My dad, a dentist.. has a small computer "network" in his office. Well, he doesn't work on fridays, so.. on Thursday, Dec. 30th (that is correct, right?) his secretaries closed out the books on their computer(s) for the day/year. So, where it was supposed to have read January 1, 2000 (signifying that they'll be starting work on a new year), it instead said January 1, 1900. I thought that was the funniest thing, but at the same time, it aggravates me, because that's not supposed to happen. Especially since the company he bought the systems from claimed they were Y2K compliant, da dee da... geez!!
Now, should we all run over there and buy some toys to thank them?
No, as I believe you're implying, we should not actually go over there and buy a bunch of stuff to reward them for dropping suit. They deserve no reward. It was idiotic beyond compare, IMHO, that they brought up the suit to begin with. Therefore, they need no reward for actually behaving in an aware state.
I think that eToy should press for damages... eToys is a big corporation, a user and as it seems in this case, a loser, and they should be taught, along with all other corporations, that it's not right to throw their weight around, for any reason, including boosting holiday sales. Geez! The love of money in this world.. *sigh*
Then again, I'm going to have to guess that there is/are some major flaw(s) in my argument, for which I apologize. Thank you.
is it just me, or was this more of a fashion show appealing to people who like the "futuristic" look?
I'm going to have to agree with you, for a couple o' reasons:
the clothing had to be the worst conglomeration of sundry materials I've ever seen
none of the technology on display looked like it was useful
how the ?!? can you operate normally while trying to utilize any of the devices on display? just.. stop in the middle of the street, turn to your sleeve, and say, "check email"? kinda.. going to the it-may-be-nice-but-it's-not-practical side of things
many people in this world who might, by some strange otherworldychance, use this junk, would very likely not look like the people who are so kindly displaying it for us
the models did not appeal to me. I guess that's because I'm a female, and none of the male models (I only noted one, but I didn't finish the fashion show) appealed, so.. bah humbug on them
I figure, though, that it's up to the inventors what they want to put their efforts into researching/designing/building, but if it were up to me, I'd work on something else.. anything but this wearable stuff. I mean, it's nice and all that it can be done, but I've yet to see a good, practical, "fashionable" wearable. Of course I haven't seen them all, that's just my $0.02 worth. Thanks
But then the question remains: What countries have/have not passed laws concerning mp3s? I'm going to guess that I should probably know this by now, but since I don't, and it's an issue [now], what countries allow mp3s/haven't ruled against them? We need to collect a list of mp3-friendly countries.. where we can stick our mp3 servers;-)
I feel slightly silly for posting this.... but, isn't blackbox supposed to be one of those nice, simple, un-bloated WM? I haven't had lots of experience with it, but I knew someone who practically "swore by it"...
It's just too damned ironic that they introduced 'R' in the latest movie.
It is. But I was wishing that I wasn't really seeing that.. I didn't want to see Q leave. But now that he's gone, I'm glad that they did let him have his mysteriously wonderful exit; it does him [more] justice instead of him simply being replaced in the next movie because he'd died. As we know, it'll be a more graceful replacement, because he was able to bow out in the last movie. I'm still sad he's gone; he was such a natural it'll be hard for his successor to satisfy my personal mold of Q. *sigh*
It was microsoft's fault, so they have to fix it. Did they pay NYPD for this, or did the people of New York pay for this..
Even if M$ did pay NYPD for this.. how could they? Could anyone, with sufficient money, pay the police to go twiddle in their business for them... make them their little pet band? If so, how can we allow this? This is pathetic! They have jobs to fulfill; they're supposed to serve and protect, but I didn't think that "serve" was extended to going and fixing someone else's booboo like that. That's a private matter that should have served as just punishment to Microsoft for being so careless. Idiots!
Then again, we all make mistakes. Poor thing, I feel sorry for the bloke who did it.
I was wondering the same thing. Sure, they may "technically" be different species, but aren't they both in the feline category? They're both cat-like, so, what's the big news? However, if they're posting this, I'm goint to assume that it's actually a big improvement in their technologies.
