The funny (sort of) thing about crime is that criminal jobs suck.
1) You're absolutely correct. Sorry about the -1, Troll you caught for your trouble.
2) That actually was my point. Even from a purely selfish point of view, running a phishing operation is only a win over getting a real job in the short run.
As always, it's a shame that people with the cleverness and skill to devise new phishing tricks don't opt for the lower income and increased job security and satisfaction of being useful, instead of being destructive pricks whose only long-term result is making everyone else's life more difficult.
Out of curiosity -- why on earth would you want to download and watch television news? If you have a connection, why not read online news -- CNN, BBC, local, whatever? It's much faster, in detail absorbed per minute, and you can choose what's of interest to you.
I'm not one of those "The MSM is blogodoomed in the face of the blogosphere!!!!" types, but I can't think of any reason to prefer a news program over a site. Tastes vary, obviously...
How much would it cost these days for a phone that did not have any unnecessities like 3D graphics, address books, calendars, clocks, and so forth?
Given a display, number keys and telephone connection, which most people would regard as necessities for a mobile phone, you basically get the address book, calendar, clock and Tetris for free. (How long do you think it takes a devloper to code a calculator or an alarm function?) I suppose that if you were willing to ditch the display, you could save, oh, four dollars? As for 3D graphics, you can easily get a phone without 3D graphics.
Thanks for your courtesy, errr, chico, but you're still missing the point. Obviously anxiety disorders involve anxiety. The part you're not grasping is that anxiety does not necessarily imply an anxiety disorder. Your friend Trent may have suffered from anxiety; he did not, from your description, have an anxiety disorder. Similarly, he had a poor diet, but not an eating disorder.
As happens every time we get one of these requests, I'm wondering who on earth would want to attend a class like this. Sit through a three hour lecture on whitespace usage? The week after surviving three hours on troff?
Sorry, I can see the value of devoting one week of lecture(s) to open source/free software: history, philosophy, licenses, examples as part of a larger course. I just can't see it filling a semester. When people need to learn CVS, they can pick it up from the documentation in 15 minutes.
I'm not sure what you think needs to be "released". People who want to imitate her lab's homebrew technique can read her paper and do it. But any test used for medical purposes needs to be validated and QC'd, and most hospitals wouldn't have the equipment to set the tests up themselves anyway.
What do you mean by "release it for research purposes" that's different from what they're doing? Making a commercial kit available is precisely what's necessary for researchers to start using it, be they yogis or psychopharmaceutical developers. They'll use the same kits doctors will.
In all seriousness, that _is_ a potential source of bias in studies of psychiatric conditions. There definitely is a skewing away from patients with symptoms (anxiety, paranoia) that make them reluctant to consent to blood draws or DNA collection.
My point is that it seems like a simple explanation (simple in hindsight, anyway) was overlooked for decades while much less parsimonious alternatives were pushed. I could easily be wrong even about that, but I don't think anyone was suggesting that anything worse than an error in good faith has been made. The thought had never even crossed my mind.
Four, five years ago, people sincerely thought there might soon be millions of users running Corel or Lycoris or Conectiva or TurboLinux -- with Eazel and HelixCode fighting for paid subscribers to their desktop update services. Since then, it's become clear that a handful of large players and close derivatives of them are going to make up the large majority of Linux use, with some minor (Gentoo, Slackware) and local (whatever Red Flag is called now, that Spanish Debian version) distros covering the rest.
No disrespect to Crux, whatever it may be, but it and Arch and Xandros and the rest aren't "divergence" in any significant sense that affects Red Hat.
Bonus inflammatory opinion: Debian is about to become the dog wagged by the Ubuntu tail. They're looking more and more like the pre-Linux GNU Project.
The Linux distro consolidation has already happened. There used to be all these "____ Will Be The Year Of Linux On The Desktop!" commercial distros that people thought would get traction, but none of them ever did. (Yeah, I know, Lindows -- have you ever heard of anyone actually using Lindows? There's nothing there but marketing.)
Everyone has converged to the Red Hat family, the Debian/Ubuntu family, SuSe, Mandrake and Gentoo. The fact that Distrowatch has a zillion microdistros is irrelevant. (Please, do not pester me with Distrowatch popularity stats.)
Sorry, I also hate when people feel the need to post to correct trivial typos but I somehow badly mangled that between Preview and Submit:
I'm surprised it took so long for anyone to do this. Is the math here significantly more difficult than it looks? Considering relativity seems like an obvious approach, especially if the alternative to postulate entirely new classes of matter.
On a side note, they are distributing the source. It's possible they may even be GPL friendly.
Note that this is the LaTeX source files for the paper, not source code. What would you do with a GPL scientific paper -- change some things and put your own name on it?
Anyway. I'm surprised it took so long for anyone to do this. Is the an obvious approach, especially if the alternative to postulate entirely new classes of matter. We lesser scientists tend to carry an inferiority complex over the supposed genius of physicists, but I wonder if we've maybe given them too much credit.
