We don't need coders -- We need people who know how computers work.
We need classes to teach people what the difference is between the OSes. We need people to know what https is. We need people who know why to VPN, what security is, and how to protect their info on the internet. We need anti-phishing anti-419 courses. Indeed, teaching C/S to the English teacher is wasted, but perhaps they knowing how the internet works is not lost?
this is not true. There is not One or Two anonymous, there is NO anonymous.
It's not useful to associate "anonymous" as a group or entity. "Anonymous" is a completely chaotic, anarchistic, loose association. It is akin to race. There are (excuse this analogy) white people, and there are other white people who do bad things, and there are yet more white people who do good things. It is not useful to say "white people" are anything, except that "white people" came from europe and have a history of colonialism.
It is exactly the same with "anonymous". Anonymous is simply a subset of most people in the world who use the internet, and there is a subse tof them who do other things, and a subset of THEM who attack things, and a subset of this which may have assaulted an epilepsy board. But none of them are really related beyond circumstance.
The point is "anonymous" does not have any goals or means or anything. They don't even share interests, the only real connection is a mode of communication (and often web sites). Some anonymous coalesce to do things, like protest scientology or mess around on the internet, but they are not related except by modes of action. Attributing causal notions to this Anonymous is fallacy.
There are still plenty of reasons to buy AMD. We all seem to forget that these things just execute binaries and seem to be ascribing all sorts of personal identification with a friggen CPU brand, as if it were a shirt we wear every day. When I bought my way into dual cores kinda recently (you can probably figure out the type of user I am -- pragmatic?) I looked at their chart, looked around in my price range, and realized that AMD was as fine of a bet as Intel. I could have easily bought an Intel processor, but the products I found fitting my mainboard and processor needs aligned quite evenly over AMD, so after putting aside the market perception, that's what I got.
And my computer does its job of being a computer very nicely.
They would no longer be able to alter APIs and file formats at whim without giving everybody else the same chance for compatibility/backcompat. They wouldn't be able to use undocumented, convoluted, encrypted, or otherwise secretive apis and transports to try and effect an interoperability lock-in, so you could use exchange with say, mysql, evaporating their monopoly (from which their profits are derived) Anybody could make anything which would interoperate with or run windows binaries, and it would destroy their monopoly (unless they competed on equal footing, and who knows how well that'd go...)
Also every single programming mistake would be open to all, so they (and anyone with the wearwithall) would have to fix every single one of them and every new one in pretty much real time.
It would be the end of MS. The closedness of their code combined with the large install base (and the general acceptance of status quo that goes with it, people not discerning between a computer as an appliance and the OS for example, &c) are the ONLY two things which allow microsoft to continue its existence.
Oh, and anybody could then offer the compiled and source forms of Windows for no charge, even if MS charged $1m / copy for it. Their next sale would be their last.
I agree. There was always something about KDE that I just disliked, which is why I always used gnome. When this drops I'll probably take a moment to check it out, plus nautilus was never too great, especially since nobody ever paid attention to my bug reports (in file-roller for example, though they sorta fixed the problem by totally removing drag-out functionality...)
I've always been pretty jealous of the kio-slave system, too.
The video has parts (the simulated ones) which look a heck of a lot like the cool and open source breve AI simulation environment ( http://www.spiderland.org/ ) which does pretty much the exact same thing. Check out the brevewalker or brevecreatures.
The video is still extra-impressive though, as the robot uses sensors to detect it's own shape and limitations, and then (it looks like) loads it into breve where the thinking seems to happen. Pretty cool indeed.
I tend to agree, though the difference is that the original Quake spawned a huge online, multiplayer, and modding community by virtue of being timely, expandable, and versatile as hell as well as eventually giving to the greater community through the release of the source code. Also 3 years before Unreal. The article is referring to that aspect of the game. CTF, and RA are the big ones, but even a veeeery early Counterstrike relative was created on Quake, called Gooseman's Guns/Navy Seals. Refer to this interview here
Quake definitely ignited the online FPS phenomenon, even though UT certainly refined it quite significantly, quake is responsible for countless mods, still played in some form to this day, the half-life franchise was built on the engine (as well as countless other games on Id engines) and who can forget The Adventures of Dank and Scud?
I'm uncertain about this, but I believe Quake was also the first game able to take advantage of consumer video cards for hardware acceleration.
You're totally right on this point, but I [i]still[/i] wouldn't classify editing one line in a text file and then typing one command as "tedious and frustrating".
I've never claimed it's all happy automagical justworksness, however one diff would remove this insurmountable hurtle and since the GGP or wherever it was seems to be relatively technologically savvy, one bug report to his distribution could fix this for all.
And yes, I use Linux (among other OS'es). Have been using it since 1999, and I really don't care if my grandma uses it.
