If someone wanted to post an interview THAT MATTERS on a site for STUFF THAT MATTERS, why not get in someone's face and ask the hard questions about why the company seems hell-bent on alienating the people who put them on the map in the first place?
Because then they might not advertise on Slashdot.
Why is the post-apocalyptic paradise just out of reach? After 40 years of Cold War teasing, I was almost ready to give up hope, but asteroids still mock us. I cry at all the missed opportunities.
What will likely happen is that the price of an IPv4 address will rise (it hasn't). As it does, people holding blocks of ipv4 will release them - for example, I think HP has two Class As. Merck has a Class A. Etcetera - the main reason they hold on to them at this point is that they don't want to pay the cost of migrating to a 10.x. At some point, they will become valuable enough that these holders will move (and also Class Bs, etc.)
The price equilibrium will see-saw for a while (price rises, people release, price falls, etc.) but yes, on the far side of all that activity, we'll be at a point where we really are running low on ipv4.
That process hasn't even started yet. We're nowhere near running low on ipv4.
If this was 2004, the article headline would be "Bush Administration Makes Good On Plan To Destroy Critical Book". In 2010, of course, we can't blame Obama for these things.
Goodbye, Blockbuster. With news of your bankruptcy (yes, I know they aren't technically closing all their stores...yet), a bit of my childhood is officially gone.
Personally, Blockbuster is a bad part of my late-adolescence. When I was a kid, there were only local video stores. These were a combination of VHS and Betamax rental, with other sections for video game carts and a curtained-off adult section. Blockbuster came in and they were so...bland in comparison. The locals would have all kinds of obscure movies, while BB only had 50 copies of the top ten. Some of the locals specialized in certain things (e.g., anime when it was harder to find, or science fiction, or foreign, etc.) All BBs stocked the exact same thing.
BB drove the little locals out of business, so I don't have any fond memories of them.
Once again, the Hebrews are not one of the civilizations. Five versions of the game and still no Hebrews. The Iroquois, the Sioux, the Siamese, the Songhai, the Hittites, etc...but no Hebrews. Call me Semitocentric if you wish, but I think the contribution to world civilization by the Hebrews is at least equal to that of, say, the Iroquois.
OK, actually I think it's about 1,000 times that of the Iroquois. Three of the game's religions trace themselves to the Hebrews, for pity's sake. Arguably, so does Monotheism, which if memory serves has a Star of David symbol in the game. And, you know, the Hebrews did have a big kingdom and all. For, oh, 900 years or so.
One nice thing was to bookmark an RSS feed in Firefox. Instead of just a bookmark, you'd get a menu of all the site's RSS entries (stories), which periodically refreshed (or could do so when you commanded). So you could look at your favorite sites and see all their headlines and then go directly to stories that interested you.
I say "nice thing" in the sense that, yeah, that's kinda nice...but not exactly rock-your-world revolutionary. RSS does make it easy to include feeds from other sites...but 9 times out of 10, who cares? If I wanted to read site X, I'd go to site X, without needing to see a list of headlines on another site.
RSS is far more available than used. 80% of Wordpress templates seem to have it as a default, as do many CMS systems. How often people actually use it is another matter.
You are not supposed to be throwing them into landfills. The labels on the back of the packaging say that. Its easy to recycle them. When I buy new CFLs from Lowes, I bring the old ones in and drop them off at the front desk. End of story.
Yes, well, you're not supposed to murder people, sell drugs, or litter, either.
Because god damn it I should have a RIGHT to burn as much energy unnecessarily as I want. I have a RIGHT to be an irresponsible, planet destroying, jackass who clings to obsolete and inefficient technologies. How DARE the government force me to utilize a less polluting, longer lasting technology. [/sarcasm]
I've been to the DMV. I've been to vote. I've been to the Post Office, and I've dealt with various Federal bureaus.
Based on that experience, I do not trust the government to do anything right.
Devils advocate here: is there any reason why a normal non-technical windows user should be able to run an executable in a directory they are able to write to? Maybe the ipod/ipad approach is better for most people.
I'm not sure that would have made any difference here. If I run an executable, it can look at my address book, send emails, etc., without any special elevated privileges. Same thing could happen on Unix - it's just that Unix isn't as widely deployed.
