, though the age of electronic, entirely non-physical terrorism is coming. It makes much more sense. The future of terrorism looks more like the Sense/Net raid from Neuromancer than the World Trade Center bombing.
Couldn't the feds press charges of terrorism, which carries very severe penalties (life imprisonment and the death penalty are both options) against the virus author? Maybe someone will figure that if they make an example of one cracker, others will be "scared straight".
I dislike MS's monopolist practices and shoddy code as much as the next person, but do we really need "reviews" of Gates' books which proudly announce that the reviewer hadn't read the book and then go on to trash it? Do we really need to profess blind faith in the irredeemable evil of the Great Satan, and a conviction that the pure of heart don't need to actually look at what they righteously condemn? Come on; this is the sort of anti-Microsoft article that sounds like a Cold War-era Soviet propaganda broadcast denouncing the "capitalist imperialist running dogs" in Washington for everything from AIDS to the latest vodka shortage. Surely we can do better...
I recall an article about Ron Howard, in which he was quoted as championing the virtue of the mainstream, of slackless normalcy and nose-to-the-grindstone conventionality. He seems to be a sort of cinematic Norman Rockwell, a champion of the mundane and workaday. As such, I'm not surprised that EDtv is uninspired.
-- acb, who almost fell asleep when he saw Backdraft.
What should really be done is for the Win32 API to be handed over to a standards body; a complete specification (sufficiently complete to produce a Win32 implementation) should be handed over by Microsoft (or distilled from MS source by independent experts), and put in the custody of an independent body, such as X/Open, IEEE or ISO. Microsoft should be restricted from extending its implementation of the API in proprietary fashions and using such extensions in applications.
This is the optimal solution. It imposes minimally on Microsoft (compared to a breakup or expropriation of source), whilst breaking the hub of Microsoft's monopoly, their control of the industry-standard desktop API. Microsoft can still compete, but they will have to do so on merit, by ensuring their Win32 implementation is the most efficient and stable (a novel concept), and they will have plenty of competition. (For one, IBM could build a Win32 implementation on their OS/2 code; and there will surely be Win32 implementations for Linux, possibly bundled with every copy of RedHat and the like.)
You misunderstand. All those attributes are superficial. They do not correlate with sexual prowess, personality, or how much you can enjoy being with said supermodel for prolonged periods of time (unless you want your women primarily as walking eye-candy, and actually interacting with them is unimportant).
Besides, if she's a stick-thin, sickly anorexic, chances are she's not going to be much of a performer in bed...
Wallace used to be such, but a while ago he gave up spamming and turned his dubious talents to helping the anti-spam cause. Unless there's more recent news I'm not aware of.
Sex with supermodels? Ummmm, no.
on
Wired on Kipling
·
· Score: 1
Aren't you making the assumption that supermodels are somehow naturally more sexually enjoyable than non-supermodels? I mean, how does being blonde, bronzed, stick-thin and mammarily enhanced automatically make a woman a better lover?
If there's one thing supermodel partners are qualified for. it is as status symbols. Ultra-wealthy men don't have young model-grade trophy wives because they are better lovers or better domestic partners; they have them as status symbols, to parade around and demonstrate their worth. It's like buying a pedigree cat for $1000; other than status you don't get much in the way of features.
Unlike on Windows, on Linux Microsoft cannot count on getting ownership of the market as a fait accompli. MS Office for Linux will probably sell to corporate markets standardised on Office. Other than that, Corel, Applix and others have a fighting chance among those not committed to the One Microsoft Way, especially if their product is more reliable.
If Office comes out on Linux, and is marketed inexpensively at non-enterprise markets, it will provide the others with a bit of healthy competition in a fair arena.
If it was a democracy, then everyone would have to concur with the majority's decision. Linux is an anarchy, which means you can call it whatever you like.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. The issue is not BSD vs. GNU; the issue is mostly the termination clause. If Apple has a change of heart about open-source and decides to revoke its license, it should not affect the base Linux kernel, or anything critical.
The Apple licence, whilst a step in the right direction, has some worrying provisions. For one, the BSDish copyright clause, and the requirements for registering modifications with Apple. And then there's the termination clause, a significant Achilles hell.
If parts of Darwin are integrated into the base of Linux, all it would take would be a patent/licence dispute, and Apple (or plaintiffs) could order all affected code (i.e., all copies of Linux with the Darwin code) destroyed. Linux would recover, after a fashion, but it would be painful, and would make Linux and OSS look unreliable.
Therefore, Darwin should be kept as far as possible from the base Linux tree. Which is not to say that there shouldn't be experimental patches or kernel modules based on Darwin; by all means there should. Use it as an ornament but not a cornerstone.
Methinks she'd regard the GPL as evil and collectivist, in that it takes away one's right to crush the competition, as Gates (a true latter-day John Galt) does.
Once saturation is reached, survival of the fittest will kick in. Projects which don't scratch anybody's itch and aren't cool enough for hack value will founder, whereas cool projects will keep taking off.
Slashdot Mirror
No, that kid was named Gibson (or at least that was his first name; don't remember his surname).
I don't think a MiniDisc holds anything near 400Mb; from memory, I believe it's more like 140Mb. They get 74 minutes of music into that using ATRAC (lossy) compression.
It's a reference to a popular song from the early 90s titled "Unbelievable", by UK indie group EMF.
In this age of information, terrorism need not be physical. With most wealth existing as information outside of physical reality, and companies founded on the shuffling of bits, an "infowar" attack against a strategic economic target could do much more damage than any reasonable number of car bombs. Why blow up the Yoyodyne building when you can instead shoot down their stock price, decimating their value and causing much more damage? Or if that's not spectacular enough, cripple their communications system.
