Speak for yourself. I'm still "stuck on 3.6" because the newer versions leak memory like a head wound. Until the newest version runs faster and more stably than 3.6, there's no need to upgrade. Also, my extensions work. Bonus.
Also, found this earlier this week while brooding over Intel's compiler bias. Since FF is open almost all the time, it seems to me beneficial to run a build that enables your CPU's instructions. I was pleased to note that these optimized builds are based off 3.6, so they, too, will work with most extensions.
I suspect that things like this are at least part of the reason that the Phriendly Pharmers don't want open walls.
There are a lot of skeletons in the closets of pharmaceutical companies that have been kept from the public eye by virtue of their being sponsors on every ad-supported television network and printed publication. So unless you read books or watch PBS, you might be unaware that, for example, many of Bayer's products originated in experiments on prisoners in Nazi concentration camps.
Hah, AT&T currently redirects all HTTP traffic to a site that requires their customers to install a certificate under the guise of "configuring their DSL connection", along with some ActiveX control. Of course Firefox won't work at all until until AT&T pulls out and has a shower.
No disk required.
I do the required install in VMware, but every few months they have a screwup on their end and require the certificate to be reinstalled for some reason.
This was the case as of a month ago when I cancelled my AT&T DSL rather than support Evil with a capital E.
While it may appear to be a simple downsampling of the source image, I'm fairly certain that each pixel in this image was hand-placed, as that is considered a requirement for "pixel art".
I'm uncertain if that makes a difference... but if such is the case, none of the pixels in the alleged "derivative work" were copied from the original work, nor were they derived from the original work via software such as an image processing filter or a "save as" command.
It is likely that such a fine subtlety would have escaped the technological philistines that populate the U.S. court system, which results in justice being short-circuited by "settling".
There are about a bajillion updated ports of doom that run on modern hardward, you know.
I recommend Zdoom since it strikes a nice blend between new features and fidelity to the original Doom's graphics and sound.
You may prefer one of the ports that swaps out the "billboard sprites" in the original with 3d models, such as Jdoom. There are also packs of high-resolution textures for the id episodes, which come in handy since the newer ports support the same resolutions as your operating system.
Also of note is Zdaemon, based on Zdoom, which allows for 16 player client/server deathmatch or 4 player co-op.
Unless you miss the bugs, I don't see why you would play Doom under an emulator instead of using a ported engine.
This is my understanding of the situation, and if I'm wrong, someone will correct me:
Every time Steamboat Willy would enter the public domain, Disney lobbies and procures a copyright extension. As a result, copyrighted works as a whole constitute a larger body of work relative to the public domain, since everything published since Steamboat Willy has its copyright protection prolonged when the copyright extensions are passed.
If the public domain is the village well, Disney is capping it and charging for water in collectible bottles.
'encourage their customers to use special "installation disks,"'? More like require. EVERY time there's a power outage in my area, I have to install AT&T's shitware in a VM just to get the DSL working. Of course they swear it's a problem on my end, caused by the power outage, but kicking the power on the surge protector does not reproduce the problem.
The thing that galls me is that unwitting customers are installing the crap because AT&T redirects all traffic to a webpage that says "THE INTERNET NEEDS THIS SOFTWARE TO WORK". To top it off, it doesn't come with a way to uninstall it. And of course the internet works fine without it, hopefully I didn't need to tell you that.
I have spent hours on the phone with their "support" and they all claim that a) the problem is on my end, and b) they can't give me the internet I've paid them for until I install their shitty software. Not "won't", "can't". You can google motivesmart if you are an AT&T dsl user.
Ah, well that sounds much more plausible and dastardly. I see how this could be used on a large scale to drown out open discussion in the short term.
Seems like the sane response is to sort "root level" threads (those that are replies to the article, rather than replies to replies to the article) by score*, and let moderation handle it.
That does pass the buck to moderation, but then, that's moderation's job, and presumably it's harder to astroturf mod+metamod.
It's similar to the way you expect a dentist to have good teeth.
Or a barber to be neatly-trimmed?