Along similar lines, people still use Outlook? What if you need
to log in from somebody else's box? I'm not a big fan of "web apps
for everything", but email is one of those things where a web app
makes much more sense than a desktop app.
Not to defend Outlook, but MS Exchange does come with Outlook Web Access. It provides a web-based interface that provides a web 2.0 interface to Outlook. Probably 90% of what you want to do in Outlook (read/writeyour mail, setup meetings, contacts, etc.) can be done in OWA. It even degrades nicely for older browsers. It's actually quite a sophisticated webapp...though of course, you're still using Outlook.
I find anti-cheating software an unnecessary evil.
It is very basic software engineering: "never trust input from a user". As the client software of game is in the hands of the user this extends to the client itself. In fact this also extends to the anti-cheating software itself.
Like DRM, anti-cheating software is a mathematical impossibility.
Much as I hate to step on a good pompous rant, you're oversimplifying and missing quite a bit. For example, there's rendering information the server has to send the client. If the client is altered to make some of the rendering transparent, the ability to look through walls is gained, which is cheating. No "trusting user input" is needed here. It would not be practical to render on the server and send the frames to the client, yet the client needs info that the user can't necessarily see to render correctly and maintain a decent frame rate.
Likewise, imagine there is a weapon that when fired blinds the opponent. If the opponent's client is modified to remove that effect, the server may never know if it's just a visual effect. Or perhaps some bad guys are hidden among the good guys...a modified client could change their color or highlight them. Or maybe I have a couple friends over and our modified clients all share information - we can then see what others see, look around walls, etc.
It is far easier to just design your game so that you do not trust the client code, run the simulation/game on the server and let the client be a dumb terminal. Dumb being a relative term, as you do want to implement some sort of prediction in the game to what the game server will do, to make it a smooth user experience.
And therein lies many opportunities to cheat. Once the client has any information that should not be available to the player, there is an opportunity to cheat. Yet this information may be vital to having a smooth, high frame rate user experience. I suppose the ideal anti-cheat would be a system where the entire GUI was rendered on the server and the client just received frames, but that is not practical from a performance viewpoint. Heck, I still see a little lag when typing in a terminal window connected to an SSH session on the other side of the country...playing an FPS via RDP over the Internet would not work.
I always find it hilarious that people assume the government (CIA, military, etc.) is capable of this type of sophisticated organization. Have you never gone to the DMV? Have you never worked with a government employee?
I wonder if there is some legal value to suing Oracle about trade secrets and getting them to settle and promise to never use HP trade secrets. Then in the future, HP would have something in writing to beat Oracle up with if it's to their advantage...but IANAL.
You could argue that there should also be a general social norm requiring that people unconnected with the case presume innocence, but it's hard to see why that should be the case.
What is so hard about it? When people presume guilt, the accused suffers immediate and irreparable harm merely from being accused of a crime. Unless (and sometimes even if) the exoneration is trumpeted as far and wide as the initial accusation, it is not uncommon for people to continue under the assumption that the accused was guilty.
I know civics education in this country is complete shit, but I do seem to recall something about how we afford people the presumption of innocence until they are proven guilty in a court of law.
Thank you for demonstrating that civics education is complete shit. There's a difference between discussing on the Internet and voting in a jury room. There is no "presumption of innocence" needed when people not involved in the case are talking - WTF? "Innocent until proven guilty" is a fine legal concept but in casual conversation, we can presume anything we want.
I think Osama bin Laden is guilty and I'll say that to anyone who cares to inquire. Gosh, I guess I failed civics.
Slashdot Mirror
If someone wanted to post an interview THAT MATTERS on a site for STUFF THAT MATTERS, why not get in someone's face and ask the hard questions about why the company seems hell-bent on alienating the people who put them on the map in the first place?
Because then they might not advertise on Slashdot.
Sure, maybe, but that's a world so far divorced from the current state of affairs as to not be relevant.
Much like a world in which people spend a lot of money buying databases that aren't Oracle or SQL Server.
A lot more money is spent on DB/2 than on SQL Server.
...but will not, alas, hit it.
Why is the post-apocalyptic paradise just out of reach? After 40 years of Cold War teasing, I was almost ready to give up hope, but asteroids still mock us. I cry at all the missed opportunities.
Weren't all addresses supposed to be gone by now?
