Why should we expect anything less for Star Wars? Fuck plot, let's move the camera so much that the audience gets motion sickness! BRIGHT LIGHTS! BIG EXPLOSIONS! VULCANS THAT HAS FEELS!
The vast majority of Hollywood movies have been shit ever since this thing happened. Independent and classic film both seem far superior, especially since they have generally made up for poor access to special effects with creativity in other areas. (Remember when special effects were, well, special?)
...until upstream bandwidth in the USA catches up with the rest of the world, self-hosted "clouds" like this are just not happening. Sure, you can colocate a server, but that's expensive for a SMB and you can spend that same money on a bigger Internet pipe instead, but with such cheap turn-key on-demand scaling services like EC2, why set up your own?
Speeding being dangerous is a commonly believed myth. Speeding vehicles are safer in many respects, especially since other vehicles that notice a speeding vehicle do not question what the intent of said vehicle is since the actions being taken by it are obvious without any guesswork. Speeding drivers also have to pay closer attention to their driving task since they know they have less reaction time and have to keep a hawk's eye out for the cops.
What is dangerous is what I refer to as "steering wheel attendants." People who are NOT giving the necessary attention to the driving task are very dangerous and are the biggest cause of traffic collisions by far. Speeding people have a lot of pressure to watch what they're doing; excessively casual drivers think they can fuck around because driving isn't exciting or interesting and seems to happen quite slowly...until an unexpected reaction is needed, and that's when the metal scrapes and the SUVs roll.
Put your damn makeup and phone away and go 90 MPH in a 65 zone. You'll be shocked how much adrenaline and paranoia increase your attention span for what's going on around you.
This is probably irrelevant for you, but I ran into issues with software running on i386 with XFS and newer kernels. Programs not compiled with -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 used the 32-bit versions of certain file-related system calls, and the default mount options for XFS changed at some point to allow 64-bit inode numbers to be created. What would happen is the program would readdir and choke the instant it hit a file or directory on an inode number greater than 2^32; the fstat calls returned EOVERFLOW and processing aborted. You'd go into a directory with GQView, for example, and mysteriously see i.e. three images and one directory where you knew there were tens of directories and hundreds of images.
Obviously, x86_64 platforms don't have this issue, but I was operating an i386 server since 2008 until just a few months ago and I found it to be extremely annoying and (at first) difficult to figure out what was happening. There is surprisingly little information about XFS and 64-bit file syscall issues when all you have is strace spouting EOVERFLOW at you and don't immediately pin the issue to the filesystem in use.
Such a poorly worded article could (and probably would) legally constitute libel. Usually newspapers that insinuate such things use careful wording to effectively say that it is so yet not outright say that. Just enough semantic looseness to be "up to interpretation."
The bottom line is that there are no "answers" to sociological issues, including this one. No matter how we try to handle any of this sort of stuff, we're going to piss a lot of people off. It will be interesting to watch this unfold.
A lot of crimes exist which (by statutory restriction or omission) cannot be pardoned by anyone, so while a pardon might be a formal analysis of whether a conviction is still relevant, it is also largely unavailable to most convicted persons.
If you don't tell anyone what town you're from, they can't do what you're suggesting. Google is very different from that scenario in that it is extremely fast and costs nothing for the searcher to use; a series of phone calls and the work required to examine a body of court documents to locate anything by a specific person is worlds apart from typing stuff into Google and looking at the screen for five minutes.
I'm also not making any arguments directly related to this new law, I'm simply fleshing out the reason that this sort of law has come about. People in general are ignorant of how criminal justice actually works, especially on the side of convicted persons. If people did not automatically hold a person's past transgressions against them, this would all be moot; however, there is a strong assumption in Western societies of "once a criminal, forever a criminal," particularly in the U.S. and this assumption is a large driving force of the vicious cycle of criminal reoffense.
It used to be that you could be forgotten by moving somewhere else and starting a new life there. That is not generally possible now, thanks to the Internet and no limitations on access to public records. There is a huge difference between having to go to the local courthouse of a place to see what someone has been convicted of and being able to find the same information by banging it out on Google in your bedroom in 30 seconds.
That's how the media exerts control over people. People think what they hear about on the news is all there is to it, but the reality is that something is only newsworthy if it is an unusual or exceptional enough incident that it merits such special attention. The other side of this coin is that anything that is exceptional enough to be newsworthy is uncommon enough that people need not worry about it in their daily lives.
This seems like the best way to do it, unfortunately. Break things strategically in a way that won't be blamed on you but that is certainly inconvenient and noticed, then fix the things you broke. Bonus: tell them it will take a week and fix it in five days. Add that to the reports.
Slashdot Mirror
Especially when "damage" = "The USA" eh?
Links2 is working just fine, thanks.
Oh god. The memories.
Internet alcohol binge commencing.
Why should we expect anything less for Star Wars? Fuck plot, let's move the camera so much that the audience gets motion sickness! BRIGHT LIGHTS! BIG EXPLOSIONS! VULCANS THAT HAS FEELS!
The vast majority of Hollywood movies have been shit ever since this thing happened. Independent and classic film both seem far superior, especially since they have generally made up for poor access to special effects with creativity in other areas. (Remember when special effects were, well, special?)