Which is not to say that Melissa is a political or economic terrorist attack, though the age of electronic, entirely non-physical terrorism is coming. It makes much more sense. The future of terrorism looks more like the Sense/Net raid from Neuromancer than the World Trade Center bombing.
...besides Netscape for linux doesn't include a midi player
Though plugger with timidity can play embedded MIDI files all too well.
How about the Free Software song?
Or should that be reserved for the RMS Dance?
Since when was it illegal to write a virus?
Since a few virus scares back when politicians passed a specific law about writing viruses (or so I recall).
Couldn't the feds press charges of terrorism, which carries very severe penalties (life imprisonment and the death penalty are both options) against the virus author? Maybe someone will figure that if they make an example of one cracker, others will be "scared straight".
He was once involved with one Doctress Neutopia, and was a candidate for the position of Gaia Messiah. For more information, see this page.
I dislike MS's monopolist practices and shoddy code as much as the next person, but do we really need "reviews" of Gates' books which proudly announce that the reviewer hadn't read the book and then go on to trash it? Do we really need to profess blind faith in the irredeemable evil of the Great Satan, and a conviction that the pure of heart don't need to actually look at what they righteously condemn? Come on; this is the sort of anti-Microsoft article that sounds like a Cold War-era Soviet propaganda broadcast denouncing the "capitalist imperialist running dogs" in Washington for everything from AIDS to the latest vodka shortage. Surely we can do better...
I recall an article about Ron Howard, in which he was quoted as championing the virtue of the mainstream, of slackless normalcy and nose-to-the-grindstone conventionality. He seems to be a sort of cinematic Norman Rockwell, a champion of the mundane and workaday. As such, I'm not surprised that EDtv is uninspired.
-- acb, who almost fell asleep when he saw Backdraft.
What should really be done is for the Win32 API to be handed over to a standards body; a complete specification (sufficiently complete to produce a Win32 implementation) should be handed over by Microsoft (or distilled from MS source by independent experts), and put in the custody of an independent body, such as X/Open, IEEE or ISO. Microsoft should be restricted from extending its implementation of the API in proprietary fashions and using such extensions in applications.
This is the optimal solution. It imposes minimally on Microsoft (compared to a breakup or expropriation of source), whilst breaking the hub of Microsoft's monopoly, their control of the industry-standard desktop API. Microsoft can still compete, but they will have to do so on merit, by ensuring their Win32 implementation is the most efficient and stable (a novel concept), and they will have plenty of competition. (For one, IBM could build a Win32 implementation on their OS/2 code; and there will surely be Win32 implementations for Linux, possibly bundled with every copy of RedHat and the like.)
You misunderstand. All those attributes are superficial. They do not correlate with sexual prowess, personality, or how much you can enjoy being with said supermodel for prolonged periods of time (unless you want your women primarily as walking eye-candy, and actually interacting with them is unimportant).
Besides, if she's a stick-thin, sickly anorexic, chances are she's not going to be much of a performer in bed...
Wallace used to be such, but a while ago he gave up spamming and turned his dubious talents to helping the anti-spam cause. Unless there's more recent news I'm not aware of.
Aren't you making the assumption that supermodels are somehow naturally more sexually enjoyable than non-supermodels? I mean, how does being blonde, bronzed, stick-thin and mammarily enhanced automatically make a woman a better lover?
If there's one thing supermodel partners are qualified for. it is as status symbols. Ultra-wealthy men don't have young model-grade trophy wives because they are better lovers or better domestic partners; they have them as status symbols, to parade around and demonstrate their worth. It's like buying a pedigree cat for $1000; other than status you don't get much in the way of features.
I'd rather see IE for Linux than Office. It'd inject some competition into the browser market on Linux (which is virtually a one-horse race).
Unlike on Windows, on Linux Microsoft cannot count on getting ownership of the market as a fait accompli. MS Office for Linux will probably sell to corporate markets standardised on Office. Other than that, Corel, Applix and others have a fighting chance among those not committed to the One Microsoft Way, especially if their product is more reliable.
If Office comes out on Linux, and is marketed inexpensively at non-enterprise markets, it will provide the others with a bit of healthy competition in a fair arena.
If it was a democracy, then everyone would have to concur with the majority's decision. Linux is an anarchy, which means you can call it whatever you like.
Since the kernel is GPLed, I don't see the point. Short of replacing the kernel, you'll never have a completely non-GPLed Linux distribution.
Besides, if you want non-GPLed, one of the BSDs would be a better choice.
Sounds like the RMS Titanic to me...
I agree with you wholeheartedly. The issue is not BSD vs. GNU; the issue is mostly the termination clause. If Apple has a change of heart about open-source and decides to revoke its license, it should not affect the base Linux kernel, or anything critical.
GNUStep would be a pretty cool alternate UI for Darwin, IMHO.
The Apple licence, whilst a step in the right direction, has some worrying provisions. For one, the BSDish copyright clause, and the requirements for registering modifications with Apple. And then there's the termination clause, a significant Achilles hell.
If parts of Darwin are integrated into the base of Linux, all it would take would be a patent/licence dispute, and Apple (or plaintiffs) could order all affected code (i.e., all copies of Linux with the Darwin code) destroyed. Linux would recover, after a fashion, but it would be painful, and would make Linux and OSS look unreliable.
Therefore, Darwin should be kept as far as possible from the base Linux tree. Which is not to say that there shouldn't be experimental patches or kernel modules based on Darwin; by all means there should. Use it as an ornament but not a cornerstone.
Methinks she'd regard the GPL as evil and collectivist, in that it takes away one's right to crush the competition, as Gates (a true latter-day John Galt) does.
See www.moral-defense.org.
Once saturation is reached, survival of the fittest will kick in. Projects which don't scratch anybody's itch and aren't cool enough for hack value will founder, whereas cool projects will keep taking off.