Now, I'm not arguing that we should just run right out and do it. Like I said at the top, "whether we should" is indeed a valid question. I just find it weird to think of science as asking religion, as if they are the ones that should be consulted. If we'd done that 300+ years ago would anybody have bothered to try sailing around the planet?
You have a point. Think how nice it'd be *cough* if we hadn't sailed around the world (geez, I really wonder what it'd be like.. not good, I guess).
Anyway, what I was thinking was - this is not 300+ years ago! Yeah, I see that you're making a relative analogy that is in all likelihood plausible, but if that's your only argument for going ahead with this project, then you're just as sunk as those people you're trying to say are sunk fighting against it. Yes, I realize that you didn't say we _should_ go ahead with it, and I agree with the whole could we/should we thing. I, personally, am torn. But that's irrelevant here. I'm just saying that there doesn't seem to be much of an argument for either side yet, or, at least not in your post.
I realize I've never been nor ever will be a candidate for such (which is quite alright with me), but I've wondered this since the Red Hat thing. I figured with Red Hat, it meant you'd contributed somehow (significantly, I'm sure) to the Open Source movement, but.. with VA? Same thing?
if you could somehow train your finger muscles to be faster or something.
or maybe i'm wrong here. that might not quite be what it'd be used for. but definitely get someone else to control you.. to kinda.. circumvent things like (in the Matrix) when they could upload a program into their brain and instantly "learn" something (like, how to fly a helicopter); just get a pilot to control you temporarily. as long as they didn't decide to kill you...
ouch.
neat, though. I esp like idea of stimulating muscle tone. i'm too lazy to work out.;-)
The only threat I'm able to think of at the moment is to anonymous free speech. So if someone prints a newsletter with ideas someone doesn't like, the newslettter is branded "subversive", and can be tracked back to the printer. But then what? Can they really be shut down? And how many such "subversisves" really are anonymous anyway?
And if it were traced back, is there any possible way they could find out who brought that document in to be printed/copied and possibly arrest them/keep them under tabs/check up on them? This is probably way off-league here, or perhaps just paranoia, but I don't like the idea of the IDs anyway, and know that I finally know that such things exist, I have no desire for them to be used against me/anyone else. As I've mentioned in other posts about topics of privacy, if you have something "that bad," you ought not to be placing it in a publicly accessible arena, but, should anyone who, for some reason, have to print/copy it on such a machine, and try to spread their views/opinions (should they be contrary to the gov't), they could likely, if the power of this technology is exercised, be candidate for investigation, inquiry, surveilance, and/or arrest. I don't like that possibility. I'm sure there are others out there who don't. As the article mentioned, it mostly smacks of first amendment rights violation, if any rights violation at all.
Most accidents almost certainly do not happen at night because most driving occurs during the day. I'm not sure if the percentage of accidents per number of drivers on the road goes up.
That's exactly what I was trying to say!!
Therefore, I think this is an unnecessary technology, that will certainly NOT improve my driving experience. *ah* someone understands...
I rather wonder though what it looks like - engines generate lots of heat, plus in the winter you have all that heat energy in the passenger compartment - wouldn't that make it rather difficult to distinguish between two cars driving next to each other in different lanes? Hmmm, well... time will tell
I wonder the same things. But I also wonder how this is going to help if it's mounted on the dash. I guess it's not that far to glance down just an inch, esp. since you're still looking at the road, but.. most people being used to looking at things through their own eyes and with "visible" light (not IR light), I'm going to also think it's going to be a bit of a hassle not only to use but to, first, get used to. I don't quite see how it's going to help _that_ much. We've been living w/out it thus far, and I don't think that the majority of accidents happen at night/because of driving at night. People just need to pay attention to what they're doing, use their headlights when needed, and stay off the road if they're unable to drive safely.
Beside, who keeps info that could breach national security on a public server anyhow?
