Cronjobs are never "simple fixes". 'chmod -w' is much easier. Anyway, the desktop is doomed as long as you have to edit anything (via a gui, but especially by hand) to get simple peripherals to work.
I don't know if the rootkit is part of the DRM system or not, but you can't install a rootkit on someone's computer without their permission. Simply saying, "You need this to play the music," isn't enough. You have to say, "You have to let us install something so that we can monitor and control your computer remotely or you can't listen to the music." If you don't spell it out, then you're commiting "cybercrime." People have gone to jail for saying less than , "this will let you play music."
Of course Number 6 destroyed a super computer capable of answering any question on "The Prisoner" by asking it "Why?". The computer would answer the question, then check the answer by repeating the question.
Of course other Christians don't have a good opinion of Catholism or the Pope, some even believing they're devil worshippers.
I had a roommate my freshman year that said to his girlfriend, "That's like being a Catholic. Catholics are as close to pagans as you can get and still call yourself a Christian." Apparently he was unaware that the Catholic Church is one the two original Christian denominations, and traces its founding to Peter. (The other being the Greek Orthodox, which traces itself back to Paul.)
He would receive mailing from John Hagee Ministries (Their stamps read "Let's take America back!", complete with the exclaimation mark and an American flag.) and another televangelist whose name elludes me fo the moment.
Little did he know I was Catholic. I should put a statue of Mary on my monitor after that.
1.) You cannot use a name of someone/something "famous", even if it's your own. Among nerds, CmdrTaco is a relatively known names. So far I've seen names like Rushlimbaugh, Petergriffin, etc. get changed the first day.
I don't have a beef with any of WoW's rules per se. I don't even have a beef with the above rule, but WoW is letting the letter of the law conflict with the spirit of the law. The rule is intended to keep people from misrepresenting themselves. But what if, like in Rob Malda's case, you are that person?
Say you were playing along as your name "Mike Jones,' or whatnot. Everything is school since you're not famous. Then something happens and you're world famous. Now WoW says, you have to change your name. That's stupid. If you can prove you're "Mike Jones," or at least created the name prior to it becoming famous, then you should be able to keep it.
The Swiss do have quite a large army, all things considered. All Swiss men are weekend warriors... that's why Hitler didn't invade.
Yeah. Everyone quakes in fear of the Territorial Army, and the National Guard. The friendliness of the Swiss government had absolutely nothing to do with it.
I was refering to upgrading the POTS to support DSL. You might not need to do that in all cases. Satellite links may be actually be more cost effective and provide good-enough access. Right now satellites can provide 2Mbps down and 256kbps up. While the upstream speed isn't that good, the downstream is comparable to DSL and cable offerings.
When the REA was established, you had to run a wire to every house. Now you don't.
On Febuary 13, 1639 Montezuma sent a fleet of trimemes, ironclads, and troopships to the African continent. When the fleet reached the western Saharan coast, a motley group of 8 divisions of muskateers, 4 calvary divisons, 4 cannon batteries, a contigent of knights, and three battle hardened phalanxes of spearmen were unloaded. This was the Aztec First Expeditionary Force. The 1EF began razing trade routes and farmland as they fanned out across the desert. The city of Alexandria quickly fell quickly to the Aztecs. The 1EF then turned south. Swazi, Npodo, and Ulundi all succumbed to the onslaught. After several months of intense fighting, Montezuma finally reached the Cape of Hope and his ultimate goal. The Mongolian capital of Ulaanbaatar
And if socialism works so well, why isn't Johnson's "Great Society" a reality today? The democrats had decades to implement plans to eliminate poverty, racism and social injustice from the federal level... so why isn't poverty eliminated?
Well why do we spend money on police and prisons? Think of all the money we've spent on that and crime still exists. This presents us with one inescapable conclusion. Law enforcement has failed. As society, we must do the responsible thing, and eliminate all law enforcement and correctional activities.
Your numbers are misleading. Your calculations presume you have provide access to land. You don't. You only have to provide access to where the people live. A lot of land in the United States is uninhabited. Take Alaska for instance. It's 1,067,653 square miles, but the majority of the people live along the southern coast. For example, it would be wasteful to provide access of any type to the 9,375 square miles of Denali National Park.
A similar case can be made with the southwest and north central United States. Those states are sparsely populated overall, but do have a few large population centers. Link the population centers, and you've effectively wired up the entire region.
