Again, that's just what he seems to think. The truth of the matter is, he's too powerful, and he's dangerous to America's economy. No one person should have so much wealth or power.
Nobody.
I agree. This analogy may be way off, but think of Hitler. He (single-handedly?) convinced an enormous group of people that he knew who deserved to live and he knew what the world should be like and proceeded from there. And look what he did.
Now, I'm not saying that M$ is trying to kill everybody or take over the world... they're just trying to take over the computing world. And I don't like it. And I know that there are a great many other people in this world who don't like it. I realize that M$ has some decent stuff.. (I use Windows.. b/c, in my current circumstances, I must) - decent as in, it works, and it's not the end of the world - but they have by far NOT taken the world to where it is by themselves, nor do they know what's best, nor are they carrying the world today, nor should they, nor should they have complete say over the future of the world ("world" here meaning (1)the computing/computer/technology world, and (2) the physical world/Earth).
I just hope the DoJ wins the anti-trust case and that M$ can be enlightened.
If MS were truely interested in better integration, they should just comp up with the MSORB, slap some visual tools with wizards on it and presto, folks that already use CORBA will not have to trash their existing infrastructure, and the world will not have to decide between an open standard which benefits from 10 years of development vs. some new drivel from MS which is close to, but not like whats out there. At least it has a catchy name
I agree. If M$ was really interested in opening up the playing field, they wouldn't have to invent SOAP; they would collaborate with other players and develop a technology with features common to all. Apparently, sharing/cooperation seems to be a problem.. unless they're sharing something with you that will give them control/the edge/more $.
How much you wanna bet that while SOAP may be used on any platform, it only really works well on MS platforms...
I'd be willing to bet you're right on this one. Either that, and you're stuck with a POC, or.. they'll charge you some nice $ for a "service pack".
I"m probably asking a redundant/silly question, but
what exactly are the restrictions that these coders face dealing with the code? And the next five years? and if it's just that they can't talk about it for the next five years, why only five years? Is that the amount of time they think it will take for Civ:CTP to have risen and fallen as a "hit" game?
On the overall level, I think this is great. I only wish I had the knowledge, experience, and good fortune to be able to participate in something like that as well!
I imagine you could. As another poster mentioned, the ramifications are enormous. You could engineer new, stronger chemical substances and build objects layer by layer and create some really great stuff. (yes, faster processors is one thing, RAM, denser storage media, so forth and so on).. but the applications aren't limited to simply "computer" technology. This _is_ technology.. technology that we should use to model, explore, control, build.. design beyond our wildest dreams...
I can't wait til they start developing this past the "look-we-can-do-it" stage and into the "look-what-we-can-do-with-it" stage(s).
.. and I can find the derivative of the derivative of f(x)=((3x^3)+sin(x))*cox(4x-5), and I know why Darth Vader wears his bio-suit, and I know "for whom the bell tolls," and...
"However, I don't recommend applying the latest service pack unless you are having some problems because in many cases a service pack can cause a bug that didn't previously exist. "
Lest we have to remind Microsoft:
There are no service packs for Linux
Linux improves over time
We don't need Ghost to make multiple copies of Linux
you can make a linux boot disk just about any time you want to
Linux supports a great many filesystems.. much more than WinNT (all of those listed, and more)
You can use Linux on just about any hardware.. or write a driver for it ('cept those pesky WinModems, eh?)
Well, that list may have been not quite as thorough as it could have been, but eh, we get the point!
From what I've gathered of the signaling problems with Rambus there are only two main ways they could 'fix' the present problem, and neither is exactly a fix.
I had wondered, myself, when this whole Rambus issue was first posted on/., how Intel could "fix" this problem. I mean, I understand attempting to fix it for future units to be shipped, but what about units that have already been shipped and have the problematic Rambus technology implemented in them? I had figured that, it being a hardware problem, they'd have to live with it, so my next thought is this:
Would Intel consider recalling those affected units and replacing them? I'm going to assume no, tragically enough, but I wish they would. Those people who have received such poor, faulty equipment shouldn't have to live with it. I also realize that I'm probably making it to sound worse than it really is, but I'm just wondering:
How big of an issue is this (for those who have the faulty MBs/etc).?