I'm not familiar with the "modern, decentralized version control" described here, so I'm probably simply missing something, but as a casual coder my concern would be this:
Casual coder A has just made a few tweaks and committed them, breaking compilation. Intarweb idiot B came by a few minutes later and deliberately broke some other things. I, casual coder C, show up a few minutes after that with an idea I'd like to try out in the source code -- and it doesn't compile because the damage from A and B hasn't been rolled back yet.
I get that the barrier to entry for contribution to a new product is a lot lower when you don't have to send a patch to a blessed contributor for him to submit (or not). But I wonder whether the frustration caused by random problems doesn't outweigh that gain. Maybe on a "toy Perl 6 interpreter in Haskell" the random idiot contingent is too small to worry about, but on, say, anything desktop-related....
Hey, there were Javascript calculators a decade ago. I don't dispute that it's possible to make decent AJAX-based lightweight office apps like the ones in your link. But people have been making the "80% of the functions in MS Office are only used by 20% of the people" argument for years, and MS Office is still there. And if there were going to suddenly be a huge switch to lightweight suites, why not to native, free-beer-and-speech open source apps? Would _you_ rather pay subscription fees to Google for the privilege of Google address book integration?
As for "the might of Google" -- I don't buy it. What they do, they do very well, but realistically, how much do they do? They're hardly Oracle, or Apple or Microsoft. They have their choice of developers, nowadays, and can pay them with wildly overpriced stock, but still...
I like Google, I really do. So far today, I've used the search engine, GMail and Froogle, and it's still before lunch on a Sunday.
But this notion of them as the new Microsoft is just delusional. Journalists have jumped on it because it's a fun story, investors have to explain the ludicrous stock price and Slashbots have because a web-based, subscription-based, proprietary office suite with who-knows-what file formats seems like a fantastic idea if it will involve sticking it to Microsoft.
Look. This is a company with a great indexing and ranking engine, a great backend and a great sense of design and offering value to customers. That's, uh, great, it really is. Google should be proud. But to say that they can just bang out a Javascript-based office suite because you guys think it would be fun is simply nuts. It's not like they have magic powers over there, no matter what the cafeteria serves.
Sure, it's powerful, but it still lacks what Photoshop has out of the box...
Is that Align Layers functionality being added to GIMP already in Photoshop? It may well be -- we have a relatively old version at work and I only use that once or twice a year, so it could have been added since I learned Photoshop a decade ago -- but I'm not aware of it.
A company as litigious as Microsoft (themselves victims of the litigious) will just use the cost of litigation to stifle their opponents.
The whole notion that Microsoft is a particularly litigious or patent-abusive company is complete nonsense. Certainly compared to that darling of the Linux set, IBM, they barely have a legal department at all. And if it was Microsoft patenting targeted ads in RSS feeds, we'd be hearing complete hysteria over it, but it's Google doing that, so never mind.
For that matter, what is the story here, anyway? Shuttleworth pulls this scenario out of his ass, and it's news?
Indeed, I believe the Constitution or an amendment (I'm neither a US citizen nor resident) grant citizens the right not to incriminate themselves. I'm not aware of any such right in Britain...
Actually, beyond that, US law protects the "exculpatory 'no'" -- untruthfully saying "I didn't do it!" isn't punished as an additional offense the way a similar lie from a witness would be. That's not the case in most countries, although I don't know about Britain.
I wouldn't mind keeping an RSA authenticated keychain that has a rotating cryptographic key that changes every 60 seconds (a pretty cool solution, I've seen in action), but moron hick who doesn't see why he should have to have more than one password will never stand for it.
You know, given the combination of social skills and common sense with which our IT personnel are endowed, it's hard to understand why everyone is so eager to send their jobs to India...
Slashdot Mirror
1) You're absolutely correct. Sorry about the -1, Troll you caught for your trouble.
2) That actually was my point. Even from a purely selfish point of view, running a phishing operation is only a win over getting a real job in the short run.
As always, it's a shame that people with the cleverness and skill to devise new phishing tricks don't opt for the lower income and increased job security and satisfaction of being useful, instead of being destructive pricks whose only long-term result is making everyone else's life more difficult.
I'm not one of those "The MSM is blogodoomed in the face of the blogosphere!!!!" types, but I can't think of any reason to prefer a news program over a site. Tastes vary, obviously...
...and cigarette makers responsible for cancer and McDonalds responsible for obesity... Fortunately we don't live in a society like that, huh?
Given a display, number keys and telephone connection, which most people would regard as necessities for a mobile phone, you basically get the address book, calendar, clock and Tetris for free. (How long do you think it takes a devloper to code a calculator or an alarm function?) I suppose that if you were willing to ditch the display, you could save, oh, four dollars? As for 3D graphics, you can easily get a phone without 3D graphics.
Thanks for your courtesy, errr, chico, but you're still missing the point. Obviously anxiety disorders involve anxiety. The part you're not grasping is that anxiety does not necessarily imply an anxiety disorder. Your friend Trent may have suffered from anxiety; he did not, from your description, have an anxiety disorder. Similarly, he had a poor diet, but not an eating disorder.