I'm white and grew up in an economically depressed rural region. I attended a school that offered the bare minimum of college prep. No AP classes. No AV club. No computer lab. No arts. Just the State of Illinois bare minimum curriculum. Yet, I got in to a four year university, no problem, and had no problem paying for it.
That said...
You went completely off track with the "woe is the white male" crap.
Racism is when you make a generalization and apply it to an individual. For example: The vast majority of the players in the NBA are black. Jack is black. Therefore Jack is good basketball player. As is: Local news shows many black criminals. Jack is black. Therefore Jack is a criminal. However, saying since Black Jack is rich, poor blacks aren't an issue, is ignoring the problem; and that's what you're doing.
You taking exception to being told that minorities have less access and less success at college is particularly disturbing. Blacks and hispanics, as a demographic group, do not achieve the same educational level as whites and asians. According to the US Census Bureau only about 13.1% of black males and 14.8% of hispanic males aged 25 and older have a 4 year degree in 2003, compared to 29.5% for white males. So educational opportunities are still not being realized for blacks and hispanics. Admission rates still lag behind whites and asians, and as of 2001 were actually declining.
Why aren't blacks and hispanics enrolling at rates equal to whites and asians? That's a complicated question, and one that still has no answer. A lot of times in the US we use race as a proxy for class. As a society, we find it easier to talk about ethnicity, but don't want to confront the brutal realities of the haves and have-nots in our "classless" society.
People from underachieving schools attend college at lower rates than those at other schools, and those that do attend typically underperform because they were inadequately prepared in high school. Schools underachieve because they don't have enough funds to attract top teachers, keep up infrastructure, and pay for greater academic resources. Schools are typically funded by property taxes, therefore schools located in poor districts receive less funds than those in wealthy districts. People with less education, are less likely to move from where they were raised, for reasons including not having enough money to leave. Poor people don't have the investment capital to improve the economic neighborhood, therefore the neighborhood stays poor. Poor people have kids that attend the very same local schools that underperform. Poor people as a group have significantly lower voting rates than afluent people, and so nothing changes. Repeat ad infinitum.
And what ethnic groups are over-represented at the low end of the economic scale? That's right. Blacks and hispanics. So what do we talk about? Blacks and hispanics. Now I'm not saying that problems of blacks and hispanics are soley economic. They aren't. Racism does still exist. We've made great strides, but frankly striking down "no niggers at the lunch counter" laws was the easy part. Racism now is more subtle, and therefore harder to prove and just much harder to irraticate.
The best rationale for affirmative action I've ever heard was from President Johnson when he introduced it. He said, that you can't just simply remove the shackles that were holding back a runner when everyone else in race has already started running, and say "Go on! You're equal now. If you don't win, it's your own fault." That "head start" takes the form of better schools, better access to health care, better living conditions, and the like. If you don't help those that are disadvantaged, they will remain disadvantaged for a long long time.
You complaining about a compartively small amount of pr
Thank you for that post. Every so often people need to be whacked with a clue stick. The 0.0001% genetic differences between the races (however that's defined) has some sort of substantive difference in performance. Vitamin D production and correlation of sickle-cell anemia. Yes. Dancing ability and intelligence? No.
There's always a slew of white guys, less than 10 white girls, a bunch of asians (divided 3:1 males:females), a bunch of indians guys, with a few indian girls, and one black guy. That's pretty much how it was at both the large and the small CS departments I've been at.
The flashing ones aren't the worse. The new floating ads that fly around over the main page and force you to click on them to make them go away are the worst. I hate those things. I can't wait until gecko and khtml come up with a new ad blocking scripts.
(private schools too if 'teacher' falls under gov't employee)
Private school teachers can't be government employees, since the school isn't funded by the government. Now public school teachers is a different kettle of fish.
PDAs PDAs are expensive. A Palm Tungsteon costs at least $150. A piece of paper (assuming $4 for a ream) costs $0.008, that's less than a penny each. Have you ever given a way a PDA? I don't think so.
No USB drives aren't accessable anywhere, because they require you to bring your PDA. And not all PDAs will work. You need a PDA that has female USB-A port, as opposed to the much more common in portable, male USB-A port, or even mini male port. Also you need a PDA with software that is compatable with the file you're trying to read. If it's not, then you're screwed. Conversely, paper simply requires that you have at least one working eye.