What is Intel planning to do about what they've already shipped?
Do we really care about Rambus? (from the other posts, I would guess no, and I know I don't want any Intel crap/Rambus stuff.)
Did the people who purchased the faulty Intel/Rambus equipment know they were buying Rambus technology? If so, did they buy it for the Rambus claims? (I realize this is a question we can't really answer b/c we don't know what was going on in their minds when they purchased said hardware.)
I also realize that most of those questions are rather poorly thought out questions, and of little import, but I was just wondering...
The concerns about "corporations having my information" are very valid, but unfortunately, this battle is pretty much over. The battle was basically lost before there even was "e-Commerce".
Correct. The battle was lost when the credit card was invented. If you're really that worried, use cash/checks. Cash only, if you want to be that paranoid. Taking it a step further (and a rather ridiculous step to me) keep your money in your mattress (figuratively; i.e., don't have a bank account if you're that worried) and then you'll know where your money is and all that jazz.
Not much that you can do to stop it though, seeing as how you're allowed to take pictures of wahtever you want [unless someone decides to copyright that];)
But isn't there a line where people can sue for this kind of thing? I mean, think about it: Doctors can't take pictures of patients (or is it their faces?) without [written] consent from said patient. Just the same, shouldn't there be some sort of privacy permission thing here? I realize that there must not be, obviously because of the press and how they publish all sorts of pictures that we know they didn't ask permission for, but, do you see where I'm coming from? What's the difference between the public taking pictures and the medical professions taking pictures for reference of diseases and such? Am I simply way off-topic here? Help please.
I wonder if they replace them for every new visitor. You never know...
::drool:: Just imagine a bunch of these suckers in a Beowulf cluster
I can imagine that if they had a Tux in every room, they'd soon quit, because I don't imagine many of them would stay past the first person to stay in that room. However, I noted a translation that said that they weren't actually going to have a Tux in every room (too expense, if you ask me).. but imagine the task of the notebooks. I know it'd be hard to steal one, considering the fact that they've got you on record as having checked one out, etc, etc... but.. another temptation to some.. actually, what I'm wondering is how much permissions you'll have over the notebook. I guess they'll just play it "safe" (at least, with a no-brainer like me, it'd be safe indeed from harm) and create a very limited user account. Of course, you could wipe the drive and re-install.. and they'd have a new distro; maybe *BSD, Mac, who knows... someone might even have the prankster idea to put Windows on the darned thing!! (ack!)
I'm just interested to see how it goes... shall have to follow up on this.. hmm.. where's my bookmark list?
What if each email, encrypted as it was, also had an internal program that counted how long it had been in existence/decoded and that deleted itself after a set time? Then, the "clock" couldn't get "turned back," and you'd be safe, and free of another email in your inbox. Of course, this may be unrealistic, but I'm just wondering....
I feel we should too, or, compile a list of questions and qualms and send them his way, so that he may write another puplit on why this pulpit was so vague, making unproveable assertions,
"Forget the Mafia, this sort of device would be in active use right now in Russia and that country would suddenly not be so poor. Things would be a lot more screwed-up in the world than they actually are. "
"This is an interesting idea but ultimately flawed, I think. The only way to write the news is to write the news. You have to do it the best that you can then take the heat, because the censorship of the nerderati is still censorship. That's why newspapers make corrections. " and wandering so tangently. " At $100 per coke.cc, intel.cc, and cringely.cc, there's millions to be made, though I suppose there will still be the risk of losing it all in 12 microseconds, which is quicker even than at the track. "
Although I do realize the importance of such an issue, if this is true. If it is, I find it strange that we're learning of it only now (well, I am, though I'm sure some of you already have), and I wonder why it hasn't been posted on/. However, as we all know, each is entitled to his/her own opinion, and I'll be more eager to hear his, though, when he is more eager to elaborate, provide support, and arrange his argument in a more logical, concise, and integrated manner.
how 'bout a new branch of "cybertools" that all run microLinux on those micro-chips of theirs, here, and make the "motherboard" (if that's what you can call it) the "handle" of the Swiss Army Knife, and the peripherals/ports the flip-out "tools" of the Swiss Army knife.
