I remember the days when they've to yell for access an Access database for update, kinda like manual locking mechanism.
What you're referring to is known as MAL, or "Manual Audio Lockout".
I first saw this described in an Amiga tech manual.. ultra-low-end "networking" by hooking up the SCSI chains of two (or more) Amigas to share files.. Due to disk cacheing, if you had multiple users you had to perform a MAL before doing writes..
maybe that's exactly what such a creature would look like?
That's completely beside the point.
Arguing what it *would* really look like is sidestepping the issue- which is when you watch it, it just looks "wrong".
A few years (around 1996 or so) ago a friend and I started a CG company - one of my first projects was to make a milk carton jump and dance around a table.. I spent *days* manually tweaking the motion paths until I got 18 seconds that looked "perfect".
My friend put it on our demo reel, which he showed his family after Thanksgiving dinner.. the first question asked was "How did you get the milk carton to do that?" Someone else came up with the suggestion that it was a guy in a foam suit, which we superimposed on footage of the desk.
They were shocked when he told them it was done with a computer.. one comment was "but it looked so real!"
Back to the issue at hand - if I had spent less time on that one 18 second scene, it wouldn't have "looked so real" - it would have moved "wrong", which would have clued people into the fact that it wasn't real at all.
Our brains instinctively know when something looks "odd" - even if a computer says it reacts physically correct, we still "know" when something looks wrong.
When someone sees the footage, they should be asking "how did they get Hugo Weaving to do that?", not saying "Wow, those are nice computer graphics."
Saying "maybe that's what it should look like" is just making excuses.
Click through/shrink rap agreements are indeed legally binding, and case law supports this.
Can you provide some links?
The only case law I've ever seen that supports this was in the US, and it had to do with a contractor using software on a company-wide basis (ie, "someone" at the company had agreed to the EULA, so therefore the company had agreed that the software manufacturer was not at fault when the software screwed up.)
The company I work for recently merged with a (techno-phobic) company (although everybody had a computer, nobody was allowed to use the internet, and all the floppy drives were disconnected, to combat "viruses".)
I had to explain to everyone new I met (including their old boss) what my job was... nobody had any idea what a sysadmin did.. I eventually got it down to one line: "I make your internet go."
Usually whenever there's a new salesman, I still have to use that line..
Not many people outside of IT know what a sysadmin does.
In the same way that server hacking is legitimate?
Spamming is, at best "questionable".
It's not a matter of opinion: many states have laws banning it, and it's against the TOS of every reputable ISP.
If it was not questionable, spammers wouldn't have to rape misconfigured relays, and they wouldn't have to play "whack-a-mole", jumping from ISP to ISP to continue to harrass everybody else.
It doesn't preserve the aspect ratio when you resize the window
OK, granted.. this should be user-selectable..
If you're like me and you've got your movie files set up to run when you double-click them, and you happen to run a second movie while the first is still playing, you get an error window that you can't close, and you have to manually kill mplayer from the command prompt.
Bizarre... I use MPlayer all the time, and when I start a second movie (by double-clicking), it plays the second file in another window.. Perhaps it's your configuation?
You have to read a whole bunch of documentation and then compile it if you want it to work
Perhaps you should try your distributions package management. I use Slackware, and the package on linuxpackages.net worked perfectly for me.
Re:In all non-decimal systems..
on
Eleventy What?
·
· Score: 1
I had a physics teacher who reamed some guy out for not pronouncing "kilometer" as "kilo-meter".. he had this huge tirade about the joining of two words, and how you should always keep the pronounciation of each one..
So I asked him what you use to measure temperature or speed? Obvously a "thermo-meter" or "speedo-meter"..
Wonder how many people here have ever even seen a rotary dial
Interesting note - I read a newspaper article a couple of years ago about a high school that put a rotary phone in the office, to prevent students from using the phone to call out..
I thought they should have based the whole movie on the dad... I guess it kind of turned into the Austen Powers film.
This is actually pretty close to the truth..
Austin Powers is Mike Myers' tribute to his father.. when his dad died, he went to Scotland.. he worked through his greif by writing the script for Austin Powers, basing it on his childhood perceptions of his dad.
It was nominated for three Oscars, 4 Golden Globes, and a whole bunch more awards.... It's a stunning movie, but underappreciated?
You're confusing "critially acclaimed" with "popular".
Being John Malkovitch was a brilliant film - unfortunately it goes over the heads of most of the public, and subsequently is underappreciated.
Kinda like "The Truman Show".. (I saw this on opening weekend, and I loved it.. as we were leaving the theatre, three "Ace Ventura" fans were walking ahead of us, obviously confused.. one of them said "so what do we tell people when they ask us if we liked it?")
No, they are not the third party. They are the first (or possibly second) party. The software publisher is the third party.
The store bought the software from the distributor, who bought it from the publisher.
If someone along that chain signed an agreement that said they would only sell a license, then they are legally at fault. But since the software is, in fact, a legal copy, and it was sold to you, then you bought it.