Document Sharing First, editors are not always authors. An editor marks a section as "awkward." An author rewrites it. An editor marks a section for expansion. An author actually expands the section. Editors have neither the time nor desire to do the author's job for him. Clearly marking defects in the middle of a sentence is incredibly difficult on a computer, compared to the old stand-by red pen.
You're remark about document sharing in MS Office and OpenOffice is comical. You obviously have never tried to use them in a real environment. Things get out of sync quickly. Especially if you're trying to merge two versions that are based off a common ancestor. The sharing only works for the most trivial changes. Most of the time, it causes much more trouble than what it's worth.
Trust me. I tried it before.
Drawing Software
I'm was talking about spur of the moment drawings. Not technical drawings for inclusion in documents. You would never use a piece of software or a $500 drawing tablet for these things. By the time you got the software launched and the tablet out and ready, the drawing could already be complete using a piece of paper and pencil that cost a nickle total.
Why did I wasting time with someone who obviously isn't even in high school yet. Now go. I think your mom is calling you.
1. Tablet PCs aren't really ready for prime time. They're big. They're bulky. They have a limited battery. Interaction is clumsy. And they're expensive. Compare to paper which is thin. Easily distributable. (You can even effectively duplicate paper sometimes by tearing it in half.) Thin and light weight. Can be read on the scale of hundreds of years. Has a natural interaction, and very inexpensive for centuries. (As seen by the saying, "Not even worth the paper it's printed on.")
2. Yeah pen drives fit in a pocket, but you can't access them everywhere. Paper only requires only anything that can leave a stain or mark for write access, and at least one working eye and sufficient light for read access. Pen drives are comparitively expensive, and require an even more expensive device, that is in working order, to access.
3. Computers may have potential for collaboration, but it's just that. Potential. For many interactions their just too awkward. Have you ever tried to mark up revisions in a document? It's not that easy. You can leave notes in the margin. And when it comes for diagraming, it's incredibly slow. When was the last time you were explaining something to someone and said, "let me draw you a picture" and then fired up gimp?
It's hard to crowd around around a terminal. Paper is easy.
Paper has huge advantages, and it's stupid to ignore them simply because no one uses paper on Star Trek.
Slashdot Mirror
The whole idea of racing is there's meant to be a penalty for getting it wrong.
Really? I thought the whole idea of racing was seeing who was the fastest. I mean, race officials don't break the legs of the losers at a track meet.
Silly me.
Cronjobs are never "simple fixes". 'chmod -w' is much easier. Anyway, the desktop is doomed as long as you have to edit anything (via a gui, but especially by hand) to get simple peripherals to work.
I don't know if the rootkit is part of the DRM system or not, but you can't install a rootkit on someone's computer without their permission. Simply saying, "You need this to play the music," isn't enough. You have to say, "You have to let us install something so that we can monitor and control your computer remotely or you can't listen to the music." If you don't spell it out, then you're commiting "cybercrime." People have gone to jail for saying less than , "this will let you play music."
Of course Number 6 destroyed a super computer capable of answering any question on "The Prisoner" by asking it "Why?". The computer would answer the question, then check the answer by repeating the question.
Ahh the Prisoner. 60s psychodelica at its finest.
Of course other Christians don't have a good opinion of Catholism or the Pope, some even believing they're devil worshippers.
I had a roommate my freshman year that said to his girlfriend, "That's like being a Catholic. Catholics are as close to pagans as you can get and still call yourself a Christian." Apparently he was unaware that the Catholic Church is one the two original Christian denominations, and traces its founding to Peter. (The other being the Greek Orthodox, which traces itself back to Paul.)
He would receive mailing from John Hagee Ministries (Their stamps read "Let's take America back!", complete with the exclaimation mark and an American flag.) and another televangelist whose name elludes me fo the moment.
Little did he know I was Catholic. I should put a statue of Mary on my monitor after that.
If he wants to make music, would a music degree make more sense?
1.) You cannot use a name of someone/something "famous", even if it's your own. Among nerds, CmdrTaco is a relatively known names. So far I've seen names like Rushlimbaugh, Petergriffin, etc. get changed the first day.
I don't have a beef with any of WoW's rules per se. I don't even have a beef with the above rule, but WoW is letting the letter of the law conflict with the spirit of the law. The rule is intended to keep people from misrepresenting themselves. But what if, like in Rob Malda's case, you are that person?