Doesn't make much sense on consideration- if there were only two dentists in town, I'd go to the one with the worst teeth, as the one with superior teeth is enjoying the services of his competitor.
A Slashdot story with an energetic discussion which is negative on say, AT&T can have an out-sized influence on opinion regarding that company, due to both word of mouth and search engine results.
Did you try to pick the worst possible example? AT&T doesn't need any astroturfing to look bad.
AT&T can worry about its image problem when it provides the services it sells its customers and stops issuing warrantless wiretaps. In fact, doing that might address their image problem.
Do you really think that government transparency is the bottleneck in finding Bin Laden?
It's not the 8 years of fighting a war against the wrong country or our policy of kicking out skilled Arabic translators who happen to be gay while we have a shortage of same. It's not that our own government characterizes the war in the middle east as "culture war". It's not the low quality of our intel or the inadequacy of our soldier's equipment.
It's that damned "accountability in government" that keeps us from catching that long-time friend of the Bush family. If only we would let our lawmakers conduct their business in ski masks and conduct all their finances off the books we would've won this thing by now.
I realize that's hyperbole, but so is making everything about Bin Laden and Hitler.
If I'm working undercover as one of Hitler's henchmen then Godwin says it's time to bring the damn troops home.
on the basis that their government would offer them suitable protection, including keeping their identity secret while they were under cover.
I'm pretty sure that any government's "spy protection" policy is to say, "I don't know that guy. Do whatever you want with him- I hate spies."
That policy, which is a side-effect of secrecy, is just as unhealthy as transparency for the spies. Transparency does make it difficult for governments to use covert operatives to meddle in the affairs of other sovereign nations without the consent or knowledge of their constituents... cry me a river.
You think that deliberate disclosure of spies' identities is a good thing? Can't think of any really significant deleterious consequences, like ooooh, I don't know, sources and their families being boiled alive by despots like Ahmedinajad bent on revenge? Plus, when coupled with your spectacular suggestion that states hold no secrets at all, a loss of all materially useful insight into what hostile states such as Iran, North Korea et al are doing?
1. I think that spies volunteer their safety and are aware of the risks. Saying that we need to turn our government into a cloak and dagger dictatorship for the sake of the spy's safety is like saying we need to ban flag-burning to protect the U.S.A, a nominal bastion of free speech (which is what allows the flag to burnt in the first place).
2. Can you think of any significant consequences of government secrecy, like, I don't know, the secretive government using its "national security" powers to boil people alive without repercussions? As long as we're going worse case scenario here...
In general, governments aren't competent enough to keep any secrets worth knowing. Allowing them to attempt to just encourages the governing body to engage in practices that, if they were forced to act under scrutiny, they would not.
The only material result of secrecy is the increased amount of shit that hits the fan when the secrets get out. That's the real lesson of wikileaks, and all the "we need to heighten security to prevent this from happening again" completely misses the point.
If you applied for food stamps (a government document by the standard proposed here), should that information be available for anybody to read and use how they see fit? What about passport applications? Military pay vouchers?
Let's turn this around:
If my tax dollars are being taken at gunpoint (as they are, ultimately) and used to feed hungry people, do I have a right to verify that they are, in fact, being used to feed hungry people?
What if my tax dollars are being used to process passport applications or hire mercenaries? Should I take the word of the ruling class that my tax dollars are being well spent?
The national security loophole is bullshit. Here's why:
An informed electorate is vital to the continued existence of a democracy. A democracy that keeps information regarding its own activities from its electorate endangers itself. Thus, the national security loophole is itself a danger to national security.
There is no valid reason for a government to ever keep its activities secret from those it governs. The potential conflict of interest is too great- it is reminiscent of the logic puzzles wherein someone of unknown honesty is asked, "Are you a liar?"
Emotional appeals for national security based on the safety of those engaged in espionage are not relevant. The individuals in question, without exception, agreed to exchange their safety for their government's. And, as stated above, invoking national security endangers the invoking government.
Your paraphrasing Potter Stewart's opinion on pornography is apt- in that that opinion is famously subjective and useful only to those who wish to set themselves up as (or be ruled by) potentates.
