. So two nights ago I went to the Andrew WK concert here in Toronto. 2000 or so people in a small club, watching my favorite artist perform on a stage barely big enough for the 5 members of the band. When he went body surfing, he was 12 feet away from me.
Tickets were only $15 CDN, plus Ticketmaster tax plus tax, about $25 CDN. Damn cheap compared to say $70 CDN Def Leppard tickets for a huge venue.
He loves his fans and people in general and has a super attitude towards life and things in general, I've been impressed by him as a person each time I've heard him interviewed. Look at the super huge replys he gives to fan-mail. He's a person full of energy, life, and goodwill towards others.
I'm just dying to get my hands on his 2nd albumn that came out TODAY.
HOWEVER, I feel that from what he said in this Onion AV interview that he has totally bought into the necessity of his label and his recording contract - the one that requires an expensive studio, expensive equipment, expensive people, etc etc.
"So I started recording in New York and continued in L.A., Michigan, Minnesota, and Florida. It was a lot of different people and a lot of different places, but all very necessary. There were a lot of engineers, and that's what we needed. The songs were good to go. We just needed all the best equipment and the systems to make them sound like they should sound. It was very work-intensive, to the point where some people didn't really enjoy working that way. It's very tedious and it involves fine-tuning and stacking, where you're looking at each song under a microscope and every split second is important."
He's currently doing one show a night in a different city every single day, for months on end. I'm beginning to think that he's got some serious debts to pay back to his recording company. A lot of this matches the horror stories you hear about artists.
I hope not. Even if he is, I'd bet he got into it by convincing himself that it was worth it to bring his music and happiness to a ton of other people in the world.
Right now, I'm just totally trying to keep myself from going out and buying this one CD.
Note - I discovered his music on Kazaa, a year ago.
Definitely time to go looking for the new replacement for mp3.com. mp3.com is where I got half my trance a few years ago. (Stupid morons, there was 20 year old case law against doing what they did that got them sued into oblivion and put them in a situation where they could get bought for peanuts by a major label.)
We (music consumers, software techies, and artists) need to create and/or pick the "one successor" service that we can use as a legal free and semi-commercial alternative to the RIAA distribution system, one where amateurs like this guy and put their music and get donations/direct-CD-sales, where amateurs can turn into semi-pro, and even make a living if they're producing something of enough value.
So I think it's time for me to do my duty, go find said service with said semi-pro and amateur artists, do what I can to make this alternate distribution service/mechanism a success, and spend my music bugdet on them.
> There are yet more problems with nuclear power. Think of the trouble the world is in over oil. Uranium will be no different. If you base the world's energy needs on a scarce resource
This is the first thing I thought of. There is not an infinite supply of Uranium, I remember reading that in documents describing how much estimated total power was available from non-renewable resources in the 90's. IIRC (and I probably do not) it was something like 50-100 years for oil, 100 years for nuclear, and 2-400 for coal.
The very first hit in this google search turns up a pdf paper that claims that if we used Nuclear for all our current electricity needs, that we'd run through all known Uranium reserves in 3 years.
Of course the source is apparently very anti-nuclear, but at least they are publicly publishing their calculations and refutations. http://beheer.oprit.rug.nl/deenen/
. NOTE - On most existing p2p networks the limiting resource is not the number of files that sharers are sharing, the limited resources is the aggregate bandwidth available to all.
Compare how easily it is to get the file you want when 5 percent of the people have thousands of files each and share, vs the situation where you have 95 percent of the people sharing only a few dozen files each.
In both cases the files you want are available, simply because.05 times 4 million times 1000 is the same as.95 times 4 million times 50. But in the latter case, 20 times the amount of bandwidth is available (presuming all are broadband subscribers).
So, *IF* enough people decide to share a few files and turn on sharing, we might actually be better off!! .
> See, here's the fun in playing "what if" games: they work both ways.
Excellent point! Totally skipped my mind.
Considering that, and seeing as we have 50 years of fuel at current consumption levels, I'd agree that we can afford to wait another 20-30 years at least...