* Define CT. Does a denial-of-service count? Did the "Ping of Death" count? Does 'telnet' count?
An excellent question indeed, because it brings to mind almost everything that can be done with a networked computer:
Telnetting (as you mentioned)
Pinging (I have a program called "NeoTrace" that does basically what traceroute does, except it continues to ping all the nodes until you tell it otherwise)
ps -ef | grep
Kicking, banning, etc, etc
Posting comments on discussion sites (/. included)
Email
Spam, most definitely
Back Orifice 2000
Port sniffing
IP masquerading
Mirroring
The list goes on and on. I realize that this'll probably get moderated as Flamebait, Troll, or, perhaps, as Just Plain Stupid, as I realize that some of the items on the list are rather ridiculous looking. Yet, you have to stop and think for a moment and realize what a large, gray field we've just leaped into by attempting to define cyber terrorism! Everybody thinks they know what it is, and I guarantee you that there won't necessarily be a happy middle ground. There are going to be people who will debate such issues indefinitely, and who will see defining cyber terrorism as an invasion of their First Amendment rights (freedom of speech, so forth and so on).
To be further frank with you, I don't have a good grasp as to exactly what I feel cyber terrorism is, but I know that if you're going to write an article about it, you've got to start poking around and finding out what others think it is, then you may begin to address it, its implications, effects, consequences, and advantages.
I'd like to begin by asking a rhetorical question: What does my religion have to do with anything? (Did I bring it up in my discussion? If I did, I apologize now, and profusely, but I don't think I did).
To continue with my retort, I am an American. Ha! Where does "You euros" come in this discussion, eh? Unless you meant that as an outward statement against all Europeans who might be thinking as I was/am. I "get by just fine" with "our system" because I've been accustomed to it all my life, but even then, there are many units that I can't convert (within the "American system") because I can't remember them all. Why? Well, it could be that
I have poor memory. or
The system isn't consistent. (Is it 4 quarts in a gallon? and how many pints in a quart? and what does that all amount to?)
My point is, I'm going to say that it can and will always be a matter of preference, because you can't make people do what they don't wish to do. Still, I remain firm in my belief that the metric system is superior to the "American system."
Well, this is an interesting use of the Slashdot Community. We've taken a small step from a 'Feedback' community to actually generating stories. This could actually lead to something interesting..
So, they're writing an article about cyberterrorism using the/. community as source. Next thing you know (and this was actually my first thought, upon seeing the JIR article post), "someone" (person, corporation, organization, etc.) will come in and do a psychological study of how the/. community works.... (and of how close I get to being kicked out at times, I'll imagine.:-)
But seriously, that would be interesting; for/. to become so influential that they decided to analyze and model us, and to encourage more groups to share as we do (except for some of the crankier posts, which I'll admit I've made some of myself... sorry!)
but, IMHO, the metric systems is a Good Thing (tm), as opposed to the "English[/American] system of measurement, because the metric system has a standard base from which all measurements are taken. You know, from orders of magnitude, relative sizes. We know because we've lived with the American-ized system our whole lives. I mean, think about how scewered our system is:
12 inches in a foot 5280 feet in a mile (I think, can't remember...) 3 feet in a yard etc, etc......
yet, the metric system has a concise, orderly way of measuring things, that is simple to use once you remember what the prefixes mean..
I don't like M$'s lies any more than the rest of you, but I think we need to keep in mind that if you don't counter the FUD with something (and something very public and noticeable), then the public isn't going to "find out exactly how full of it they are."
