I'm not saying commercial software is perfect in that regard (there have been cases of commerically distributed software containing malware too), but at least there is generally some level of quality control there.
And one might argue that the world would be a slightly better place to live in if it was not so... Imagine. A company actually taking responsibility for its actions.
What would happen is that nobody would be willing to go into anything but the most mundane businesses. Who in the world would put their entire life's assets constantly at risk, especially in the Sue S.A., where misfortune is looked upon as a stroke of good luck.
For example, I was witness to this conversation:
Person #1: "...and they had to amputate his arm." Person #2: "Oh man he's going to get millions! I'd let them chop off my arm for a million."
Also, the corporate shield is not magically impenetrable. If there's gross negligence, for instance, or fraud.
LOL all you want, but if you don't think a lifelong financially crippling judgement isn't going to get other sites to shut down then you're just kidding yourself.
I don't play a lot of games, and I don't play any online, but this was going to be the first one in some time that I was planning to buy. But this just lost me. No doubt there will be a crack that will make it work without checking in, but I'd feel like a chump for paying them full price and then having to crack it anyway.
Dijkstra started his paper by holding up examples of better practices.
No he didn't. In the opening paragraph he says use of the goto statement has "disastrous effects" and that it "should be abolished from all 'higher level' programming languages." It's not until halfway through the letter that he gets around to an example of a better practice.
Of course, airplanes are supposed to be like that, but the security is so tight that it isn't worthwhile.
So you're thinking that if we called them trains instead then we wouldn't have tight security? I like it. It worked for the "patriot" act. If they'd have called it the "trample your so-called rights however we damn well please" act, I think fewer people would have supported it.
If a change makes it harder to communicate, then it won't catch on.
That's not always true. When a word is subverted to mean something else, then its original meaning can be diluted. If there are no good substitutes then it's now harder to communicate well. Consider Awesome, for example. We already have plenty of ways to say something is interesting, but now when something is truly awesome the word no longer works so well. But we gained little to nothing by making awesome yet another synonym for "cool."
Of course cool was not diluted because the original meaning is sufficiently different.
Any word on when ESPN will start broadcasting these "games" live? Throw in a few hot cheer leaders and I'd watch.
When I was in high school we travelled to another school for a chess match. They actually had cheerleaders. But since there were no fans, and the cheerleaders of course had to be quiet, it was rather strange.
Which lens do you recommend? Do you have any sample photographs?
I bought my first "real" camera not too long ago. I've got a lot to learn, but I'm having a lot of fun.
SoftRAM is a good story. They sold 600,000 copies of a program that they claimed would compress the contents of RAM, effectively doubling the available amount. It turned out that the program didn't even attempt it.
what is needed is an aggressive, targeted push to reward and keep the talented people.
A large company trying to retain the most talented employees is like an older man trying to keep a beautiful young woman around. He has to keep giving her more and more, because she keeps becoming accustomed to whatever the current level is. So he has to continue to raise it. And then, no matter what, sooner or later someone with more money is going to come along and she's going to leave anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
You're right, and I almost left it off, but it really bugs me that they could do that without significant consequences.
Creative MP3 players ship with virus
Apple Ships iPods with Windows Virus
Seagate Storage Units Ship with Virus
Sega Dreamcast console game spreads virus
Maxtor USB Hard Drives Ship Virus Infected
Digital photo frames ship with computer virus
Sony Ships Rootkit
What would happen is that nobody would be willing to go into anything but the most mundane businesses. Who in the world would put their entire life's assets constantly at risk, especially in the Sue S.A., where misfortune is looked upon as a stroke of good luck.
For example, I was witness to this conversation:
Person #1: "...and they had to amputate his arm."
Person #2: "Oh man he's going to get millions! I'd let them chop off my arm for a million."
Also, the corporate shield is not magically impenetrable. If there's gross negligence, for instance, or fraud.
LOL all you want, but if you don't think a lifelong financially crippling judgement isn't going to get other sites to shut down then you're just kidding yourself.
I don't play a lot of games, and I don't play any online, but this was going to be the first one in some time that I was planning to buy. But this just lost me. No doubt there will be a crack that will make it work without checking in, but I'd feel like a chump for paying them full price and then having to crack it anyway.
Considering that I a few thousand GB right here on my desk, I'm guessing that they already ship way way more than a billion.
Yeah. Those 200-1 shots never come in. The odds of that happening must be millions to one.
No he didn't. In the opening paragraph he says use of the goto statement has "disastrous effects" and that it "should be abolished from all 'higher level' programming languages." It's not until halfway through the letter that he gets around to an example of a better practice.
Enough with the fancy lawyerin' talk. Give it to us in layman's terms.
So you're thinking that if we called them trains instead then we wouldn't have tight security? I like it. It worked for the "patriot" act. If they'd have called it the "trample your so-called rights however we damn well please" act, I think fewer people would have supported it.
So you're saying they're like apples and oranges?
That's not always true. When a word is subverted to mean something else, then its original meaning can be diluted. If there are no good substitutes then it's now harder to communicate well. Consider Awesome, for example. We already have plenty of ways to say something is interesting, but now when something is truly awesome the word no longer works so well. But we gained little to nothing by making awesome yet another synonym for "cool."
Of course cool was not diluted because the original meaning is sufficiently different.
That doesn't really make sense. It's almost as if you begged the insult.
Maybe by Monetize they meant you could turn it into a 19th century French impressionist painter.
When I was in high school we travelled to another school for a chess match. They actually had cheerleaders. But since there were no fans, and the cheerleaders of course had to be quiet, it was rather strange.
Which lens do you recommend? Do you have any sample photographs?
I bought my first "real" camera not too long ago. I've got a lot to learn, but I'm having a lot of fun.
If you're going to measure the quality of something by how much money it makes, then Windows is the greatest operating system ever created.
SoftRAM is a good story. They sold 600,000 copies of a program that they claimed would compress the contents of RAM, effectively doubling the available amount. It turned out that the program didn't even attempt it.
The one thing you've learned in your life, and it makes no sense. That must be depressing. Or maybe it's deeply philosophical.
Personally I'm slightly embarrassed to say that. I just call it 10.5.
What do you mean? The Softpedia article doesn't say anything about the HOT Splash Screen! That will probably be replaced!
On another note, you'd think the guy could have at least cleaned up the grammar a bit as he was stealing it.
I'll bet sales would increase if they named them.
Really? You must have some rather short hubris where you come from.
A large company trying to retain the most talented employees is like an older man trying to keep a beautiful young woman around. He has to keep giving her more and more, because she keeps becoming accustomed to whatever the current level is. So he has to continue to raise it. And then, no matter what, sooner or later someone with more money is going to come along and she's going to leave anyway.
Well then you're in luck. He always shows you where the goat is!