> My kid brother was booted off his cablemodem for playing Quake with me online. He hosted the game, which violated the "you may not run any servers" clause, and I swear he and I were the only ones playing.
Mmmm, yeah, some providers aren't all that enlightened, no matter where you go. Switch to someone like istop, 3.5/800 ul/dl and NO such restrictions - http://www.istop.com/residential.html - or switch to Bell Canada (Sympatico) DSL, they have the same rules, but I've never seen them enforced, the second they do - bye bye, I'm off to iStop.
> The broadband industry is in a terrible state in Canada. You have two government-approved monopolies (cable and phone) splitting it all up 50/50. Theres no room in the system for any competition from 3rd parties, either.
Last time I checked, there were 43 competing DSL providers in southern Ontario - http://www.canadianisp.com/ - and unlike the US Bell's, Bell Canada plays fair and doesn't do dirty tricks (see, the CRTC is good for something!)
My Mom, in rural Saskatchewan (prairies) in a town of 800 people 100 miles from the nearest city, has access to 1mbit/128kbit ul/dl DSL for $40 CDN per month. I think Saskatchewan is the last holdout province with a crown corporation providing local phone service and DSL. They're way ahead of the rest of the country.
Your arguments will fail if the "economic incentive" and time available to create new sources of energy as oil runs out is not sufficient to create the amount of energy and the entire technology infrastructure that we will actually need or desire for our purposes.
You cannot assume that the natural oil depletion price curve will match what I am describing and everything will magically "work itself out". If the market and pure capitalism was a cure-all, we wouldn't need 90% of what our governments do.
Society and reality will in all cases greatly impact your "solution" (what is technically possible, how much it costs to do, how long it will take given a certain level of money, what unintended side-effects will occur, etc ).
It takes time and energy to create alternate-source power-stations, cars, distribution systems. What happens if the "natural demand curve" that you are describing causes oil to become scarce so fast that there isn't enough of it left to build all the "alternative fuel sources" to replace oil itself? Answer: our available energy levels go way way down and mostly gets diverted to trying to create more alternative fuel sources, which means for 5 or 10 years you don't get power to run your washing machine and only important people get cars. Not an ideal solution, eh? Don't you wish you had consciously chosen to pay an extra 10% for fuel in the prior 10 years to develop the alternative-power-sources *before* they were needed, instead of "letting the market decide"?
My Win2K Pro home PC had EXACTLY the same symptoms starting late last week.
I applied SP4, did Windows Update, did a memtest86, uninstalled a few new apps. Then while I was sitting there thinking, my registry monitor utility started blaring. Odd, I wasn't installing/uninstalling anything, it shouldn't have been complaining. It was msblast.exe being added to the Run registry entry. At which point I found out about the msblast virus, and noticed the 20 port 135 connections to the net every second.
So I killed the msblast process and installed the patch (twice, just to be sure) and removed the registry entry.
No more RPC service crashes, back nice and stable.
The issue is that apparently, sometimes for certain systems, the buffer overflow fails. Instead of the overflow causing the appropriate arbitrary code to be executed, it would simply crash one of the RPC services. So you wouldn't have msblast.exe per se, but you would have system problems from the malformed port 135 connections to your system, the *attempts* to infect you.
So the question is, what circumstances would cause you to not be protected, but still suffer non-exploitable buffer overflows.
My guess is a bad microsoft "fix" for the problem in an earlier MSUpdate or something.
It seems perfectly obvious to "monday-morning quarterbacks" that the foam was a problem, but five years of experience suggested otherwise.
This is exactly the type of bad logic that helped cause the first shuttle tragedy. The dangerous fallacy that "since it's worked N times before" that it "will work N more times".
*Anyone* who is in a man-critical environment can NOT use the simple fact that something hasn't been a problem yet to conclude that it isn't dangerous.
> All the list I'm on (intentionally, at least) use double-opt-in.
Now that would work with his forwarding alias problem.