You have a point there, but, as you hinted at, and as we all know, writing a piece to post on the site of your distro to point out the advantages of Linux (over M$) is going to be a very sensitive subject, because you're not going to want to get into the same dung hole they're in and start your own FUD page. The last thing the public needs is two [or more] companies going at it tooth-and-nail, or even spouting back and forth about whose-product-is-better-and-why-and-you-should-buy -mine.
I think that it's not such a bad idea, to keep Linux in the light, but I think that if it is to be done, whoever does it should probably be a big, heterogenous group of Linux-dudes who spend as much time researching the specific differences as they do tweaking their wording.
I, acting on behalf of Garbage-Collectors Anonymous (G.A.), hereby declare the permanent exclusion of Lotus from within our stinkin' ranks. That piece o' garbage ain't got no place here. Take your trash elsewhere.
After all, all D&D players are Satanists or so the radical religious zealots would have us believe. I wonder what these same folks think of Unix and Linux with it's spawning daemons, zombies, magic cookies, and the like? I wonder myself; but then I stop because I figure that the thing is, a lot of those zealots out there don't know enough about Unix and linux to know that there _are_ daemons, cookies, etc, etc... There are lots of Christians out there who _would_ love to see a movie like this, (re: me), and I'm all for that magic and stuff. I don't believe it's real, but I enjoy imagining it so. I realize this'll also probably get rated Flamebait, but, so be it.. it's a dirty job, but somebody's gotta do it.
he released the Doom source.... so we could just look at it and drool? Forgive me for my ignorance, please, but I'm not quite understanding the concept behind this. Reminds me of the whole Corel spill (ok, not really) and all these other times I've heard of source releases, only to hear whelps of joy when the stuff was GPL'ed...
We may think that we're invulnerable, but we're not. We're no more invulnerable than the next country. We have no real way of knowing what another country is doing, so long as they can keep a secret. I'm willing to think, therefore, that there are a lot of countries out there not half as loud-mouth and braggy as the United States, and thus I would think we have more to worry about than the rest of the free world.
However, in the lesser grand schema of U.S. political theories, I think this is a good thing, and I'm glad they can feel secure in their successful test. I, OTOH, think that this test doesn't say much. As I've heard it mentioned, and as I thought myself, they planned this thing, unarmed the missile, and knew where everything was supposed to go. Does real war play out like this? I'd like to think not. Nice job guys, but you've got work yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Again, that's just what he seems to think. The truth of the matter is, he's too powerful, and he's dangerous to America's economy. No one person should have so much wealth or power.
Nobody.
I agree. This analogy may be way off, but think of Hitler. He (single-handedly?) convinced an enormous group of people that he knew who deserved to live and he knew what the world should be like and proceeded from there. And look what he did.
Now, I'm not saying that M$ is trying to kill everybody or take over the world... they're just trying to take over the computing world. And I don't like it. And I know that there are a great many other people in this world who don't like it. I realize that M$ has some decent stuff.. (I use Windows.. b/c, in my current circumstances, I must) - decent as in, it works, and it's not the end of the world - but they have by far NOT taken the world to where it is by themselves, nor do they know what's best, nor are they carrying the world today, nor should they, nor should they have complete say over the future of the world ("world" here meaning (1)the computing/computer/technology world, and (2) the physical world/Earth).
I just hope the DoJ wins the anti-trust case and that M$ can be enlightened.
If MS were truely interested in better integration, they should just comp up with the MSORB, slap some visual tools with wizards on it and presto, folks that already use CORBA will not have to trash their existing infrastructure, and the world will not have to decide between an open standard which benefits from 10 years of development vs. some new drivel from MS which is close to, but not like whats out there. At least it has a catchy name
I agree. If M$ was really interested in opening up the playing field, they wouldn't have to invent SOAP; they would collaborate with other players and develop a technology with features common to all. Apparently, sharing/cooperation seems to be a problem.. unless they're sharing something with you that will give them control/the edge/more $.