If their gov't is run by people, and if the people that run their gov't are similar in any way to the people that run ours, that won't always matter. Now, I realize that thus far I sound like I'm a accusing the Australian gov't of being bad people, but I'm not trying to. I'm just going to assume that they're not going to specifically define what they'll consider to be information that is a breach of national security, b/c that would convolute the workings of politic. (ok, so I'm ranting now.. moderate me down then.. sorry)
this is why democracy rules...... you cannot put people to death for things which cannot justify death.... these people (the commie gov) are murderers of anyone, student protestors, crackers, anyone who gets in their way. absolute power corrupts.
As someone else pointed out, we have the death penalty in the U.S., no?, and we're democratic, no?
Furthermore, I think you're making an incorrect generalization when you say "you cannot put people to death for things which cannot justify death." One of the many hot debated items in the world, I venture.. if not, at least in U.S., is what sort of punishments are justified by the many crimes (or, actions that are considered crimes) that exist. As humans, we all have our own opinions, and our own morals, values, and personal beliefs; therefore, we're not all going to agree on punishments for people. There are many people in this world who applaud the death penatly and there are as many or more so who feel exactly the opposite about it. Some are in the middle. And further still, there are disagreements over what type and the severity of punishments for crimes; I mean, we have parole! And, where you note "(the commie gov) are murderers of anyone, student protestors, crackers, anyone who gets in their way." I'd be willing to venture that our gov't has done a lot of the same type of activity. My theory? You've got an issue with communism, because you don't like it and/or don't understand it, and therefore you are going to blame all problems on the fact that China (or whoever we may speak of that's communist) is a communist country, and not stop and consider the entire situation. Sure, communism may not be the best answer, but I'm sure it isn't the worst. And think: perhaps the "drastic" punishments for such crimes serve as better deterrants against them. who knows.
If you have a rational argument, and it isn't one of those topics that generate more heat than light, then posting a position different than that of most posters is informative. And, in my experience, it's also more likely than an equally-well written "me-too" variant to get some karma points.
I agree.. and I wrote what I wrote.. out of lack of better thought, actually, because what I was referring to is Flamebait and people who post comments on subjects that they, and we, know will merely start a comment war (i.e., when people post religious comments. I'm a Christian, and proud of it, and I'm sure that most people are proud of whatever beliefs they hold pertaining to religion, but religion is a topic that often sparks hot debate, and I figure it's a subject that's better left out of/. discussions, seeing as how this isn't a religion site.)
Windows is not where Netscape is going to shine. I think M$ has pretty much demonstrated that no matter how cool your stuff is, they own the turf--and they control it depending on their own interests. Where Netscape is going to shine is in the Linux/*nix market, where there is a definate void for a decent browser. Communicator's nice and all, but I want Mozilla! Didn't I switch to Linux to avoid instability?
You make a good point here. Microsoft, as sole owners of Windows and as proprietors of its source code, have basically complete control over things and have sway in this situation so that it's easy for IE to beat Netscape on windows. I use Netscape and find it suits my needs; others will not find it so. But, back to my point, it's easier for Netscape to excell on the open source market (or, for other OSes besides Win and besides OSS, though I wouldn't know from experience) because of the very nature of OSS. I mean, if all the code is open for peaking and tweaking, what do you expect? So yes, there is a nice big void on the open source side of things (and *nices, as you mentioned) for something like Netscape to come in and fill. As for me, I'm waiting for 5, but in the mean time, I'm just happy with my 4.7.
(as i'm sure many of us are thinking) people'd get the point and actually give up that kind of stuff. geez!
In the Flamebait section, they could have added "be the Devil's Advocate," "bring taboo subjects into play," and.. this could have been a whole other enumerated item in itself: "Post as much and as often as possible to every article that you have time to do." The more Anonymous Cowards in this world, the better!
I just think, along with at least a few others in this world, I'm sure, that celeron is a dumb name b/c it's too reminiscent of a certain vegetable (?) by the name of Celery.
It's always nice to know you've got a garden in there; some real processing power.
You may be right. I acknowledge beforehand that this isn't a very knowledgeable post, so I'm sorry.
But, continuing with my earlier thought.. it seems as though, in one sense, DVD was hacked too soon because things like DVD-A weren't released yet (am I right) and because of the hacking, things like that are being delayed for fear of being hacked. If you ask me, though, it must be some sort of deep-seated desire for $. Then again, I wouldn't know.