My ISP however will not pass any e-mail that doesn't contain their own domain-name in the "from" e-mail address. When I used Navigator 4.7x for e-mail and Usenet, I would use a munged e-mail hostname in my profile. However if I forgot to switch it back before sending e-mail, the e-mail would be silently dropped by my ISP's systems. Come to think of it, they didn't always used to do that.. so I guess some people might be able to do what you suggest even if the list wasn't double-opt-in.
> Yes you can. Just about any mailer lets you set > the "from" address to whatever you want.
Only an idiot would run an "opt in" system which didn't use the ISP's "from" and just took the user-specified "from" field. To do so would mean that ANYONE could subscribe or unsubscribe you from their services, which would be idiotic and completely defeat the purpose.
>> Why would I want to do "a simple name search >> for a file across an entire drive"? The file >> name is meaningless outside the context of its hierarchy. > > Again, you're assumiung you, a technically savvy user.
Yup, and even some of us technically savvy users can't remember which sub-sub-sub folder we put that one file whose name we can't quite remember into. We know we're looking for the file that contains the list of shoes we've owned and which ones were comfortable (because it's time to replace our current pair), but is it in our/personal/medical/ folder because it's related to feet, or is it in/information/real-world/clothing/ because we were shopping for clothing, or what? Did I put that file on a given technical issue in my/information/x86/hardware/drives/ folder, or did I put it in/information/my-computer/drives/ folder because it pertained to my specific computer as opposed to x86 hardware in general.
I search for files ALL the time. Windows 2000 NTFS searches are so slow I actually have a nightly cron job using a win32 port of unix find build me a 2 MB index file in the root of my drive, and a little utility that runs grep against it. 10 times faster and more convenient than "explorer search", and takes up 100 times less space and CPU usage than turning on "index files" in NTFS (sucks bad when you have a half terrabyte in drives - and the thing seems to index only FILE CONTENTS and not file names, I never noticed a speed up in file name searching when drive indexing was turned on...)
Worse yet is when you attempt to browse through the directories, directories containing 5-10,000 plus files, directories with 20 subdirectories - Explorer or the file-open/save dialog can sit there for 30 seconds or more before it begins to display the directory contents.
Frequently I don't care about the file contents, I just want to drill down into a sub-sub-sub folder, or select a folder (not open/view it, select it to save/link/etc). It should show me the directory structure and not block while it goes off to build the list of files in the folder. Heck it blocks even when the one directory you are in only has 20 subdirectories and no files of it's own, it's like it's got to go through all 50,000 files in the sub-directories before it can display the parent directory. Stupid and slow.
Welcome to another exciting game of "Where's the most releveant fscking link!!?".
Move your mouse over any of the fifty different single-word semi-ambiguous hyperlinks and see if you can spot the one small word that links to an obscure URL that is actually the most relevant to the story at hand.
Because of Neo's strong connection to her, he wasn't going to say 'fuck you' to the Architect and blow the whole place up. Blowing the whole place up would lead to the death of everyone in the matrix, and coupled with the destruction of Zion would lead to the extinction of the human race.
Wait, that's not right.
By going through the one door to save Trinitiy he *WAS* dooming the entire place and all of Humanity (as far as the Architect was concerned). It was only if he went through the other door and re-intergrated his code that the humanity in the Matrix would live on, and he and 28 remaining Zions would form the seed for the "next" Zion ready for the next incarnation of "The One".
He DID say 'fuck you' to the architect and doomed all Humanity to die just because he has a stronger connection to Trinity than he does to Humanity - and the machines will just have to "make do" with a lower level of existence (without all the power that the Matrix provides them).
I found the article highly useful as a personal development tool - to illuminate the things in life I could do differently to better my life - and I'm speaking IN GENERAL.
You sound like you assumed that the author was placing you in the one of two groups. He's in all probability not an a**h*le, so that assumption simply can't be right.