As for myself, if I must be ruled, I would prefer the rule of law to the rule of man.
It's a dslreports thread by someone attempting to find a way to connect to the internet without installing the crapware and features responses from users who claim to be AT&T support representatives.
The post linked to is a summary of the thread that outlines AT&T's policy and why it is evil.
I do use openDNS, so it seems that AT&T is doing more than just redirecting DNS.
I've actually been installing the malware in virtualbox and then deleting the disk file... but this is still extremely shady behavior from a company that is nominally selling internet access.
I pay for data access. How I use that access should be unimportant to the data provider.
See my signature. AT&T disallows internet access to their paying DSL customers by redirecting dns to a malware install site.
If you want to run an OS that their malware doesn't support, expect a long call to technical support every time they screw up their settings and reset the dns redirect.
Of course, the only alternative is Comcast, so which rotten egg would you like to suck today?
This article lends credence to the idea. Don't have a ready citation for the idea that drunk driving is something government needs, though.
If you're too lazy to click, Dallas, TX decided that the cameras at red lights were doing too good a job of reducing infractions and were cutting into their funding, so they got rid of them. The cops would have you believe that the purpose of the cameras was to increase safety, but their behavior clearly shows that the primary motive was cash.
It could be argued that this is the result of "running government like a business".
The lesson: If everyone stopped breaking the law, cops might have to do an honest day's work.:D
Slashdot Mirror
Speak for yourself. I'm still "stuck on 3.6" because the newer versions leak memory like a head wound. Until the newest version runs faster and more stably than 3.6, there's no need to upgrade. Also, my extensions work. Bonus.
Also, found this earlier this week while brooding over Intel's compiler bias. Since FF is open almost all the time, it seems to me beneficial to run a build that enables your CPU's instructions. I was pleased to note that these optimized builds are based off 3.6, so they, too, will work with most extensions.
It shouldn't be long until Facebook is rife with:
Oxy Moron likes Purdue Pharmaceutical.
Horse Head likes Bayer.
I suspect that things like this are at least part of the reason that the Phriendly Pharmers don't want open walls.
There are a lot of skeletons in the closets of pharmaceutical companies that have been kept from the public eye by virtue of their being sponsors on every ad-supported television network and printed publication. So unless you read books or watch PBS, you might be unaware that, for example, many of Bayer's products originated in experiments on prisoners in Nazi concentration camps.
I liked his other nickname better.
Hah, AT&T currently redirects all HTTP traffic to a site that requires their customers to install a certificate under the guise of "configuring their DSL connection", along with some ActiveX control. Of course Firefox won't work at all until until AT&T pulls out and has a shower.
No disk required.
I do the required install in VMware, but every few months they have a screwup on their end and require the certificate to be reinstalled for some reason.
This was the case as of a month ago when I cancelled my AT&T DSL rather than support Evil with a capital E.
PaRappa the Rapper was not a Nintendo Game. It was a PlayStation game published by Sony Computer Entertainment.
Perhaps you meant to use the Super Mario Bros. series for your example?
While it may appear to be a simple downsampling of the source image, I'm fairly certain that each pixel in this image was hand-placed, as that is considered a requirement for "pixel art".
I'm uncertain if that makes a difference... but if such is the case, none of the pixels in the alleged "derivative work" were copied from the original work, nor were they derived from the original work via software such as an image processing filter or a "save as" command.
It is likely that such a fine subtlety would have escaped the technological philistines that populate the U.S. court system, which results in justice being short-circuited by "settling".
There are about a bajillion updated ports of doom that run on modern hardward, you know.
I recommend Zdoom since it strikes a nice blend between new features and fidelity to the original Doom's graphics and sound.
You may prefer one of the ports that swaps out the "billboard sprites" in the original with 3d models, such as Jdoom. There are also packs of high-resolution textures for the id episodes, which come in handy since the newer ports support the same resolutions as your operating system.
Also of note is Zdaemon, based on Zdoom, which allows for 16 player client/server deathmatch or 4 player co-op.