How much you wanna bet that while SOAP may be used on any platform, it only really works well on MS platforms...
I'd be willing to bet you're right on this one. Either that, and you're stuck with a POC, or.. they'll charge you some nice $ for a "service pack".
I"m probably asking a redundant/silly question, but
what exactly are the restrictions that these coders face dealing with the code? And the next five years? and if it's just that they can't talk about it for the next five years, why only five years? Is that the amount of time they think it will take for Civ:CTP to have risen and fallen as a "hit" game?
On the overall level, I think this is great. I only wish I had the knowledge, experience, and good fortune to be able to participate in something like that as well!
I imagine you could. As another poster mentioned, the ramifications are enormous. You could engineer new, stronger chemical substances and build objects layer by layer and create some really great stuff. (yes, faster processors is one thing, RAM, denser storage media, so forth and so on).. but the applications aren't limited to simply "computer" technology. This _is_ technology.. technology that we should use to model, explore, control, build.. design beyond our wildest dreams...
I can't wait til they start developing this past the "look-we-can-do-it" stage and into the "look-what-we-can-do-with-it" stage(s).
gro.todhsals.www
.. and I can find the derivative of the derivative of f(x)=((3x^3)+sin(x))*cox(4x-5), and I know why Darth Vader wears his bio-suit, and I know "for whom the bell tolls," and...
Lest we have to remind Microsoft:
Well, that list may have been not quite as thorough as it could have been, but eh, we get the point!
I had wondered, myself, when this whole Rambus issue was first posted on
Would Intel consider recalling those affected units and replacing them?
I'm going to assume no, tragically enough, but I wish they would. Those people who have received such poor, faulty equipment shouldn't have to live with it. I also realize that I'm probably making it to sound worse than it really is, but I'm just wondering:
- How big of an issue is this (for those who have the faulty MBs/etc).?
- What is Intel planning to do about what they've already shipped?
- Do we really care about Rambus? (from the other posts, I would guess no, and I know I don't want any Intel crap/Rambus stuff.)
- Did the people who purchased the faulty Intel/Rambus equipment know they were buying Rambus technology? If so, did they buy it for the Rambus claims? (I realize this is a question we can't really answer b/c we don't know what was going on in their minds when they purchased said hardware.)
I also realize that most of those questions are rather poorly thought out questions, and of little import, but I was just wondering...The concerns about "corporations having my information" are very valid, but unfortunately, this battle is pretty much over. The battle was basically lost before there even was "e-Commerce".
Correct. The battle was lost when the credit card was invented. If you're really that worried, use cash/checks. Cash only, if you want to be that paranoid. Taking it a step further (and a rather ridiculous step to me) keep your money in your mattress (figuratively; i.e., don't have a bank account if you're that worried) and then you'll know where your money is and all that jazz.
Not much that you can do to stop it though, seeing as how you're allowed to take pictures of wahtever you want [unless someone decides to copyright that] ;)
But isn't there a line where people can sue for this kind of thing? I mean, think about it:
Doctors can't take pictures of patients (or is it their faces?) without [written] consent from said patient. Just the same, shouldn't there be some sort of privacy permission thing here? I realize that there must not be, obviously because of the press and how they publish all sorts of pictures that we know they didn't ask permission for, but, do you see where I'm coming from? What's the difference between the public taking pictures and the medical professions taking pictures for reference of diseases and such? Am I simply way off-topic here? Help please.
I can imagine that if they had a Tux in every room, they'd soon quit, because I don't imagine many of them would stay past the first person to stay in that room. However, I noted a translation that said that they weren't actually going to have a Tux in every room (too expense, if you ask me).. but
imagine the task of the notebooks. I know it'd be hard to steal one, considering the fact that they've got you on record as having checked one out, etc, etc... but.. another temptation to some.. actually, what I'm wondering is how much permissions you'll have over the notebook. I guess they'll just play it "safe" (at least, with a no-brainer like me, it'd be safe indeed from harm) and create a very limited user account. Of course, you could wipe the drive and re-install.. and they'd have a new distro; maybe *BSD, Mac, who knows... someone might even have the prankster idea to put Windows on the darned thing!! (ack!)