Place yourself in his shoes. He wants to list the things a person *could* do to increase their odds of eventually succeeding, and as an excellent counterpoint list the opposite, the things that will decrease your odds of succeeding.
Just because he's seperated it up into these two camps, doesn't mean he's accusing you or anyone else who isn't "successful" of being a brain-dead paranoid retard with *all* of those listed failings. But he is trying to list some of the things you could do to increase your chances of success.
>Isn't is possible to write good software and have it sell without huge amounts of thought about marketing
Sure, it could happen. If you want to leave things to chance and to whatever random assortment of luck and personal attributes you've been handed in life - you can do that.
But if you want some ideas to try and exceed whatever random thing happens to your effort, there they are. Pick and choose whatever bits you think might help you.
Just yesterday I saw a graph that showed the number of people killed by lynching in the USA over the past century. It was 150 a year in 1900, and was a straight line down to zero by 1965 or so.
Don't tell me society can not evolve. Don't tell me the world isn't getting better, even if it is taking 50 years at a time.
Information cannot be posessed or owned. You are merely the first human being to arrange a given information set into that particular arrangement.
Somewhere out there is a planet where the molecular vibrations of a small block of gas or rock - at one instant in the history of the universe - perfectly replicated the information in the ILLIAD.
Your "posession" is only as unique as the number of bytes required to duplicate it. Three short strings of a couple dozen notes of a given waveform is not all that unique, and you are not allowed to claim ownership of it.
However if you take the time to create a particularly pleasing set of information, we will allow you a short artificial monopoly of this non-physical thing (that can in fact be replicated millions of times for nearly no cost) in order to make it worth your time to spend discovering such pleasing and useful forms of information.
. The problem isn't stupid people, it's people who haven't been informed about the issue and are making a perfectly reasonable assumption.
I was about to suggest we tell everyone why they're not allowed to use cell phones on planes (thinking that if they're informed they will realize why they shouldn't), but then I realized that if they didn't think it was a "safety" issue, suddenly all the arrogant selfish SOBs would begin using thier cellphones chronically on planes, to hell with whoever is in the cells down below:|
You've all got points, but Google may be falling behind fast in completeness of search results.
My home website hasn't been scanned by Google in 3 months, and even then they only did 2 of the dozens of pages.
However MSN has scanned all my pages regularly, and I currently get 7/10ths of my hits from MSN searches, 1/10th from other search engines, 1/10th from references in personal posts, and 1/10th from one old Google-ized page.
I think Google is falling behind in crawling the web. And that will eventually hurt them - not immediately as it will be a while before users (as opposed to webmasters) notce that they get more complete search results from MSN than Google, and they get links at MSN that Google does not have.
I'm a long time Google fanatic, have their toolbar, etc etc, but my webserver's access logs don't lie.
"Aggressive War" should also include when a country or a leadership murders tens of thousands to millions of their own citizens. I reject outright the "old" dogma that "the internal affairs of another country are no business of ours". There is a reason we call them "fundamental human rights" - they transcend borders.
Of course my Mom couldn't care less about the Iraqi people, she'd be happy to see them rot in Iraq under Sadaam, Sadaam's sons, and sons of sons for all eternity. She figures it's the Iraqi people's own problem if they are being ruled by a vicious dictator, why should we fight for them?
Slashdot Mirror
So two nights ago I went to the Andrew WK concert here in Toronto. 2000 or so people in a small club, watching my favorite artist perform on a stage barely big enough for the 5 members of the band. When he went body surfing, he was 12 feet away from me.
http://www.awkworld.com/
Tickets were only $15 CDN, plus Ticketmaster tax plus tax, about $25 CDN. Damn cheap compared to say $70 CDN Def Leppard tickets for a huge venue.
He loves his fans and people in general and has a super attitude towards life and things in general, I've been impressed by him as a person each time I've heard him interviewed. Look at the super huge replys he gives to fan-mail. He's a person full of energy, life, and goodwill towards others.
I'm just dying to get my hands on his 2nd albumn that came out TODAY.
