That's amazing! I mean, the way you skimmed the same article that we can all ready just by clicking, then copied and pasted a tiny bit of it here, with no added content, thought or value. I'd never have considered doing that in order to farm karma, but then I bet you've got some fancy pants college degree. Your parents must be so proud of you.
Does OLPC have "competition" in any meaningful sense? The Classmate doesn't compete directly with the XO, since Wintel is simply bribing its way into markets; technical problems with the XO won't have any effect on the "purchasers'" decisions. And among the beaten wives that consist of OLPC's first world sponsors, this is just a reason to give OLPC even more free money for fucking up. Again.
OLPC won't have any real competition until a Chinese cloneshop starts churning out identical units at 3/4 the price, in a nicer range of colours, running Linux or Windows Mobile.
But if you [implicitly an atheist] try to tell a follower of a major religion that they are evil and deserve to be tortured for the way they lead their lives, those "hate speech" laws are going to come down like a hammer on you.
Uh huh. Cite one case in the past 50 years in Sweden, or a jurisdiction to which Sweden would extradite.
Alternatively, you could act like a grown up and say "Yeah, that was a pretty dumb thing to write. Sorry for the bullshit."
The FTC can "tighten up" all they like, but as long as people are dumb enough to send money to a couple of beaners who "run" dozens of fake companies from non-existent addresses, there's good money to be made. The solution is smarter consumers, not more regulation. Perhaps eugenics can help us.
If you want to take notes during the lecture (the excuse everyone uses), paper still works just fine, as it has for ages.
So does chiselling hieroglyphs on little stone pyramids, but that's not a good reason to eschew new technology.
The argument against banning laptops/intartubes access is bullshit, because it presupposes that:
Every single moment in a lecture contains vital information.
Students are incapable of multitasking, or determining what's important and what is filler.
That the customer (the student) is wrong.
It fails every rational test. It's about ego, pure and simple. Lecturers are having hissy fits because their customers aren't a captive audience any more, and they want the old days back, when they could pretend that sleeping students were just listening really attentively. They may as well order the tide not to come in.
Bingo. All these tech demos are just super impressive, but let's see one where it's hosed down for 48 hours, thrown out of the back of a flatbed and rolled down a sand dune, then inspected and put on by a grunt, with a realistic amount (8 hours) of training, using a standard issue field manual, in 120 degree heat. Oh, and he's got 4 hours of sleep a night for the past 12 weeks.
Sure, but it's not very efficient. I was listening to an interview with one of the techies who does load balancing on the UK's national grid who said that wind and solar (any form) give him the willies because they're so unreliable from minute-to-minute. The fossil / nuclear plants need to be kept hot with the turbines spinning all the time in order to pick up the load immediately, meaning that the practical savings from renewables are much less than the theoretical ones. He liked hydro though.
CCP does not believe in security by obscurity. The Python scripting language that is used by the client can be easily decompiled to generate human-readable code, and CCP has designed its server-side systems with that understanding.
This is the best attitude that I've even seen from a commercial MOG developer. It is exactly correct.
Someone just needs to tell their Banstick guys that. If they believe their own argument, then they need to act like it.
All correct, which is exactly why vulnerability to any form of client side automation should be designed out. The client is never secure, ever. Not even Blizzard with their "We own your machine" EULA can keep up with client hacks.
What ISO need to do right now is to grow a pair and admit that they're gagging on sweaty Ballmer-balls, rather than putting their fingers in their ears and going "La la la, the process is perfect, la la la, there's nothing wrong."
I doubt you'd find any unbiased informed observer that believes them, although I'm sure you'd find a few who would happily say that in return for a free upgrade of their corporate Office installs. The emperor has no clothes, no matter how many procedural boxes they tick off to try to hide their ding-a-ling dangling in the wind.
That is the major effect though. I think that most unbiased observers would conclude that Microsoft's main goal in having OOXML rushed through is to allow.govs to tick the box that allows them to keep purchasing Microsoft Office. I have no faith that Microsoft will adhere to OOXML in letter or spirit, and in fact that having it 'controlled' by ISO makes this even less likely. Microsoft will not approach ISO to have new features included, they'll just binary-blob them in.
I say this as someone whose job it is to implement editors for previous (binary) versions of Office formats. The (new) guys working on our OOXML version are super stoked because (they say) it's much clearer. Sure, I tell them, but wait until Office >=2009 starts saving out documents with big embedded proprietary binary blobs. They'll still be OOXML 'compliant', for all the good that'll do us.
I doubt that the working group itself has been bribed. After all, they just held ISO down: it was Microsoft's paid catspaws who did the actual gang rape.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I'm clearly claiming that I love Hitler.
That's amazing! I mean, the way you skimmed the same article that we can all ready just by clicking, then copied and pasted a tiny bit of it here, with no added content, thought or value. I'd never have considered doing that in order to farm karma, but then I bet you've got some fancy pants college degree. Your parents must be so proud of you.