Sorry, I can see the value of devoting one week of lecture(s) to open source/free software: history, philosophy, licenses, examples as part of a larger course. I just can't see it filling a semester. When people need to learn CVS, they can pick it up from the documentation in 15 minutes.
I'm not sure what you think needs to be "released". People who want to imitate her lab's homebrew technique can read her paper and do it. But any test used for medical purposes needs to be validated and QC'd, and most hospitals wouldn't have the equipment to set the tests up themselves anyway.
As he correctly notes, there's a distinction between anxiety and anxiety disorder to which you continue to be oblivious.
What do you mean by "release it for research purposes" that's different from what they're doing? Making a commercial kit available is precisely what's necessary for researchers to start using it, be they yogis or psychopharmaceutical developers. They'll use the same kits doctors will.
In all seriousness, that _is_ a potential source of bias in studies of psychiatric conditions. There definitely is a skewing away from patients with symptoms (anxiety, paranoia) that make them reluctant to consent to blood draws or DNA collection.
My point is that it seems like a simple explanation (simple in hindsight, anyway) was overlooked for decades while much less parsimonious alternatives were pushed. I could easily be wrong even about that, but I don't think anyone was suggesting that anything worse than an error in good faith has been made. The thought had never even crossed my mind.
NPR, the oration of George W. Bush and knitting!?! Truly, Steve Jobs hath led us into a glorious new existence!
No disrespect to Crux, whatever it may be, but it and Arch and Xandros and the rest aren't "divergence" in any significant sense that affects Red Hat.
Bonus inflammatory opinion: Debian is about to become the dog wagged by the Ubuntu tail. They're looking more and more like the pre-Linux GNU Project.
Everyone has converged to the Red Hat family, the Debian/Ubuntu family, SuSe, Mandrake and Gentoo. The fact that Distrowatch has a zillion microdistros is irrelevant. (Please, do not pester me with Distrowatch popularity stats.)
I'm surprised it took so long for anyone to do this. Is the math here significantly more difficult than it looks? Considering relativity seems like an obvious approach, especially if the alternative to postulate entirely new classes of matter.
Note that this is the LaTeX source files for the paper, not source code. What would you do with a GPL scientific paper -- change some things and put your own name on it?
Anyway. I'm surprised it took so long for anyone to do this. Is the an obvious approach, especially if the alternative to postulate entirely new classes of matter. We lesser scientists tend to carry an inferiority complex over the supposed genius of physicists, but I wonder if we've maybe given them too much credit.
Casual coder A has just made a few tweaks and committed them, breaking compilation. Intarweb idiot B came by a few minutes later and deliberately broke some other things. I, casual coder C, show up a few minutes after that with an idea I'd like to try out in the source code -- and it doesn't compile because the damage from A and B hasn't been rolled back yet.
I get that the barrier to entry for contribution to a new product is a lot lower when you don't have to send a patch to a blessed contributor for him to submit (or not). But I wonder whether the frustration caused by random problems doesn't outweigh that gain. Maybe on a "toy Perl 6 interpreter in Haskell" the random idiot contingent is too small to worry about, but on, say, anything desktop-related....
As for "the might of Google" -- I don't buy it. What they do, they do very well, but realistically, how much do they do? They're hardly Oracle, or Apple or Microsoft. They have their choice of developers, nowadays, and can pay them with wildly overpriced stock, but still...
But this notion of them as the new Microsoft is just delusional. Journalists have jumped on it because it's a fun story, investors have to explain the ludicrous stock price and Slashbots have because a web-based, subscription-based, proprietary office suite with who-knows-what file formats seems like a fantastic idea if it will involve sticking it to Microsoft.
Look. This is a company with a great indexing and ranking engine, a great backend and a great sense of design and offering value to customers. That's, uh, great, it really is. Google should be proud. But to say that they can just bang out a Javascript-based office suite because you guys think it would be fun is simply nuts. It's not like they have magic powers over there, no matter what the cafeteria serves.
Is that Align Layers functionality being added to GIMP already in Photoshop? It may well be -- we have a relatively old version at work and I only use that once or twice a year, so it could have been added since I learned Photoshop a decade ago -- but I'm not aware of it.
The whole notion that Microsoft is a particularly litigious or patent-abusive company is complete nonsense. Certainly compared to that darling of the Linux set, IBM, they barely have a legal department at all. And if it was Microsoft patenting targeted ads in RSS feeds, we'd be hearing complete hysteria over it, but it's Google doing that, so never mind.
For that matter, what is the story here, anyway? Shuttleworth pulls this scenario out of his ass, and it's news?
Actually, beyond that, US law protects the "exculpatory 'no'" -- untruthfully saying "I didn't do it!" isn't punished as an additional offense the way a similar lie from a witness would be. That's not the case in most countries, although I don't know about Britain.
You know, given the combination of social skills and common sense with which our IT personnel are endowed, it's hard to understand why everyone is so eager to send their jobs to India...
No, the point is that the author was touting LAMP as the great hope for Linux standardization.