HOWEVER, I feel that from what he said in this Onion AV interview that he has totally bought into the necessity of his label and his recording contract - the one that requires an expensive studio, expensive equipment, expensive people, etc etc.
He's currently doing one show a night in a different city every single day, for months on end. I'm beginning to think that he's got some serious debts to pay back to his recording company. A lot of this matches the horror stories you hear about artists.
I hope not. Even if he is, I'd bet he got into it by convincing himself that it was worth it to bring his music and happiness to a ton of other people in the world.
Right now, I'm just totally trying to keep myself from going out and buying this one CD.
Note - I discovered his music on Kazaa, a year ago.
Definitely time to go looking for the new replacement for mp3.com. mp3.com is where I got half my trance a few years ago. (Stupid morons, there was 20 year old case law against doing what they did that got them sued into oblivion and put them in a situation where they could get bought for peanuts by a major label.)
We (music consumers, software techies, and artists) need to create and/or pick the "one successor" service that we can use as a legal free and semi-commercial alternative to the RIAA distribution system, one where amateurs like this guy and put their music and get donations/direct-CD-sales, where amateurs can turn into semi-pro, and even make a living if they're producing something of enough value.
[[ plug for my fav melodic trance artist and all his mp3 downloads - search kazaa/etc first before you slashdot him please ]]
So I think it's time for me to do my duty, go find said service with said semi-pro and amateur artists, do what I can to make this alternate distribution service/mechanism a success, and spend my music bugdet on them.
F*CK THE LABELS
> There are yet more problems with nuclear power. Think of the trouble the world is in over oil. Uranium will be no different. If you base the world's energy needs on a scarce resource
This is the first thing I thought of. There is not an infinite supply of Uranium, I remember reading that in documents describing how much estimated total power was available from non-renewable resources in the 90's. IIRC (and I probably do not) it was something like 50-100 years for oil, 100 years for nuclear, and 2-400 for coal.
The very first hit in this google search turns up a pdf paper that claims that if we used Nuclear for all our current electricity needs, that we'd run through all known Uranium reserves in 3 years.
Of course the source is apparently very anti-nuclear, but at least they are publicly publishing their calculations and refutations. http://beheer.oprit.rug.nl/deenen/
.
.05 times 4 million times 1000 is the same as .95 times 4 million times 50. But in the latter case, 20 times the amount of bandwidth is available (presuming all are broadband subscribers).
NOTE - On most existing p2p networks the limiting resource is not the number of files that sharers are sharing, the limited resources is the aggregate bandwidth available to all.
Compare how easily it is to get the file you want when 5 percent of the people have thousands of files each and share, vs the situation where you have 95 percent of the people sharing only a few dozen files each.
In both cases the files you want are available, simply because
So, *IF* enough people decide to share a few files and turn on sharing, we might actually be better off!!
.
> See, here's the fun in playing "what if" games: they work both ways.
Excellent point! Totally skipped my mind.
Considering that, and seeing as we have 50 years of fuel at current consumption levels, I'd agree that we can afford to wait another 20-30 years at least...
> My kid brother was booted off his cablemodem for playing Quake with me online. He hosted the game, which violated the "you may not run any servers" clause, and I swear he and I were the only ones playing.
Mmmm, yeah, some providers aren't all that enlightened, no matter where you go. Switch to someone like istop, 3.5/800 ul/dl and NO such restrictions - http://www.istop.com/residential.html - or switch to Bell Canada (Sympatico) DSL, they have the same rules, but I've never seen them enforced, the second they do - bye bye, I'm off to iStop.
> The broadband industry is in a terrible state in Canada. You have two government-approved monopolies (cable and phone) splitting it all up 50/50. Theres no room in the system for any competition from 3rd parties, either.
Last time I checked, there were 43 competing DSL providers in southern Ontario - http://www.canadianisp.com/ - and unlike the US Bell's, Bell Canada plays fair and doesn't do dirty tricks (see, the CRTC is good for something!)