Say you were playing along as your name "Mike Jones,' or whatnot. Everything is school since you're not famous. Then something happens and you're world famous. Now WoW says, you have to change your name. That's stupid. If you can prove you're "Mike Jones," or at least created the name prior to it becoming famous, then you should be able to keep it.
I usually find porn really interesting for the first 3 minutes or so, then for some reason it's not so interesting anymore. But maybe that's just me.
You are not alone.
The Swiss do have quite a large army, all things considered. All Swiss men are weekend warriors... that's why Hitler didn't invade.
Yeah. Everyone quakes in fear of the Territorial Army, and the National Guard. The friendliness of the Swiss government had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Their Navy is based in Italy
They don't have have a navy.
I was refering to upgrading the POTS to support DSL. You might not need to do that in all cases. Satellite links may be actually be more cost effective and provide good-enough access. Right now satellites can provide 2Mbps down and 256kbps up. While the upstream speed isn't that good, the downstream is comparable to DSL and cable offerings.
When the REA was established, you had to run a wire to every house. Now you don't.
And if socialism works so well, why isn't Johnson's "Great Society" a reality today? The democrats had decades to implement plans to eliminate poverty, racism and social injustice from the federal level... so why isn't poverty eliminated?
Well why do we spend money on police and prisons? Think of all the money we've spent on that and crime still exists. This presents us with one inescapable conclusion. Law enforcement has failed. As society, we must do the responsible thing, and eliminate all law enforcement and correctional activities.
I love the how that joke works on multiple levels.
Pretty much the entire industrialized world is more "socialist" than the United States.
--
When everyone around you is "ahead of the curve," you're behind it.
Your numbers are misleading. Your calculations presume you have provide access to land. You don't. You only have to provide access to where the people live. A lot of land in the United States is uninhabited. Take Alaska for instance. It's 1,067,653 square miles, but the majority of the people live along the southern coast. For example, it would be wasteful to provide access of any type to the 9,375 square miles of Denali National Park.
A similar case can be made with the southwest and north central United States. Those states are sparsely populated overall, but do have a few large population centers. Link the population centers, and you've effectively wired up the entire region.
I guess that's the famous British politeness shining though.
I'm white and grew up in an economically depressed rural region. I attended a school that offered the bare minimum of college prep. No AP classes. No AV club. No computer lab. No arts. Just the State of Illinois bare minimum curriculum. Yet, I got in to a four year university, no problem, and had no problem paying for it.
That said...
You went completely off track with the "woe is the white male" crap.
Racism is when you make a generalization and apply it to an individual. For example: The vast majority of the players in the NBA are black. Jack is black. Therefore Jack is good basketball player. As is: Local news shows many black criminals. Jack is black. Therefore Jack is a criminal. However, saying since Black Jack is rich, poor blacks aren't an issue, is ignoring the problem; and that's what you're doing.
You taking exception to being told that minorities have less access and less success at college is particularly disturbing. Blacks and hispanics, as a demographic group, do not achieve the same educational level as whites and asians.
According to the US Census Bureau only about 13.1% of black males and 14.8% of hispanic males aged 25 and older have a 4 year degree in 2003, compared to 29.5% for white males. So educational opportunities are still not being realized for blacks and hispanics. Admission rates still lag behind whites and asians, and as of 2001 were actually declining.
Why aren't blacks and hispanics enrolling at rates equal to whites and asians? That's a complicated question, and one that still has no answer. A lot of times in the US we use race as a proxy for class. As a society, we find it easier to talk about ethnicity, but don't want to confront the brutal realities of the haves and have-nots in our "classless" society.
People from underachieving schools attend college at lower rates than those at other schools, and those that do attend typically underperform because they were inadequately prepared in high school. Schools underachieve because they don't have enough funds to attract top teachers, keep up infrastructure, and pay for greater academic resources. Schools are typically funded by property taxes, therefore schools located in poor districts receive less funds than those in wealthy districts. People with less education, are less likely to move from where they were raised, for reasons including not having enough money to leave. Poor people don't have the investment capital to improve the economic neighborhood, therefore the neighborhood stays poor. Poor people have kids that attend the very same local schools that underperform. Poor people as a group have significantly lower voting rates than afluent people, and so nothing changes. Repeat ad infinitum.
And what ethnic groups are over-represented at the low end of the economic scale? That's right. Blacks and hispanics. So what do we talk about? Blacks and hispanics. Now I'm not saying that problems of blacks and hispanics are soley economic. They aren't. Racism does still exist. We've made great strides, but frankly striking down "no niggers at the lunch counter" laws was the easy part. Racism now is more subtle, and therefore harder to prove and just much harder to irraticate.