I imagine that what they'll get is a horse's head in their bed, courtesy of InterGlobalPetroCorp.
1. There.
2. And Back Again.
I think it's just so great that there are racists in Mexico too!
I suspect you may be a Vulcan, rather than a Vegan.
Skynet? We don't want to piss that off.
Does OLPC have "competition" in any meaningful sense? The Classmate doesn't compete directly with the XO, since Wintel is simply bribing its way into markets; technical problems with the XO won't have any effect on the "purchasers'" decisions. And among the beaten wives that consist of OLPC's first world sponsors, this is just a reason to give OLPC even more free money for fucking up. Again.
OLPC won't have any real competition until a Chinese cloneshop starts churning out identical units at 3/4 the price, in a nicer range of colours, running Linux or Windows Mobile.
Then I'm doing my bit to keep prices down, since I've yet to see a compelling reason to upgrade from 2K to XP, let alone to downgrade to Vista.
Wow, you must be the life and soul of every party.
I'm sorry, I thought we were talking about C++. I have no idea what it is that you - or Microsoft - think you're talking about, but it's not C++.
You chose to say:
Uh huh. Cite one case in the past 50 years in Sweden, or a jurisdiction to which Sweden would extradite.
Alternatively, you could act like a grown up and say "Yeah, that was a pretty dumb thing to write. Sorry for the bullshit."
The FTC can "tighten up" all they like, but as long as people are dumb enough to send money to a couple of beaners who "run" dozens of fake companies from non-existent addresses, there's good money to be made. The solution is smarter consumers, not more regulation. Perhaps eugenics can help us.
So does chiselling hieroglyphs on little stone pyramids, but that's not a good reason to eschew new technology.
The argument against banning laptops/intartubes access is bullshit, because it presupposes that:
It fails every rational test. It's about ego, pure and simple. Lecturers are having hissy fits because their customers aren't a captive audience any more, and they want the old days back, when they could pretend that sleeping students were just listening really attentively. They may as well order the tide not to come in.
The default C++ new does throw an exception rather than returning NULL, but don't let your ignorance of the language stop you from decrying it.
Bingo. All these tech demos are just super impressive, but let's see one where it's hosed down for 48 hours, thrown out of the back of a flatbed and rolled down a sand dune, then inspected and put on by a grunt, with a realistic amount (8 hours) of training, using a standard issue field manual, in 120 degree heat. Oh, and he's got 4 hours of sleep a night for the past 12 weeks.
Sure, but it's not very efficient. I was listening to an interview with one of the techies who does load balancing on the UK's national grid who said that wind and solar (any form) give him the willies because they're so unreliable from minute-to-minute. The fossil / nuclear plants need to be kept hot with the turbines spinning all the time in order to pick up the load immediately, meaning that the practical savings from renewables are much less than the theoretical ones. He liked hydro though.
Your mom's basement.
This is the best attitude that I've even seen from a commercial MOG developer. It is exactly correct.
Someone just needs to tell their Banstick guys that. If they believe their own argument, then they need to act like it.
All correct, which is exactly why vulnerability to any form of client side automation should be designed out. The client is never secure, ever. Not even Blizzard with their "We own your machine" EULA can keep up with client hacks.
ISO got gamed, ganked and pwned. At this point, Microsoft are teabagging their corpse.
What ISO need to do right now is to grow a pair and admit that they're gagging on sweaty Ballmer-balls, rather than putting their fingers in their ears and going "La la la, the process is perfect, la la la, there's nothing wrong."
I doubt you'd find any unbiased informed observer that believes them, although I'm sure you'd find a few who would happily say that in return for a free upgrade of their corporate Office installs. The emperor has no clothes, no matter how many procedural boxes they tick off to try to hide their ding-a-ling dangling in the wind.
That is the major effect though. I think that most unbiased observers would conclude that Microsoft's main goal in having OOXML rushed through is to allow .govs to tick the box that allows them to keep purchasing Microsoft Office. I have no faith that Microsoft will adhere to OOXML in letter or spirit, and in fact that having it 'controlled' by ISO makes this even less likely. Microsoft will not approach ISO to have new features included, they'll just binary-blob them in.
I say this as someone whose job it is to implement editors for previous (binary) versions of Office formats. The (new) guys working on our OOXML version are super stoked because (they say) it's much clearer. Sure, I tell them, but wait until Office >=2009 starts saving out documents with big embedded proprietary binary blobs. They'll still be OOXML 'compliant', for all the good that'll do us.
Darth Cheney will pwn your country and make you buy.
Occam's Razor would suggest that those posters' major experience with cars is their mom driving them to chess club.
I doubt that the working group itself has been bribed. After all, they just held ISO down: it was Microsoft's paid catspaws who did the actual gang rape.