Slashdot Mirror
My dad, a dentist.. has a small computer "network" in his office. Well, he doesn't work on fridays, so.. on Thursday, Dec. 30th (that is correct, right?) his secretaries closed out the books on their computer(s) for the day/year. So, where it was supposed to have read January 1, 2000 (signifying that they'll be starting work on a new year), it instead said January 1, 1900. I thought that was the funniest thing, but at the same time, it aggravates me, because that's not supposed to happen. Especially since the company he bought the systems from claimed they were Y2K compliant, da dee da...
geez!!
Now, should we all run over there and buy some toys to thank them?
No, as I believe you're implying, we should not actually go over there and buy a bunch of stuff to reward them for dropping suit. They deserve no reward. It was idiotic beyond compare, IMHO, that they brought up the suit to begin with. Therefore, they need no reward for actually behaving in an aware state.
I think that eToy should press for damages... eToys is a big corporation, a user and as it seems in this case, a loser, and they should be taught, along with all other corporations, that it's not right to throw their weight around, for any reason, including boosting holiday sales. Geez! The love of money in this world.. *sigh*
Then again, I'm going to have to guess that there is/are some major flaw(s) in my argument, for which I apologize. Thank you.
appealing to people who like the "futuristic" look?
I'm going to have to agree with you, for a couple o' reasons:
I figure, though, that it's up to the inventors what they want to put their efforts into researching/designing/building, but if it were up to me, I'd work on something else.. anything but this wearable stuff. I mean, it's nice and all that it can be done, but I've yet to see a good, practical, "fashionable" wearable. Of course I haven't seen them all, that's just my $0.02 worth. Thanks
But then the question remains: What countries have/have not passed laws concerning mp3s? I'm going to guess that I should probably know this by now, but since I don't, and it's an issue [now], what countries allow mp3s/haven't ruled against them? We need to collect a list of mp3-friendly countries.. where we can stick our mp3 servers ;-)
I feel slightly silly for posting this.... but, isn't blackbox supposed to be one of those nice, simple, un-bloated WM? I haven't had lots of experience with it, but I knew someone who practically "swore by it"...
It's just too damned ironic that they introduced 'R' in the latest movie.
It is. But I was wishing that I wasn't really seeing that.. I didn't want to see Q leave. But now that he's gone, I'm glad that they did let him have his mysteriously wonderful exit; it does him [more] justice instead of him simply being replaced in the next movie because he'd died. As we know, it'll be a more graceful replacement, because he was able to bow out in the last movie. I'm still sad he's gone; he was such a natural it'll be hard for his successor to satisfy my personal mold of Q. *sigh*
alas, alas.....
'nuff said
It was microsoft's fault, so they have to fix it. Did they pay NYPD for this, or did the people of New York pay for this..
Even if M$ did pay NYPD for this.. how could they? Could anyone, with sufficient money, pay the police to go twiddle in their business for them... make them their little pet band? If so, how can we allow this? This is pathetic! They have jobs to fulfill; they're supposed to serve and protect, but I didn't think that "serve" was extended to going and fixing someone else's booboo like that. That's a private matter that should have served as just punishment to Microsoft for being so careless. Idiots!
Then again, we all make mistakes. Poor thing, I feel sorry for the bloke who did it.
Any one of us would love to have access to his lab.
Better yet, access to the products of his lab!
I was wondering the same thing. Sure, they may "technically" be different species, but aren't they both in the feline category? They're both cat-like, so, what's the big news? However, if they're posting this, I'm goint to assume that it's actually a big improvement in their technologies.
Now, I'm not arguing that we should just run right out and do it. Like I said at the top, "whether we should" is indeed a valid question. I just find it weird to think
of science as asking religion, as if they are the ones that should be consulted. If we'd done that 300+ years ago would anybody have bothered to try sailing around
the planet?
You have a point. Think how nice it'd be *cough* if we hadn't sailed around the world (geez, I really wonder what it'd be like.. not good, I guess).
