Get used to it. The stimulus (and, it seems, many of the Obama administration's policies) are designed to reward failure.
I saw this coming when Obama and a bunch of Democrats sweeped the election based on voter unrest over the economic crisis--even though the Democrats contributed to it by encouraging banks to make high-risk loans to poor people in the name of "social justice." It's like they got rewarded for tanking the economy.
Not that the Republicans were saints, since they took much of the credit when there was an economic boom from all those loans. It bit them in the ass when people couldn't pay it all back.
I see this as an administration led by an amateur who listens too much to college campus ideas about economics. Everything's going to fix itself with kittens and rainbows through more of the same "social justice" thinking. It's a childlike mindset. It's like when you were a kid and couldn't understand why Mom wouldn't let you get the $9.99 action figure. It's just $9.99--what's the big deal! I saw Dad's paycheck, he makes hundreds, so there's plenty to go around! Meanwhile, she knows there are taxes to pay, gas, groceries, dentist appointments, clothes, school lunch, etc. The $9.99 doesn't spring out of thin air. But you're not thinking about any of that because you want the short-term joy of the toy.
1.) It's a lame but common tactic to portray those opposed to socialism as heartless. No, we don't want to see unemployed people starve. As an owner of my money, I can even choose to give handouts of my own volition. The government shouldn't be forcing anyone to do it. Having the government throw money at everything to make you feel good about solving social problems doesn't really solve them. It's a magical solution for people who employ magical thinking based on their emotions.
2.) To answer your question, I'd like to pay who I choose to pay. Why should a government have the power to tell me who to pay? What if I don't like who they're paying?
3.) Socialism puts an enormous level of power in the government's hands instead of its citizens. History proves that sort of dynamic to be folly. Governments are naturally corrupt. So are corporations, but at least they can be prosecuted or boycotted by consumers or whatever until they die off. You can't shop at a different government when yours doesn't do something you don't agree with. Thus, giving it a lot of power is really stupid.
Yes! It's only a matter of time until Slashdot's heroes, the Pirate Bay operators, get away with this. It's our right as human beings to rip off artists and not pay them, and it's totally awesome for Pirate Bay to run a torrent tracker that connects users so that they can distribute file chunks to each other.
FUCK artists, and FUCK their rights. They are our slaves. We don't owe them a dime for their work. Long live, Pirate Bay, and enjoy the victory, guys!
It still requires a user to save an attachment and execute it.
One of the points of the article is that Linux is as vulnerable as Windows. You say it requires a user to execute something--well, so does Windows malware.
The new thing here is that it saves a file in a format Gnome or KDE recognizes as a script (a launcher file) even without the execution bit set. I am unsure about what it demonstrates.
It demonstrates how to download an arbitrary script from a malware server using a launcher without the need for an execute bit, as well as setting the script to autostart on boot. There is also an appendix talking about gaining root.
Slashdot's heroes, the Pirate Bay, are gonna get away with it! We deserve to get everything that artists make free of charge. FUCK artists, and FUCK their rights!
I join my fellow Slashdotters in cheering for this story. People who are ripping artists off are getting away with it. What's not to love?
I love when people make this retarded argument, completely ignoring that PirateBay acts as a tracker server which means it's specifically connecting IPs for the purposes of distributing file chunks.
Why is Slashdot so pro-piracy in every situation? I've never understood it. Why would you ever rationally take a position in SUPPORT of Pirate Bay?
Yes, this news fills me with joy! People who run torrent sites should be lauded as heroes on Slashdot. They should be people we get behind and support when they go to court for running their mass piracy ring. When anyone brings up the artists who are getting ripped off every day by these people, we'll just mindlessly rant about the RIAA or the MPAA some more.
Remember the Slashdot credo--FUCK artists, and FUCK their rights! PirateBay is our hero!
If the argument is that putting a site up that points at known torrents is a crime, doesn't every media outlet in the world carrying this story run the risk of some culpability by promoting it?
PirateBay doesn't "point at known torrents." It's the tracker that faciliates the downloads.
Geez, pirates will go to extreme lengths to justify their piracy. Comparing a media outlet that runs this story to a torrent tracker server? Come on.
If morons stopped pirating everything under the sun, there wouldn't be a need for these DRM measures to protect creators' rights. This being Slashdot, I fully expect nobody to even consider their rights in this equation.
If you won't accept a CLI answer, I'm not going to care enough about your problem to take the time to create screenshots and the like. You either get the CLI solution, or none at all. Take your pick.
Because of that attitude, the users will pick Windows.
What new direction did Doom 3 take? You walked into a dark room, activated a trigger that opened a monster closet, then moved onto the next dark room. You're right that it's different from the previous Dooms, but it wasn't very innovative. After the opening sequence, the game settles into a predictable routine that doesn't end until Hell.
Id actually developed an awesome survival horror game that those of us who enjoy such games loved. But everyone else in the world expected a shotgun gorefest and thus described it as boring, or whatever.