I'm just interested to see how it goes... shall have to follow up on this.. hmm.. where's my bookmark list?
This idea is probably too far-fetched, but
What if each email, encrypted as it was, also had an internal program that counted how long it had been in existence/decoded and that deleted itself after a set time? Then, the "clock" couldn't get "turned back," and you'd be safe, and free of another email in your inbox. Of course, this may be unrealistic, but I'm just wondering....
and I suggest /. invites him to do so here
/.
I feel we should too, or, compile a list of questions and qualms and send them his way, so that he may write another puplit on why this pulpit was so vague, making unproveable assertions,
"Forget the Mafia, this sort of device would be in active use right now in Russia and that country would suddenly not be so poor. Things would be a lot more screwed-up in the world than they actually are. "
"This is an interesting idea but ultimately flawed, I think. The only way to write the news is to write the news. You have to do it the best that you can then take the heat, because the censorship of the nerderati is still censorship. That's why newspapers make corrections. "
and wandering so tangently.
" At $100 per coke.cc, intel.cc, and cringely.cc, there's millions to be made, though I suppose there will still be the risk of losing it all in 12 microseconds, which is quicker even than at the track. "
Although I do realize the importance of such an issue, if this is true. If it is, I find it strange that we're learning of it only now (well, I am, though I'm sure some of you already have), and I wonder why it hasn't been posted on
However, as we all know, each is entitled to his/her own opinion, and I'll be more eager to hear his, though, when he is more eager to elaborate, provide support, and arrange his argument in a more logical, concise, and integrated manner.
how 'bout a new branch of "cybertools" that all run microLinux on those micro-chips of theirs, here, and make the "motherboard" (if that's what you can call it) the "handle" of the Swiss Army Knife, and the peripherals/ports the flip-out "tools" of the Swiss Army knife.
Neat idea?
An excellent question indeed, because it brings to mind almost everything that can be done with a networked computer:
The list goes on and on. I realize that this'll probably get moderated as Flamebait, Troll, or, perhaps, as Just Plain Stupid, as I realize that some of the items on the list are rather ridiculous looking. Yet, you have to stop and think for a moment and realize what a large, gray field we've just leaped into by attempting to define cyber terrorism! Everybody thinks they know what it is, and I guarantee you that there won't necessarily be a happy middle ground. There are going to be people who will debate such issues indefinitely, and who will see defining cyber terrorism as an invasion of their First Amendment rights (freedom of speech, so forth and so on).
To be further frank with you, I don't have a good grasp as to exactly what I feel cyber terrorism is, but I know that if you're going to write an article about it, you've got to start poking around and finding out what others think it is, then you may begin to address it, its implications, effects, consequences, and advantages.
Yes!
I'd like to begin by asking a rhetorical question: What does my religion have to do with anything? (Did I bring it up in my discussion? If I did, I apologize now, and profusely, but I don't think I did).
To continue with my retort, I am an American. Ha!
Where does "You euros" come in this discussion, eh? Unless you meant that as an outward statement against all Europeans who might be thinking as I was/am. I "get by just fine" with "our system" because I've been accustomed to it all my life, but even then, there are many units that I can't convert (within the "American system") because I can't remember them all. Why? Well, it could be that
or
My point is, I'm going to say that it can and will always be a matter of preference, because you can't make people do what they don't wish to do. Still, I remain firm in my belief that the metric system is superior to the "American system."
Well, this is an interesting use of the Slashdot Community. We've taken a small step from a 'Feedback' community to actually generating stories. This could actually lead to something interesting..
/. community as source. Next thing you know (and this was actually my first thought, upon seeing the JIR article post), "someone" (person, corporation, organization, etc.) will come in and do a psychological study of how the /. community works.... :-)
/. to become so influential that they decided to analyze and model us, and to encourage more groups to share as we do (except for some of the crankier posts, which I'll admit I've made some of myself... sorry!)