Anyway, what I was thinking was - this is not 300+ years ago! Yeah, I see that you're making a relative analogy that is in all likelihood plausible, but if that's your only argument for going ahead with this project, then you're just as sunk as those people you're trying to say are sunk fighting against it. Yes, I realize that you didn't say we _should_ go ahead with it, and I agree with the whole could we/should we thing. I, personally, am torn. But that's irrelevant here. I'm just saying that there doesn't seem to be much of an argument for either side yet, or, at least not in your post.
What exactly merits someone to get "the letter"?
I realize I've never been nor ever will be a candidate for such (which is quite alright with me), but I've wondered this since the Red Hat thing. I figured with Red Hat, it meant you'd contributed somehow (significantly, I'm sure) to the Open Source movement, but.. with VA? Same thing?
if you could somehow train your finger muscles to be faster or something.
;-)
or maybe i'm wrong here. that might not quite be what it'd be used for. but definitely get someone else to control you.. to kinda.. circumvent things like (in the Matrix) when they could upload a program into their brain and instantly "learn" something (like, how to fly a helicopter); just get a pilot to control you temporarily. as long as they didn't decide to kill you...
ouch.
neat, though. I esp like idea of stimulating muscle tone. i'm too lazy to work out.
The only threat I'm able to think of at the moment is to anonymous free speech. So if someone prints a newsletter with ideas someone doesn't like, the newslettter is
branded "subversive", and can be tracked back to the printer. But then what? Can they really be shut down? And how many such "subversisves" really are
anonymous anyway?
And if it were traced back, is there any possible way they could find out who brought that document in to be printed/copied and possibly arrest them/keep them under tabs/check up on them? This is probably way off-league here, or perhaps just paranoia, but I don't like the idea of the IDs anyway, and know that I finally know that such things exist, I have no desire for them to be used against me/anyone else. As I've mentioned in other posts about topics of privacy, if you have something "that bad," you ought not to be placing it in a publicly accessible arena, but, should anyone who, for some reason, have to print/copy it on such a machine, and try to spread their views/opinions (should they be contrary to the gov't), they could likely, if the power of this technology is exercised, be candidate for investigation, inquiry, surveilance, and/or arrest. I don't like that possibility. I'm sure there are others out there who don't. As the article mentioned, it mostly smacks of first amendment rights violation, if any rights violation at all.
just my little $20/1000 cents worth.
what does Caveat Emptor mean?
Most accidents almost certainly do not happen at night because most driving occurs during the day. I'm not sure if the percentage of accidents per number of
drivers on the road goes up.
That's exactly what I was trying to say!!
Therefore, I think this is an unnecessary technology, that will certainly NOT improve my driving experience. *ah* someone understands...
I rather wonder though what it looks like - engines generate lots of heat, plus in the winter you have all
that heat energy in the passenger compartment - wouldn't that make it rather difficult to distinguish between two cars driving next to each other in different lanes?
Hmmm, well... time will tell
I wonder the same things. But I also wonder how this is going to help if it's mounted on the dash. I guess it's not that far to glance down just an inch, esp. since you're still looking at the road, but.. most people being used to looking at things through their own eyes and with "visible" light (not IR light), I'm going to also think it's going to be a bit of a hassle not only to use but to, first, get used to. I don't quite see how it's going to help _that_ much. We've been living w/out it thus far, and I don't think that the majority of accidents happen at night/because of driving at night. People just need to pay attention to what they're doing, use their headlights when needed, and stay off the road if they're unable to drive safely.
Beside, who keeps info that could breach national security on a public server anyhow?
If their gov't is run by people, and if the people that run their gov't are similar in any way to the people that run ours, that won't always matter. Now, I realize that thus far I sound like I'm a accusing the Australian gov't of being bad people, but I'm not trying to. I'm just going to assume that they're not going to specifically define what they'll consider to be information that is a breach of national security, b/c that would convolute the workings of politic. (ok, so I'm ranting now.. moderate me down then.. sorry)
this is why democracy rules...... you cannot put people to death for things which cannot justify death.... these people (the commie gov) are murderers of anyone, student protestors, crackers, anyone who gets in their way. absolute power corrupts.