I didn't have a problem with Doom 3 initially. I was blown away at first, but after about 30 minutes when the levels barely changed from one area to the next, I began to fret that the entire game would be like that. My memory of the game is of dim, neverending corridors of metal. I played through it to reach Hell, which was a real treat but all too brief.
Basically, I barely felt like I was progressing because every level looked and felt the same for long periods of time. I knew I was disappointed when I would enter an area, notice the visible holes at the bottom of a wall, and correctly guessed that spider-demons would come crawling out of them when I moved forward. It sucks when I see through a game and perceive it in terms of its level triggers and design cliches.
Contrast to Half-Life 2 which consistently varied its gameplay enough to keep me riveted through to the end.
Why do so many modern first-person shooters create visuals that are essentially black and white? Or in this case, brown and tan. The details of the models in that Rage screenshot are interesting to look at, but the total lack of color makes the image so bland to me that I quickly lose interest.
Is there a reason for this trend of monochrome visuals? Is it to exaggerate the normal mapping on the models or a cheap way to inject atmosphere? I can't help wondering how stunning that screenshot might look if it was full of color.
A photograph whose composition clearly reflects the expression of the photographer through subject matter, lighting, and so forth is real art. This isn't hard--you can tell real art from crap. You don't even have to like something to be able to admit that it's still authentic art (I respect some country music artists).
By authentic, we're referring to the humanity of the music. What you describe is authentic musicianship. Compare that to a band that goes into a studio and records a verse, a chorus, auto-tunes it all, clicks in some MIDI drum notes, then copies and pastes those parts multiple times to fill out three minutes of a single. That's pretty different from what you're talking about where you actually "make" the music.
My personal opinion is that popular music has no real future and that we're entering an era of smaller, more distributed successes through MySpace, iTunes, and whatever else is coming. Instead of a few big-name acts, there will be lots of small-name acts who come and go depending on the iTunes top ten. This will further lead to an assembly-line process for making music, but thankfully it will be easier to find the authentic stuff amongst the crap.
Most of the big-name acts today are either established acts from previous eras or reality show stars who will eventually be forgotten. This decade has been remarkably bland and lacking in direction, and I think it's a sign of the future and of our deadened culture.
If had kept the same architecture, while only increasing the processor speed and the graphics chip (while still adding new opengl lighting and shading effects, etc.), they could have easily made the PS3 FORWARD compatible, like many of the Xbox games are.
An interesting statement considering the Xbox 360 didn't retain the same architecture either, having switched from x86 to a customized PowerPC platform. It plays older games through emulation.
Slashdot Mirror
I saw this coming when Obama and a bunch of Democrats sweeped the election based on voter unrest over the economic crisis--even though the Democrats contributed to it by encouraging banks to make high-risk loans to poor people in the name of "social justice." It's like they got rewarded for tanking the economy.
Not that the Republicans were saints, since they took much of the credit when there was an economic boom from all those loans. It bit them in the ass when people couldn't pay it all back.
I see this as an administration led by an amateur who listens too much to college campus ideas about economics. Everything's going to fix itself with kittens and rainbows through more of the same "social justice" thinking. It's a childlike mindset. It's like when you were a kid and couldn't understand why Mom wouldn't let you get the $9.99 action figure. It's just $9.99--what's the big deal! I saw Dad's paycheck, he makes hundreds, so there's plenty to go around! Meanwhile, she knows there are taxes to pay, gas, groceries, dentist appointments, clothes, school lunch, etc. The $9.99 doesn't spring out of thin air. But you're not thinking about any of that because you want the short-term joy of the toy.
Funny, that's precisely the reason why governments shouldn't be given so much power.
Boil it down to this--I believe people should have freedom with the money they earned. You don't.
1.) It's a lame but common tactic to portray those opposed to socialism as heartless. No, we don't want to see unemployed people starve. As an owner of my money, I can even choose to give handouts of my own volition. The government shouldn't be forcing anyone to do it. Having the government throw money at everything to make you feel good about solving social problems doesn't really solve them. It's a magical solution for people who employ magical thinking based on their emotions.
2.) To answer your question, I'd like to pay who I choose to pay. Why should a government have the power to tell me who to pay? What if I don't like who they're paying?
3.) Socialism puts an enormous level of power in the government's hands instead of its citizens. History proves that sort of dynamic to be folly. Governments are naturally corrupt. So are corporations, but at least they can be prosecuted or boycotted by consumers or whatever until they die off. You can't shop at a different government when yours doesn't do something you don't agree with. Thus, giving it a lot of power is really stupid.
Huh? No, that's not good either.
Great. That's your opinion. You pay for it. Don't force me to.
Yes! It's only a matter of time until Slashdot's heroes, the Pirate Bay operators, get away with this. It's our right as human beings to rip off artists and not pay them, and it's totally awesome for Pirate Bay to run a torrent tracker that connects users so that they can distribute file chunks to each other.