No, however it may suddenly be much less of a priority to the QA managers to ensure that releases are secure, because any flaw may then bolster a revenue stream for Microsoft. And anyhow if they don't catch it in time they could just push a stopgap to their own AV suite which everybody has by default based on their intimate, insider knowledge of their own territory.
My tinfoil hat might be a bit tight, but this does stink a bit. At the very least, what's going on is questionable.
I believe you may have a misconception about the issue at hand here, sir.
The issue is not whether or not they are locking out vendors. (actually it is, but there's more to it.) See, Microsoft is a monopoly (Yes, it is. There is not an argument here anymore. They've been legally classified as a monopoly by the US and the EU.) and being a monopoly they are subject to a number of restrictions. One of those being it is illegal for microsoft to use their Desktop OS monopoly (which is recognized legally as such) to manipulate another market. It is LEGAL for them to enter any market, but they cannot use their existing monopoly to tilt the playingfield to their own benefit.
Ergo, locking out vendors in the antivirus/antispyware market while simultaniously creating a product in that market very clearly falls under that catagory. Microsoft may not use it's desktop operating system monopoly to manipulate another market. It only adds to the case that they are charging for some of these services.
Sure you can jump ship. But it's still illegal for them to lock everyone but microsoft out of a market, even if it's just witholding APIs for a period of time (which happens to be part of the issue at hand) because this would give them a distinct advantage in the AV/AS market, temporarily at least being the only game in town. Assuming they even open it up to outsiders.
And no, it doesn't matter that they created this market in the first place. That does not magically make it okay; they COULD have just been open about things and worked with AS/AV vendors to include them in the process in some way. Doing anything but could create another dangerous situation for Microsoft.
Slashdot Mirror
We don't need coders -- We need people who know how computers work.
We need classes to teach people what the difference is between the OSes. We need people to know what https is. We need people who know why to VPN, what security is, and how to protect their info on the internet. We need anti-phishing anti-419 courses. Indeed, teaching C/S to the English teacher is wasted, but perhaps they knowing how the internet works is not lost?
will it work on a suitcase of drugs?
It's a joke dude. The DMCA outlaws circumventing a copy protection system (no matter how weak it is, re adobe and its rot13).
Well actually, that doesn't sound like a very funny joke.
this is not true. There is not One or Two anonymous, there is NO anonymous.
It's not useful to associate "anonymous" as a group or entity. "Anonymous" is a completely chaotic, anarchistic, loose association. It is akin to race. There are (excuse this analogy) white people, and there are other white people who do bad things, and there are yet more white people who do good things. It is not useful to say "white people" are anything, except that "white people" came from europe and have a history of colonialism.
It is exactly the same with "anonymous". Anonymous is simply a subset of most people in the world who use the internet, and there is a subse tof them who do other things, and a subset of THEM who attack things, and a subset of this which may have assaulted an epilepsy board. But none of them are really related beyond circumstance.
The point is "anonymous" does not have any goals or means or anything. They don't even share interests, the only real connection is a mode of communication (and often web sites). Some anonymous coalesce to do things, like protest scientology or mess around on the internet, but they are not related except by modes of action. Attributing causal notions to this Anonymous is fallacy.
encouraging someone to disrupt a videogame or break a contract is not prohibited by law.
I agree. Quake 4 was a solid game.
the price:performance ratios look pretty good still, according to tom's hardware's charts at least.
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=946&model2=882&chart=444
There are still plenty of reasons to buy AMD. We all seem to forget that these things just execute binaries and seem to be ascribing all sorts of personal identification with a friggen CPU brand, as if it were a shirt we wear every day. When I bought my way into dual cores kinda recently (you can probably figure out the type of user I am -- pragmatic?) I looked at their chart, looked around in my price range, and realized that AMD was as fine of a bet as Intel. I could have easily bought an Intel processor, but the products I found fitting my mainboard and processor needs aligned quite evenly over AMD, so after putting aside the market perception, that's what I got.
And my computer does its job of being a computer very nicely.
Sure it'd be bad for them.
They would no longer be able to alter APIs and file formats at whim without giving everybody else the same chance for compatibility/backcompat. They wouldn't be able to use undocumented, convoluted, encrypted, or otherwise secretive apis and transports to try and effect an interoperability lock-in, so you could use exchange with say, mysql, evaporating their monopoly (from which their profits are derived) Anybody could make anything which would interoperate with or run windows binaries, and it would destroy their monopoly (unless they competed on equal footing, and who knows how well that'd go...)
Also every single programming mistake would be open to all, so they (and anyone with the wearwithall) would have to fix every single one of them and every new one in pretty much real time.
It would be the end of MS. The closedness of their code combined with the large install base (and the general acceptance of status quo that goes with it, people not discerning between a computer as an appliance and the OS for example, &c) are the ONLY two things which allow microsoft to continue its existence.