As someone else pointed out, we have the death penalty in the U.S., no?, and we're democratic, no?
Furthermore, I think you're making an incorrect generalization when you say "you cannot put people to death for things which cannot justify death." One of the many hot debated items in the world, I venture.. if not, at least in U.S., is what sort of punishments are justified by the many crimes (or, actions that are considered crimes) that exist. As humans, we all have our own opinions, and our own morals, values, and personal beliefs; therefore, we're not all going to agree on punishments for people. There are many people in this world who applaud the death penatly and there are as many or more so who feel exactly the opposite about it. Some are in the middle. And further still, there are disagreements over what type and the severity of punishments for crimes; I mean, we have parole! And, where you note "(the commie gov) are murderers of anyone, student protestors, crackers, anyone who gets in their way." I'd be willing to venture that our gov't has done a lot of the same type of activity. My theory? You've got an issue with communism, because you don't like it and/or don't understand it, and therefore you are going to blame all problems on the fact that China (or whoever we may speak of that's communist) is a communist country, and not stop and consider the entire situation. Sure, communism may not be the best answer, but I'm sure it isn't the worst. And think: perhaps the "drastic" punishments for such crimes serve as better deterrants against them. who knows.
If you have a rational argument, and it isn't one of those topics that generate more heat than light, then posting a position different than that of most posters is informative. And, in my experience, it's also more likely than an equally-well written "me-too" variant to get some karma points.
/. discussions, seeing as how this isn't a religion site.)
I agree.. and I wrote what I wrote.. out of lack of better thought, actually, because what I was referring to is Flamebait and people who post comments on subjects that they, and we, know will merely start a comment war (i.e., when people post religious comments. I'm a Christian, and proud of it, and I'm sure that most people are proud of whatever beliefs they hold pertaining to religion, but religion is a topic that often sparks hot debate, and I figure it's a subject that's better left out of
But, thanks for the clarification.
Windows is not where Netscape is going to shine. I think M$ has pretty much demonstrated that no matter how cool your stuff is, they own the turf--and they control it depending on their own interests.
Where Netscape is going to shine is in the Linux/*nix market, where there is a definate void for a decent browser. Communicator's nice and all, but I want Mozilla! Didn't I switch to Linux to avoid instability?
You make a good point here. Microsoft, as sole owners of Windows and as proprietors of its source code, have basically complete control over things and have sway in this situation so that it's easy for IE to beat Netscape on windows. I use Netscape and find it suits my needs; others will not find it so. But, back to my point, it's easier for Netscape to excell on the open source market (or, for other OSes besides Win and besides OSS, though I wouldn't know from experience) because of the very nature of OSS. I mean, if all the code is open for peaking and tweaking, what do you expect? So yes, there is a nice big void on the open source side of things (and *nices, as you mentioned) for something like Netscape to come in and fill. As for me, I'm waiting for 5, but in the mean time, I'm just happy with my 4.7.
(as i'm sure many of us are thinking) people'd get the point and actually give up that kind of stuff. geez!
In the Flamebait section, they could have added "be the Devil's Advocate," "bring taboo subjects into play," and.. this could have been a whole other enumerated item in itself: "Post as much and as often as possible to every article that you have time to do." The more Anonymous Cowards in this world, the better!
I just think, along with at least a few others in this world, I'm sure, that celeron is a dumb name b/c it's too reminiscent of a certain vegetable (?) by the name of Celery.
It's always nice to know you've got a garden in there; some real processing power.
this coming sometime after.. those reports of one of the last missions crashing b/c of conversion problems between American & metric
You may be right. I acknowledge beforehand that this isn't a very knowledgeable post, so I'm sorry.
But, continuing with my earlier thought.. it seems as though, in one sense, DVD was hacked too soon because things like DVD-A weren't released yet (am I right) and because of the hacking, things like that are being delayed for fear of being hacked. If you ask me, though, it must be some sort of deep-seated desire for $. Then again, I wouldn't know.