FUCK artists, and FUCK their rights. They are our slaves. We don't owe them a dime for their work. Long live, Pirate Bay, and enjoy the victory, guys!
One of the points of the article is that Linux is as vulnerable as Windows. You say it requires a user to execute something--well, so does Windows malware.
It demonstrates how to download an arbitrary script from a malware server using a launcher without the need for an execute bit, as well as setting the script to autostart on boot. There is also an appendix talking about gaining root.
Slashdot's heroes, the Pirate Bay, are gonna get away with it! We deserve to get everything that artists make free of charge. FUCK artists, and FUCK their rights!
I join my fellow Slashdotters in cheering for this story. People who are ripping artists off are getting away with it. What's not to love?
I love when people make this retarded argument, completely ignoring that PirateBay acts as a tracker server which means it's specifically connecting IPs for the purposes of distributing file chunks.
Why is Slashdot so pro-piracy in every situation? I've never understood it. Why would you ever rationally take a position in SUPPORT of Pirate Bay?
Yes, this news fills me with joy! People who run torrent sites should be lauded as heroes on Slashdot. They should be people we get behind and support when they go to court for running their mass piracy ring. When anyone brings up the artists who are getting ripped off every day by these people, we'll just mindlessly rant about the RIAA or the MPAA some more.
Remember the Slashdot credo--FUCK artists, and FUCK their rights! PirateBay is our hero!
PirateBay doesn't "point at known torrents." It's the tracker that faciliates the downloads.
Geez, pirates will go to extreme lengths to justify their piracy. Comparing a media outlet that runs this story to a torrent tracker server? Come on.
Who elects those politicians?
If morons stopped pirating everything under the sun, there wouldn't be a need for these DRM measures to protect creators' rights. This being Slashdot, I fully expect nobody to even consider their rights in this equation.
God, I'm so tired of the "FAIL" meme. It was never funny. It's old. Stop using it.
Like what? "An awful lot" implies you'll have an awful lot of examples to offer.
Because of that attitude, the users will pick Windows.
What new direction did Doom 3 take? You walked into a dark room, activated a trigger that opened a monster closet, then moved onto the next dark room. You're right that it's different from the previous Dooms, but it wasn't very innovative. After the opening sequence, the game settles into a predictable routine that doesn't end until Hell.
I didn't have a problem with Doom 3 initially. I was blown away at first, but after about 30 minutes when the levels barely changed from one area to the next, I began to fret that the entire game would be like that. My memory of the game is of dim, neverending corridors of metal. I played through it to reach Hell, which was a real treat but all too brief.
Basically, I barely felt like I was progressing because every level looked and felt the same for long periods of time. I knew I was disappointed when I would enter an area, notice the visible holes at the bottom of a wall, and correctly guessed that spider-demons would come crawling out of them when I moved forward. It sucks when I see through a game and perceive it in terms of its level triggers and design cliches.
Contrast to Half-Life 2 which consistently varied its gameplay enough to keep me riveted through to the end.
Why do so many modern first-person shooters create visuals that are essentially black and white? Or in this case, brown and tan. The details of the models in that Rage screenshot are interesting to look at, but the total lack of color makes the image so bland to me that I quickly lose interest.
Is there a reason for this trend of monochrome visuals? Is it to exaggerate the normal mapping on the models or a cheap way to inject atmosphere? I can't help wondering how stunning that screenshot might look if it was full of color.
I'm having a hard time remembering when this mythical era of gaming utopia occurred.
Ashley Simpson posts on Slashdot?
I don't want singers to always sing in tune. The humanity of the music comes from the subtle imperfections of the performance.
A photograph whose composition clearly reflects the expression of the photographer through subject matter, lighting, and so forth is real art. This isn't hard--you can tell real art from crap. You don't even have to like something to be able to admit that it's still authentic art (I respect some country music artists).
By authentic, we're referring to the humanity of the music. What you describe is authentic musicianship. Compare that to a band that goes into a studio and records a verse, a chorus, auto-tunes it all, clicks in some MIDI drum notes, then copies and pastes those parts multiple times to fill out three minutes of a single. That's pretty different from what you're talking about where you actually "make" the music.
My personal opinion is that popular music has no real future and that we're entering an era of smaller, more distributed successes through MySpace, iTunes, and whatever else is coming. Instead of a few big-name acts, there will be lots of small-name acts who come and go depending on the iTunes top ten. This will further lead to an assembly-line process for making music, but thankfully it will be easier to find the authentic stuff amongst the crap.
Most of the big-name acts today are either established acts from previous eras or reality show stars who will eventually be forgotten. This decade has been remarkably bland and lacking in direction, and I think it's a sign of the future and of our deadened culture.
Not authentically human, though. I need humanity in my music. I can only listen to electronica for so long.
An interesting statement considering the Xbox 360 didn't retain the same architecture either, having switched from x86 to a customized PowerPC platform. It plays older games through emulation.