What will likely happen is that the price of an IPv4 address will rise (it hasn't). As it does, people holding blocks of ipv4 will release them - for example, I think HP has two Class As. Merck has a Class A. Etcetera - the main reason they hold on to them at this point is that they don't want to pay the cost of migrating to a 10.x. At some point, they will become valuable enough that these holders will move (and also Class Bs, etc.)
The price equilibrium will see-saw for a while (price rises, people release, price falls, etc.) but yes, on the far side of all that activity, we'll be at a point where we really are running low on ipv4.
That process hasn't even started yet. We're nowhere near running low on ipv4.
If this was 2004, the article headline would be "Bush Administration Makes Good On Plan To Destroy Critical Book". In 2010, of course, we can't blame Obama for these things.
There is NO other industry that is as customer-unfriendly as the cell phone industry.
I take it you've never been to the Department of Motor Vehicles...
Only... your and idiot.
My irony meter is pegged.
Goodbye, Blockbuster. With news of your bankruptcy (yes, I know they aren't technically closing all their stores...yet), a bit of my childhood is officially gone.
Personally, Blockbuster is a bad part of my late-adolescence. When I was a kid, there were only local video stores. These were a combination of VHS and Betamax rental, with other sections for video game carts and a curtained-off adult section. Blockbuster came in and they were so...bland in comparison. The locals would have all kinds of obscure movies, while BB only had 50 copies of the top ten. Some of the locals specialized in certain things (e.g., anime when it was harder to find, or science fiction, or foreign, etc.) All BBs stocked the exact same thing.
BB drove the little locals out of business, so I don't have any fond memories of them.
Once again, the Hebrews are not one of the civilizations. Five versions of the game and still no Hebrews. The Iroquois, the Sioux, the Siamese, the Songhai, the Hittites, etc...but no Hebrews. Call me Semitocentric if you wish, but I think the contribution to world civilization by the Hebrews is at least equal to that of, say, the Iroquois.
OK, actually I think it's about 1,000 times that of the Iroquois. Three of the game's religions trace themselves to the Hebrews, for pity's sake. Arguably, so does Monotheism, which if memory serves has a Star of David symbol in the game. And, you know, the Hebrews did have a big kingdom and all. For, oh, 900 years or so.
Arabs, but no Hebrews.
Babylonians, but no Hebrews.
You can play Pharaoh but not David.
Sid, for Christ's sake, no pun intended, WTF?!?
Nonetheless, I will be playing this.
***I've always wondered what RSS is good for.***
One nice thing was to bookmark an RSS feed in Firefox. Instead of just a bookmark, you'd get a menu of all the site's RSS entries (stories), which periodically refreshed (or could do so when you commanded). So you could look at your favorite sites and see all their headlines and then go directly to stories that interested you.
I say "nice thing" in the sense that, yeah, that's kinda nice...but not exactly rock-your-world revolutionary. RSS does make it easy to include feeds from other sites...but 9 times out of 10, who cares? If I wanted to read site X, I'd go to site X, without needing to see a list of headlines on another site.
RSS is far more available than used. 80% of Wordpress templates seem to have it as a default, as do many CMS systems. How often people actually use it is another matter.
You are not supposed to be throwing them into landfills. The labels on the back of the packaging say that. Its easy to recycle them. When I buy new CFLs from Lowes, I bring the old ones in and drop them off at the front desk. End of story.
Yes, well, you're not supposed to murder people, sell drugs, or litter, either.
Because god damn it I should have a RIGHT to burn as much energy unnecessarily as I want. I have a RIGHT to be an irresponsible, planet destroying, jackass who clings to obsolete and inefficient technologies. How DARE the government force me to utilize a less polluting, longer lasting technology. [/sarcasm]
I've been to the DMV. I've been to vote. I've been to the Post Office, and I've dealt with various Federal bureaus.
Based on that experience, I do not trust the government to do anything right.
Approximately 4,800 are awaiting disposition in federal vaccine court.
What is "federal vaccine court"?
Oh, people still use Flickr?
Anyway, to get around this, I usually hack the installer.
Oh you do not. You click "Next" like everyone else.
Devils advocate here: is there any reason why a normal non-technical windows user should be able to run an executable in a directory they are able to write to? Maybe the ipod/ipad approach is better for most people.