Oh, and anybody could then offer the compiled and source forms of Windows for no charge, even if MS charged $1m / copy for it. Their next sale would be their last.
I agree. There was always something about KDE that I just disliked, which is why I always used gnome. When this drops I'll probably take a moment to check it out, plus nautilus was never too great, especially since nobody ever paid attention to my bug reports (in file-roller for example, though they sorta fixed the problem by totally removing drag-out functionality...)
I've always been pretty jealous of the kio-slave system, too.
ah, that reminds me of a thing I heard; "An audiophile is one who listens to his equipment, not his music."
And I believe this to be true. (also: Bose sucks)
The video has parts (the simulated ones) which look a heck of a lot like the cool and open source breve AI simulation environment ( http://www.spiderland.org/ ) which does pretty much the exact same thing. Check out the brevewalker or brevecreatures.
The video is still extra-impressive though, as the robot uses sensors to detect it's own shape and limitations, and then (it looks like) loads it into breve where the thinking seems to happen. Pretty cool indeed.
Credit card companies do this constantly.
There is; it's called "Photoshop". Remember that at this point in the game, a die is flat =)
I tend to agree, though the difference is that the original Quake spawned a huge online, multiplayer, and modding community by virtue of being timely, expandable, and versatile as hell as well as eventually giving to the greater community through the release of the source code. Also 3 years before Unreal. The article is referring to that aspect of the game. CTF, and RA are the big ones, but even a veeeery early Counterstrike relative was created on Quake, called Gooseman's Guns/Navy Seals. Refer to this interview here
Quake definitely ignited the online FPS phenomenon, even though UT certainly refined it quite significantly, quake is responsible for countless mods, still played in some form to this day, the half-life franchise was built on the engine (as well as countless other games on Id engines) and who can forget The Adventures of Dank and Scud?
I'm uncertain about this, but I believe Quake was also the first game able to take advantage of consumer video cards for hardware acceleration.
You're totally right on this point, but I [i]still[/i] wouldn't classify editing one line in a text file and then typing one command as "tedious and frustrating".
I've never claimed it's all happy automagical justworksness, however one diff would remove this insurmountable hurtle and since the GGP or wherever it was seems to be relatively technologically savvy, one bug report to his distribution could fix this for all.
And yes, I use Linux (among other OS'es). Have been using it since 1999, and I really don't care if my grandma uses it.
Changing one line in a text file, then typing "apt-get install alsa-oss" is at least as simple as operating a coffee machine.
But their TVs are fine, and also use linux!
So is there a 64bit build yet?
that never killed anybody. Fires however, do.
The wiring on your house can create a fire hazard, the bits on that disk can't generally hurt anybody.
No, however it may suddenly be much less of a priority to the QA managers to ensure that releases are secure, because any flaw may then bolster a revenue stream for Microsoft. And anyhow if they don't catch it in time they could just push a stopgap to their own AV suite which everybody has by default based on their intimate, insider knowledge of their own territory.
My tinfoil hat might be a bit tight, but this does stink a bit. At the very least, what's going on is questionable.
I believe you may have a misconception about the issue at hand here, sir.
The issue is not whether or not they are locking out vendors. (actually it is, but there's more to it.) See, Microsoft is a monopoly (Yes, it is. There is not an argument here anymore. They've been legally classified as a monopoly by the US and the EU.) and being a monopoly they are subject to a number of restrictions. One of those being it is illegal for microsoft to use their Desktop OS monopoly (which is recognized legally as such) to manipulate another market. It is LEGAL for them to enter any market, but they cannot use their existing monopoly to tilt the playingfield to their own benefit.
Ergo, locking out vendors in the antivirus/antispyware market while simultaniously creating a product in that market very clearly falls under that catagory. Microsoft may not use it's desktop operating system monopoly to manipulate another market. It only adds to the case that they are charging for some of these services.
Sure you can jump ship. But it's still illegal for them to lock everyone but microsoft out of a market, even if it's just witholding APIs for a period of time (which happens to be part of the issue at hand) because this would give them a distinct advantage in the AV/AS market, temporarily at least being the only game in town. Assuming they even open it up to outsiders.
And no, it doesn't matter that they created this market in the first place. That does not magically make it okay; they COULD have just been open about things and worked with AS/AV vendors to include them in the process in some way. Doing anything but could create another dangerous situation for Microsoft.
I didn't even bother reading TFA, as that website hardly comes close to displaying correctly in firefox. Out of curiosity, am I alone here?
Well that took much less time than anticipated.
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/5738
No more roland piquipaki! Thanks to Brendan Donahue, script author.
I have a roland-deleter greasemonkey UI script. Every Roland post is blanked out. I'll try to find it for ya...