The best rationale for affirmative action I've ever heard was from President Johnson when he introduced it. He said, that you can't just simply remove the shackles that were holding back a runner when everyone else in race has already started running, and say "Go on! You're equal now. If you don't win, it's your own fault." That "head start" takes the form of better schools, better access to health care, better living conditions, and the like. If you don't help those that are disadvantaged, they will remain disadvantaged for a long long time.
You complaining about a compartively small amount of pr
Thank you for that post. Every so often people need to be whacked with a clue stick. The 0.0001% genetic differences between the races (however that's defined) has some sort of substantive difference in performance. Vitamin D production and correlation of sickle-cell anemia. Yes. Dancing ability and intelligence? No.
There's always a slew of white guys, less than 10 white girls, a bunch of asians (divided 3:1 males:females), a bunch of indians guys, with a few indian girls, and one black guy. That's pretty much how it was at both the large and the small CS departments I've been at.
Maybe they do. But they're a not a govenment employee by any stretch. That's all I'm saying.
The flashing ones aren't the worse. The new floating ads that fly around over the main page and force you to click on them to make them go away are the worst. I hate those things. I can't wait until gecko and khtml come up with a new ad blocking scripts.
I remember it. It was like a phone book. It was very useful back in the day. I always wondered who subscribed to it.
Just picking a nit:
(private schools too if 'teacher' falls under gov't employee)
Private school teachers can't be government employees, since the school isn't funded by the government. Now public school teachers is a different kettle of fish.
PDAs
PDAs are expensive. A Palm Tungsteon costs at least $150. A piece of paper (assuming $4 for a ream) costs $0.008, that's less than a penny each. Have you ever given a way a PDA? I don't think so.
No USB drives aren't accessable anywhere, because they require you to bring your PDA. And not all PDAs will work. You need a PDA that has female USB-A port, as opposed to the much more common in portable, male USB-A port, or even mini male port. Also you need a PDA with software that is compatable with the file you're trying to read. If it's not, then you're screwed. Conversely, paper simply requires that you have at least one working eye.
Document Sharing
First, editors are not always authors. An editor marks a section as "awkward." An author rewrites it. An editor marks a section for expansion. An author actually expands the section. Editors have neither the time nor desire to do the author's job for him. Clearly marking defects in the middle of a sentence is incredibly difficult on a computer, compared to the old stand-by red pen.
You're remark about document sharing in MS Office and OpenOffice is comical. You obviously have never tried to use them in a real environment. Things get out of sync quickly. Especially if you're trying to merge two versions that are based off a common ancestor. The sharing only works for the most trivial changes. Most of the time, it causes much more trouble than what it's worth.
Trust me. I tried it before.
Drawing Software
I'm was talking about spur of the moment drawings. Not technical drawings for inclusion in documents. You would never use a piece of software or a $500 drawing tablet for these things. By the time you got the software launched and the tablet out and ready, the drawing could already be complete using a piece of paper and pencil that cost a nickle total.
Why did I wasting time with someone who obviously isn't even in high school yet. Now go. I think your mom is calling you.
1. Tablet PCs aren't really ready for prime time. They're big. They're bulky. They have a limited battery. Interaction is clumsy. And they're expensive. Compare to paper which is thin. Easily distributable. (You can even effectively duplicate paper sometimes by tearing it in half.) Thin and light weight. Can be read on the scale of hundreds of years. Has a natural interaction, and very inexpensive for centuries. (As seen by the saying, "Not even worth the paper it's printed on.")
2. Yeah pen drives fit in a pocket, but you can't access them everywhere. Paper only requires only anything that can leave a stain or mark for write access, and at least one working eye and sufficient light for read access. Pen drives are comparitively expensive, and require an even more expensive device, that is in working order, to access.
3. Computers may have potential for collaboration, but it's just that. Potential. For many interactions their just too awkward. Have you ever tried to mark up revisions in a document? It's not that easy. You can leave notes in the margin. And when it comes for diagraming, it's incredibly slow. When was the last time you were explaining something to someone and said, "let me draw you a picture" and then fired up gimp?
It's hard to crowd around around a terminal. Paper is easy.
Paper has huge advantages, and it's stupid to ignore them simply because no one uses paper on Star Trek.