...until upstream bandwidth in the USA catches up with the rest of the world, self-hosted "clouds" like this are just not happening. Sure, you can colocate a server, but that's expensive for a SMB and you can spend that same money on a bigger Internet pipe instead, but with such cheap turn-key on-demand scaling services like EC2, why set up your own?
Speeding being dangerous is a commonly believed myth. Speeding vehicles are safer in many respects, especially since other vehicles that notice a speeding vehicle do not question what the intent of said vehicle is since the actions being taken by it are obvious without any guesswork. Speeding drivers also have to pay closer attention to their driving task since they know they have less reaction time and have to keep a hawk's eye out for the cops.
What is dangerous is what I refer to as "steering wheel attendants." People who are NOT giving the necessary attention to the driving task are very dangerous and are the biggest cause of traffic collisions by far. Speeding people have a lot of pressure to watch what they're doing; excessively casual drivers think they can fuck around because driving isn't exciting or interesting and seems to happen quite slowly...until an unexpected reaction is needed, and that's when the metal scrapes and the SUVs roll.
Put your damn makeup and phone away and go 90 MPH in a 65 zone. You'll be shocked how much adrenaline and paranoia increase your attention span for what's going on around you.
Segmentation fault
The first rule of the bandwidth pixies is you do not talk about the bandwidth pixies.
This is probably irrelevant for you, but I ran into issues with software running on i386 with XFS and newer kernels. Programs not compiled with -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 used the 32-bit versions of certain file-related system calls, and the default mount options for XFS changed at some point to allow 64-bit inode numbers to be created. What would happen is the program would readdir and choke the instant it hit a file or directory on an inode number greater than 2^32; the fstat calls returned EOVERFLOW and processing aborted. You'd go into a directory with GQView, for example, and mysteriously see i.e. three images and one directory where you knew there were tens of directories and hundreds of images.
Obviously, x86_64 platforms don't have this issue, but I was operating an i386 server since 2008 until just a few months ago and I found it to be extremely annoying and (at first) difficult to figure out what was happening. There is surprisingly little information about XFS and 64-bit file syscall issues when all you have is strace spouting EOVERFLOW at you and don't immediately pin the issue to the filesystem in use.
Such a poorly worded article could (and probably would) legally constitute libel. Usually newspapers that insinuate such things use careful wording to effectively say that it is so yet not outright say that. Just enough semantic looseness to be "up to interpretation."
The bottom line is that there are no "answers" to sociological issues, including this one. No matter how we try to handle any of this sort of stuff, we're going to piss a lot of people off. It will be interesting to watch this unfold.
A lot of crimes exist which (by statutory restriction or omission) cannot be pardoned by anyone, so while a pardon might be a formal analysis of whether a conviction is still relevant, it is also largely unavailable to most convicted persons.
If you don't tell anyone what town you're from, they can't do what you're suggesting. Google is very different from that scenario in that it is extremely fast and costs nothing for the searcher to use; a series of phone calls and the work required to examine a body of court documents to locate anything by a specific person is worlds apart from typing stuff into Google and looking at the screen for five minutes.
I'm also not making any arguments directly related to this new law, I'm simply fleshing out the reason that this sort of law has come about. People in general are ignorant of how criminal justice actually works, especially on the side of convicted persons. If people did not automatically hold a person's past transgressions against them, this would all be moot; however, there is a strong assumption in Western societies of "once a criminal, forever a criminal," particularly in the U.S. and this assumption is a large driving force of the vicious cycle of criminal reoffense.
During the case, Liebeck's attorneys discovered that McDonald's required franchisees to hold coffee at 180–190 F (82–88 C). At 190 F (88 C), the coffee would cause a third-degree burn in two to seven seconds.
You drink tea while it's 180F? If so, how do you still have a throat?
We're not talking about removing the article, we're talking about removing that article from the automatically created article index.
It used to be that you could be forgotten by moving somewhere else and starting a new life there. That is not generally possible now, thanks to the Internet and no limitations on access to public records. There is a huge difference between having to go to the local courthouse of a place to see what someone has been convicted of and being able to find the same information by banging it out on Google in your bedroom in 30 seconds.
That's how the media exerts control over people. People think what they hear about on the news is all there is to it, but the reality is that something is only newsworthy if it is an unusual or exceptional enough incident that it merits such special attention. The other side of this coin is that anything that is exceptional enough to be newsworthy is uncommon enough that people need not worry about it in their daily lives.
And whoever modded that as "troll" is clearly an idiot. Read BOFH sometime.
This seems like the best way to do it, unfortunately. Break things strategically in a way that won't be blamed on you but that is certainly inconvenient and noticed, then fix the things you broke. Bonus: tell them it will take a week and fix it in five days. Add that to the reports.
I will street the day? Damn you French-Canadian wannabes.
sh: wakeup: command not found
The end.
The use of "woman-owned" and "minority-owned" as heavy biases (and sometimes hard requirements) is very much sexist and racist, and needs to stop.
And all of them are inferior versions of sysvinit. ;)
-1 flamebait
Related: IBM's DAISY: http://researcher.watson.ibm.c...