You still have to agree to the software license before installing it on your computer.
Says who?
Oh yeah, the license.
So if you don't agree with the license, then you have to agree with the license, right?
Nope. It's illegal to impose restrictions on a sale after the sale has taken place, which is what an EULA is.
You don't have to agree to anything before installing software.
*please* make sure you read the article on it in issue #60 of Phrack
I've run BB for a number of years, and I got a good laugh from that article.. thanks..
the security concerns I had were enough to cause me to move along to the next product
The thing is, that if you've got security concerns, then you souldn't have a problem with using BB, because you're already aware of what needs to be done to prevent this information leakage.
The article you linked to didn't provide me with anything I didn't know before I originally installed BB - I run BB as an untrusted user without a valid login (why in the world would a daemon process require a password? - just set it to '*', and be done with it.).. and my status page is password protected, and encrypted.
BB's "security" is only a problem for people who don't understand security in the first place. If you know how to adequately secure a box, BB is no different than any other application.
Slashdot Mirror
Nothing should prevent you from running an SMTP server on your own computer if that is the way you want to do it.
Entirely correct.
However, nothing should force me to receive SMTP connections from you, if I don't want them.
I'm going stoned, whos with me?
:o)
That depends man, are you buying?
I remember the days when they've to yell for access an Access database for update, kinda like manual locking mechanism.
What you're referring to is known as MAL, or "Manual Audio Lockout".
I first saw this described in an Amiga tech manual.. ultra-low-end "networking" by hooking up the SCSI chains of two (or more) Amigas to share files.. Due to disk cacheing, if you had multiple users you had to perform a MAL before doing writes..
maybe that's exactly what such a creature would look like?
That's completely beside the point.
Arguing what it *would* really look like is sidestepping the issue- which is when you watch it, it just looks "wrong".
A few years (around 1996 or so) ago a friend and I started a CG company - one of my first projects was to make a milk carton jump and dance around a table.. I spent *days* manually tweaking the motion paths until I got 18 seconds that looked "perfect".
My friend put it on our demo reel, which he showed his family after Thanksgiving dinner.. the first question asked was "How did you get the milk carton to do that?" Someone else came up with the suggestion that it was a guy in a foam suit, which we superimposed on footage of the desk.
They were shocked when he told them it was done with a computer.. one comment was "but it looked so real!"
Back to the issue at hand - if I had spent less time on that one 18 second scene, it wouldn't have "looked so real" - it would have moved "wrong", which would have clued people into the fact that it wasn't real at all.
Our brains instinctively know when something looks "odd" - even if a computer says it reacts physically correct, we still "know" when something looks wrong.
When someone sees the footage, they should be asking "how did they get Hugo Weaving to do that?", not saying "Wow, those are nice computer graphics."
Saying "maybe that's what it should look like" is just making excuses.
how much exactly is a gibibit?
Isn't a gibibit the long form of "gib" - you know, in Quake, what corpses turn into when you shoot them.
Hmm.. could also be the sound made by a hair-lipped frog.
Whenever someone asks me if I'm a "computer guy", I always tell them "no. If I was a 'computer' guy, I'd be on the other side of the screen."
Click through/shrink rap agreements are indeed legally binding, and case law supports this.
Can you provide some links?
The only case law I've ever seen that supports this was in the US, and it had to do with a contractor using software on a company-wide basis (ie, "someone" at the company had agreed to the EULA, so therefore the company had agreed that the software manufacturer was not at fault when the software screwed up.)
Everyone now knows what a Sys Admin does.
Not neccessarily..
The company I work for recently merged with a (techno-phobic) company (although everybody had a computer, nobody was allowed to use the internet, and all the floppy drives were disconnected, to combat "viruses".)
I had to explain to everyone new I met (including their old boss) what my job was... nobody had any idea what a sysadmin did.. I eventually got it down to one line: "I make your internet go."
Usually whenever there's a new salesman, I still have to use that line..
Not many people outside of IT know what a sysadmin does.
That movie was "The Slow and the Dimwitted". What a retarted movie. It was like watching something written by 13 year olds for 13 years olds.
Hey! You better watch what you say about that movie!!11!1 It was awesome!!!
Vin Deisal kicks a$$!!11!.. and he's a better actor than.. umm, well.. uhh... he's a better actor than my dog!...oh, umm.. OK, maybe not..
I'm sorry, what were we talking about?
Oh, yea, the Fats and the Furryus! It r0x0rs!
I'd like to understand how you're going to solve the problem of receiving payment for software?
I'd like to understand you you're going to solve the problem of carpenters receiveing payment for building houses?
Or of Archetects receiving payment for designing them?
Or of doctors receiving payment for treating the sick?
Hint: Software is really a service industry. Even Microsoft is beginning to catch on to this.
this is not a questionable business
Yes, it most certainly is.
it is perfectly legitamate.