Unless you miss the bugs, I don't see why you would play Doom under an emulator instead of using a ported engine.
"This is nonsense."
This is my understanding of the situation, and if I'm wrong, someone will correct me:
Every time Steamboat Willy would enter the public domain, Disney lobbies and procures a copyright extension. As a result, copyrighted works as a whole constitute a larger body of work relative to the public domain, since everything published since Steamboat Willy has its copyright protection prolonged when the copyright extensions are passed.
If the public domain is the village well, Disney is capping it and charging for water in collectible bottles.
'encourage their customers to use special "installation disks,"'? More like require. EVERY time there's a power outage in my area, I have to install AT&T's shitware in a VM just to get the DSL working. Of course they swear it's a problem on my end, caused by the power outage, but kicking the power on the surge protector does not reproduce the problem.
The thing that galls me is that unwitting customers are installing the crap because AT&T redirects all traffic to a webpage that says "THE INTERNET NEEDS THIS SOFTWARE TO WORK". To top it off, it doesn't come with a way to uninstall it. And of course the internet works fine without it, hopefully I didn't need to tell you that.
I have spent hours on the phone with their "support" and they all claim that a) the problem is on my end, and b) they can't give me the internet I've paid them for until I install their shitty software. Not "won't", "can't". You can google motivesmart if you are an AT&T dsl user.
Ah, well that sounds much more plausible and dastardly.
I see how this could be used on a large scale to drown out open discussion in the short term.
Seems like the sane response is to sort "root level" threads (those that are replies to the article, rather than replies to replies to the article) by score*, and let moderation handle it.
That does pass the buck to moderation, but then, that's moderation's job, and presumably it's harder to astroturf mod+metamod.
(* bolded the main idea for the TL;DR crowd)
It's similar to the way you expect a dentist to have good teeth.
Or a barber to be neatly-trimmed?
Doesn't make much sense on consideration- if there were only two dentists in town, I'd go to the one with the worst teeth, as the one with superior teeth is enjoying the services of his competitor.
A Slashdot story with an energetic discussion which is negative on say, AT&T can have an out-sized influence on opinion regarding that company, due to both word of mouth and search engine results.
Did you try to pick the worst possible example? AT&T doesn't need any astroturfing to look bad.
AT&T can worry about its image problem when it provides the services it sells its customers and stops issuing warrantless wiretaps. In fact, doing that might address their image problem.
If lots of people steal a game, it tells publishers a market for the product exists but it's too easy to acquire said product without paying.
On the other hand, if no one buys the game, it tells publishers that no market for the product exists.
There doesn't seem to be a way to convey, "I like the game but I hate the malware it's bundled with." through market forces.
Do you really think that government transparency is the bottleneck in finding Bin Laden?
It's not the 8 years of fighting a war against the wrong country or our policy of kicking out skilled Arabic translators who happen to be gay while we have a shortage of same. It's not that our own government characterizes the war in the middle east as "culture war". It's not the low quality of our intel or the inadequacy of our soldier's equipment.
It's that damned "accountability in government" that keeps us from catching that long-time friend of the Bush family. If only we would let our lawmakers conduct their business in ski masks and conduct all their finances off the books we would've won this thing by now.
I realize that's hyperbole, but so is making everything about Bin Laden and Hitler.
If I'm working undercover as one of Hitler's henchmen then Godwin says it's time to bring the damn troops home.
on the basis that their government would offer them suitable protection, including keeping their identity secret while they were under cover.
I'm pretty sure that any government's "spy protection" policy is to say, "I don't know that guy. Do whatever you want with him- I hate spies."
That policy, which is a side-effect of secrecy, is just as unhealthy as transparency for the spies. Transparency does make it difficult for governments to use covert operatives to meddle in the affairs of other sovereign nations without the consent or knowledge of their constituents... cry me a river.
You think that deliberate disclosure of spies' identities is a good thing? Can't think of any really significant deleterious consequences, like ooooh, I don't know, sources and their families being boiled alive by despots like Ahmedinajad bent on revenge? Plus, when coupled with your spectacular suggestion that states hold no secrets at all, a loss of all materially useful insight into what hostile states such as Iran, North Korea et al are doing?