I'm not sure that would have made any difference here. If I run an executable, it can look at my address book, send emails, etc., without any special elevated privileges. Same thing could happen on Unix - it's just that Unix isn't as widely deployed.
Along similar lines, people still use Outlook? What if you need to log in from somebody else's box? I'm not a big fan of "web apps for everything", but email is one of those things where a web app makes much more sense than a desktop app.
Not to defend Outlook, but MS Exchange does come with Outlook Web Access. It provides a web-based interface that provides a web 2.0 interface to Outlook. Probably 90% of what you want to do in Outlook (read/writeyour mail, setup meetings, contacts, etc.) can be done in OWA. It even degrades nicely for older browsers. It's actually quite a sophisticated webapp...though of course, you're still using Outlook.
I find anti-cheating software an unnecessary evil. It is very basic software engineering: "never trust input from a user". As the client software of game is in the hands of the user this extends to the client itself. In fact this also extends to the anti-cheating software itself. Like DRM, anti-cheating software is a mathematical impossibility.
Much as I hate to step on a good pompous rant, you're oversimplifying and missing quite a bit. For example, there's rendering information the server has to send the client. If the client is altered to make some of the rendering transparent, the ability to look through walls is gained, which is cheating. No "trusting user input" is needed here. It would not be practical to render on the server and send the frames to the client, yet the client needs info that the user can't necessarily see to render correctly and maintain a decent frame rate.
Likewise, imagine there is a weapon that when fired blinds the opponent. If the opponent's client is modified to remove that effect, the server may never know if it's just a visual effect. Or perhaps some bad guys are hidden among the good guys...a modified client could change their color or highlight them. Or maybe I have a couple friends over and our modified clients all share information - we can then see what others see, look around walls, etc.
It is far easier to just design your game so that you do not trust the client code, run the simulation/game on the server and let the client be a dumb terminal. Dumb being a relative term, as you do want to implement some sort of prediction in the game to what the game server will do, to make it a smooth user experience.
And therein lies many opportunities to cheat. Once the client has any information that should not be available to the player, there is an opportunity to cheat. Yet this information may be vital to having a smooth, high frame rate user experience. I suppose the ideal anti-cheat would be a system where the entire GUI was rendered on the server and the client just received frames, but that is not practical from a performance viewpoint. Heck, I still see a little lag when typing in a terminal window connected to an SSH session on the other side of the country...playing an FPS via RDP over the Internet would not work.
I'm just picking random examples off the top of my head, but the problem is not as simple as you imply
I always find it hilarious that people assume the government (CIA, military, etc.) is capable of this type of sophisticated organization. Have you never gone to the DMV? Have you never worked with a government employee?
You are naive.
CIA had its hands all over Balkan all the time(amongst others) And all that time, there were wery little visible agents that one could point on.
Your post is hilarious with its Elmer Fudd accent.
NO. THEY CANNOT EXIST TOGETHER!
We need to take this to Thunderdome! Two computing devices enter, one computing device leaves!
I wonder if there is some legal value to suing Oracle about trade secrets and getting them to settle and promise to never use HP trade secrets. Then in the future, HP would have something in writing to beat Oracle up with if it's to their advantage...but IANAL.
You could argue that there should also be a general social norm requiring that people unconnected with the case presume innocence, but it's hard to see why that should be the case.
What is so hard about it? When people presume guilt, the accused suffers immediate and irreparable harm merely from being accused of a crime. Unless (and sometimes even if) the exoneration is trumpeted as far and wide as the initial accusation, it is not uncommon for people to continue under the assumption that the accused was guilty.
Poor OJ.
I know civics education in this country is complete shit, but I do seem to recall something about how we afford people the presumption of innocence until they are proven guilty in a court of law.
Thank you for demonstrating that civics education is complete shit. There's a difference between discussing on the Internet and voting in a jury room. There is no "presumption of innocence" needed when people not involved in the case are talking - WTF? "Innocent until proven guilty" is a fine legal concept but in casual conversation, we can presume anything we want.
I think Osama bin Laden is guilty and I'll say that to anyone who cares to inquire. Gosh, I guess I failed civics.
How about innocent until proven guilty?
How about discussing on Slashdot where we're not in a jury box? I can call someone guilty all I want.
BTW, I say OJ is guilty, even after he was proven innocent. OMG!!!1!!