In the same way that server hacking is legitimate?
Spamming is, at best "questionable".
It's not a matter of opinion: many states have laws banning it, and it's against the TOS of every reputable ISP.
If it was not questionable, spammers wouldn't have to rape misconfigured relays, and they wouldn't have to play "whack-a-mole", jumping from ISP to ISP to continue to harrass everybody else.
It doesn't preserve the aspect ratio when you resize the window
OK, granted.. this should be user-selectable..
If you're like me and you've got your movie files set up to run when you double-click them, and you happen to run a second movie while the first is still playing, you get an error window that you can't close, and you have to manually kill mplayer from the command prompt.
Bizarre... I use MPlayer all the time, and when I start a second movie (by double-clicking), it plays the second file in another window.. Perhaps it's your configuation?
You have to read a whole bunch of documentation and then compile it if you want it to work
Perhaps you should try your distributions package management. I use Slackware, and the package on linuxpackages.net worked perfectly for me.
I had a physics teacher who reamed some guy out for not pronouncing "kilometer" as "kilo-meter".. he had this huge tirade about the joining of two words, and how you should always keep the pronounciation of each one..
So I asked him what you use to measure temperature or speed? Obvously a "thermo-meter" or "speedo-meter"..
He didn't like that.
Wonder how many people here have ever even seen a rotary dial
Interesting note - I read a newspaper article a couple of years ago about a high school that put a rotary phone in the office, to prevent students from using the phone to call out..
Apparently they had no idea how to use one.
don't you canadians realize that down here in the USA we don't care what you think?
really? for a country that doesn't care, you sure have a thin skin
obscurity works pretty damn well as PART of a whole system.
No, it most certainly doesn't. Not at all.
In fact, it actually makes whatever security you *do* have less useful, by making you believe that you're doing something that's aiding you.
go over to iraq and tell the soldiers to exchange their camo gear for florescent orange.
What, exactly, does that have to do with obscurity?
Being conspicuous, and hiding information are two very different things..
But I suspect you're just trolling anyway.
I know everyone hated it
The best thing about waterworld is the review it prompted from my mother:
"It's just The Road Warrior, watered down."
I thought they should have based the whole movie on the dad ... I guess it kind of turned into the Austen Powers film.
This is actually pretty close to the truth..
Austin Powers is Mike Myers' tribute to his father.. when his dad died, he went to Scotland.. he worked through his greif by writing the script for Austin Powers, basing it on his childhood perceptions of his dad.
I'll second and third that
:o)
Meg? Is that you?
It was nominated for three Oscars, 4 Golden Globes, and a whole bunch more awards. ... It's a stunning movie, but underappreciated?
You're confusing "critially acclaimed" with "popular".
Being John Malkovitch was a brilliant film - unfortunately it goes over the heads of most of the public, and subsequently is underappreciated.
Kinda like "The Truman Show".. (I saw this on opening weekend, and I loved it.. as we were leaving the theatre, three "Ace Ventura" fans were walking ahead of us, obviously confused.. one of them said "so what do we tell people when they ask us if we liked it?")
They sell you the software, but as a third party
No, they are not the third party. They are the first (or possibly second) party. The software publisher is the third party.
The store bought the software from the distributor, who bought it from the publisher.
If someone along that chain signed an agreement that said they would only sell a license, then they are legally at fault. But since the software is, in fact, a legal copy, and it was sold to you, then you bought it.
You still have to agree to the software license before installing it on your computer.
Says who?
Oh yeah, the license.
So if you don't agree with the license, then you have to agree with the license, right?
Nope. It's illegal to impose restrictions on a sale after the sale has taken place, which is what an EULA is.
You don't have to agree to anything before installing software.
*please* make sure you read the article on it in issue #60 of Phrack
I've run BB for a number of years, and I got a good laugh from that article.. thanks..
the security concerns I had were enough to cause me to move along to the next product
The thing is, that if you've got security concerns, then you souldn't have a problem with using BB, because you're already aware of what needs to be done to prevent this information leakage.
The article you linked to didn't provide me with anything I didn't know before I originally installed BB - I run BB as an untrusted user without a valid login (why in the world would a daemon process require a password? - just set it to '*', and be done with it.).. and my status page is password protected, and encrypted.
BB's "security" is only a problem for people who don't understand security in the first place. If you know how to adequately secure a box, BB is no different than any other application.
E 17 will be a complete desktop environment, not just a window manager
:o)
Yeah, and with any luck, it might just be finished by the time Duke Nukem Forever is released, too
I think userfriendly.org had Bill the Cat on as a guest
That would be this one.
I know "Cymru" means "Welsh" but that's about it.
:o)
Tux, the beloved Linux mascot is Welsh!
It's true! Tux is a penguin..
Penguin is derived from two Welsh words: Pen (head) and Gwynn (white)...
So (besides Alan) there is another link between Wales and Linux.
(That, and I've tripled your knowledge of the Welsh language