1. I think that spies volunteer their safety and are aware of the risks. Saying that we need to turn our government into a cloak and dagger dictatorship for the sake of the spy's safety is like saying we need to ban flag-burning to protect the U.S.A, a nominal bastion of free speech (which is what allows the flag to burnt in the first place).
2. Can you think of any significant consequences of government secrecy, like, I don't know, the secretive government using its "national security" powers to boil people alive without repercussions? As long as we're going worse case scenario here...
In general, governments aren't competent enough to keep any secrets worth knowing. Allowing them to attempt to just encourages the governing body to engage in practices that, if they were forced to act under scrutiny, they would not.
The only material result of secrecy is the increased amount of shit that hits the fan when the secrets get out. That's the real lesson of wikileaks, and all the "we need to heighten security to prevent this from happening again" completely misses the point.
Presumably the sex crime's victims' names are already made public knowledge in the course of bringing the sex criminal to trial?
While you've listed some unpleasant consequences of transparency in government, they pale next to the consequences of opaqueness in government.
If you applied for food stamps (a government document by the standard proposed here), should that information be available for anybody to read and use how they see fit? What about passport applications? Military pay vouchers?
Let's turn this around:
If my tax dollars are being taken at gunpoint (as they are, ultimately) and used to feed hungry people, do I have a right to verify that they are, in fact, being used to feed hungry people?
What if my tax dollars are being used to process passport applications or hire mercenaries? Should I take the word of the ruling class that my tax dollars are being well spent?
The national security loophole is bullshit. Here's why:
An informed electorate is vital to the continued existence of a democracy. A democracy that keeps information regarding its own activities from its electorate endangers itself. Thus, the national security loophole is itself a danger to national security.
There is no valid reason for a government to ever keep its activities secret from those it governs. The potential conflict of interest is too great- it is reminiscent of the logic puzzles wherein someone of unknown honesty is asked, "Are you a liar?"
Emotional appeals for national security based on the safety of those engaged in espionage are not relevant. The individuals in question, without exception, agreed to exchange their safety for their government's. And, as stated above, invoking national security endangers the invoking government.
Your paraphrasing Potter Stewart's opinion on pornography is apt- in that that opinion is famously subjective and useful only to those who wish to set themselves up as (or be ruled by) potentates.
As for myself, if I must be ruled, I would prefer the rule of law to the rule of man.
What the hell is up with the programming on the History channel?!
Well, since you asked...
Oh, and here's the actual link I was attempting to redirect to.
It's a dslreports thread by someone attempting to find a way to connect to the internet without installing the crapware and features responses from users who claim to be AT&T support representatives.
The post linked to is a summary of the thread that outlines AT&T's policy and why it is evil.
Sorry about the busted link.
I do use openDNS, so it seems that AT&T is doing more than just redirecting DNS.
I've actually been installing the malware in virtualbox and then deleting the disk file... but this is still extremely shady behavior from a company that is nominally selling internet access.
Sorry, I just used the first result for googling "shortest free redirect" since the link won't fit in my sig.
I pay for data access. How I use that access should be unimportant to the data provider.
See my signature. AT&T disallows internet access to their paying DSL customers by redirecting dns to a malware install site.
If you want to run an OS that their malware doesn't support, expect a long call to technical support every time they screw up their settings and reset the dns redirect.
Of course, the only alternative is Comcast, so which rotten egg would you like to suck today?
This article lends credence to the idea. Don't have a ready citation for the idea that drunk driving is something government needs, though.
If you're too lazy to click, Dallas, TX decided that the cameras at red lights were doing too good a job of reducing infractions and were cutting into their funding, so they got rid of them. The cops would have you believe that the purpose of the cameras was to increase safety, but their behavior clearly shows that the primary motive was cash.
It could be argued that this is the result of "running government like a business".
The lesson: If everyone stopped breaking the law, cops might have to do an honest day's work. :D
See my sig (just updated today) for more AT&T hijinx. I'd switch if the alternative wasn't comcast.