So, they're writing an article about cyberterrorism using the
(and of how close I get to being kicked out at times, I'll imagine.
But seriously, that would be interesting; for
just my penny for the day
yeah, i knew that...
(faux pas of the grandest sort)
*hands head in shame*
well, darn it, i got on my matchbox, and look what it did for me
but, IMHO, the metric systems is a Good Thing (tm), as opposed to the "English[/American] system of measurement, because the metric system has a standard base from which all measurements are taken. You know, from orders of magnitude, relative sizes. We know because we've lived with the American-ized system our whole lives. I mean, think about how scewered our system is:
12 inches in a foot
5280 feet in a mile (I think, can't remember...)
3 feet in a yard
etc, etc......
yet, the metric system has a concise, orderly way of measuring things, that is simple to use once you remember what the prefixes mean..
just my $0.02 worth
I don't like M$'s lies any more than the rest of you, but I think we need to keep in mind that if you don't counter the FUD with something (and something very public and noticeable), then the public isn't going to "find out exactly how full of it they are."
y -mine.
You have a point there, but, as you hinted at, and as we all know, writing a piece to post on the site of your distro to point out the advantages of Linux (over M$) is going to be a very sensitive subject, because you're not going to want to get into the same dung hole they're in and start your own FUD page. The last thing the public needs is two [or more] companies going at it tooth-and-nail, or even spouting back and forth about whose-product-is-better-and-why-and-you-should-bu
I think that it's not such a bad idea, to keep Linux in the light, but I think that if it is to be done, whoever does it should probably be a big, heterogenous group of Linux-dudes who spend as much time researching the specific differences as they do tweaking their wording.
My thought of the day.. =)
Why not just call it "National Spam a Techie Day" and at least be honest about it.
Then you'd have people with thoughts of "National Spam Day".. only instead, we'd really make a "National Spam-The-Spammers Day," and
Vengeance is ours!
Official Notice
I, acting on behalf of Garbage-Collectors Anonymous (G.A.), hereby declare the permanent exclusion of Lotus from within our stinkin' ranks. That piece o' garbage ain't got no place here. Take your trash elsewhere.
Unanimously
-The not-Undersigned Anonymous-
After all, all D&D players are Satanists or so the radical religious zealots would have us believe. I wonder what these same folks think of Unix and Linux with it's spawning daemons, zombies, magic cookies, and the like? I wonder myself; but then I stop because I figure that the thing is, a lot of those zealots out there don't know enough about Unix and linux to know that there _are_ daemons, cookies, etc, etc...
There are lots of Christians out there who _would_ love to see a movie like this, (re: me), and I'm all for that magic and stuff. I don't believe it's real, but I enjoy imagining it so. I realize this'll also probably get rated Flamebait, but, so be it.. it's a dirty job, but somebody's gotta do it.
First was the initial release of the Doom source,
he released the Doom source.... so we could just look at it and drool? Forgive me for my ignorance, please, but I'm not quite understanding the concept behind this. Reminds me of the whole Corel spill (ok, not really) and all these other times I've heard of source releases, only to hear whelps of joy when the stuff was GPL'ed...
Thanks
This is probably off-topic, but:
secure in the knowledge that we are invulnerable?
We may think that we're invulnerable, but we're not. We're no more invulnerable than the next country. We have no real way of knowing what another country is doing, so long as they can keep a secret. I'm willing to think, therefore, that there are a lot of countries out there not half as loud-mouth and braggy as the United States, and thus I would think we have more to worry about than the rest of the free world.
However, in the lesser grand schema of U.S. political theories, I think this is a good thing, and I'm glad they can feel secure in their successful test. I, OTOH, think that this test doesn't say much. As I've heard it mentioned, and as I thought myself, they planned this thing, unarmed the missile, and knew where everything was supposed to go. Does real war play out like this? I'd like to think not. Nice job guys, but you've got work yet.