My Mom, in rural Saskatchewan (prairies) in a town of 800 people 100 miles from the nearest city, has access to 1mbit/128kbit ul/dl DSL for $40 CDN per month. I think Saskatchewan is the last holdout province with a crown corporation providing local phone service and DSL. They're way ahead of the rest of the country.
Your arguments will fail if the "economic incentive" and time available to create new sources of energy as oil runs out is not sufficient to create the amount of energy and the entire technology infrastructure that we will actually need or desire for our purposes.
You cannot assume that the natural oil depletion price curve will match what I am describing and everything will magically "work itself out". If the market and pure capitalism was a cure-all, we wouldn't need 90% of what our governments do.
Society and reality will in all cases greatly impact your "solution" (what is technically possible, how much it costs to do, how long it will take given a certain level of money, what unintended side-effects will occur, etc ).
It takes time and energy to create alternate-source power-stations, cars, distribution systems. What happens if the "natural demand curve" that you are describing causes oil to become scarce so fast that there isn't enough of it left to build all the "alternative fuel sources" to replace oil itself? Answer: our available energy levels go way way down and mostly gets diverted to trying to create more alternative fuel sources, which means for 5 or 10 years you don't get power to run your washing machine and only important people get cars. Not an ideal solution, eh? Don't you wish you had consciously chosen to pay an extra 10% for fuel in the prior 10 years to develop the alternative-power-sources *before* they were needed, instead of "letting the market decide"?
Hi Jade,
My Win2K Pro home PC had EXACTLY the same symptoms starting late last week.
I applied SP4, did Windows Update, did a memtest86, uninstalled a few new apps. Then while I was sitting there thinking, my registry monitor utility started blaring. Odd, I wasn't installing/uninstalling anything, it shouldn't have been complaining. It was msblast.exe being added to the Run registry entry. At which point I found out about the msblast virus, and noticed the 20 port 135 connections to the net every second.
So I killed the msblast process and installed the patch (twice, just to be sure) and removed the registry entry.
No more RPC service crashes, back nice and stable.
The issue is that apparently, sometimes for certain systems, the buffer overflow fails. Instead of the overflow causing the appropriate arbitrary code to be executed, it would simply crash one of the RPC services. So you wouldn't have msblast.exe per se, but you would have system problems from the malformed port 135 connections to your system, the *attempts* to infect you.
So the question is, what circumstances would cause you to not be protected, but still suffer non-exploitable buffer overflows.
My guess is a bad microsoft "fix" for the problem in an earlier MSUpdate or something.
The download caps were totally removed this month!!!
http://forums.sympatico.ca/WebX?50@179.GKHmaFgJY3
If you're running man critical systems based upon "old adages".... you'll get what you deserve ;)
It seems perfectly obvious to "monday-morning quarterbacks" that the foam was a problem, but five years of experience suggested otherwise.
This is exactly the type of bad logic that helped cause the first shuttle tragedy. The dangerous fallacy that "since it's worked N times before" that it "will work N more times".
*Anyone* who is in a man-critical environment can NOT use the simple fact that something hasn't been a problem yet to conclude that it isn't dangerous.
That's a great point/idea!
Thanks,
> All the list I'm on (intentionally, at least) use double-opt-in.
Now that would work with his forwarding alias problem.
My ISP however will not pass any e-mail that doesn't contain their own domain-name in the "from" e-mail address. When I used Navigator 4.7x for e-mail and Usenet, I would use a munged e-mail hostname in my profile. However if I forgot to switch it back before sending e-mail, the e-mail would be silently dropped by my ISP's systems. Come to think of it, they didn't always used to do that.. so I guess some people might be able to do what you suggest even if the list wasn't double-opt-in.
> Yes you can. Just about any mailer lets you set
> the "from" address to whatever you want.
Only an idiot would run an "opt in" system which didn't use the ISP's "from" and just took the user-specified "from" field. To do so would mean that ANYONE could subscribe or unsubscribe you from their services, which would be idiotic and completely defeat the purpose.
>> Why would I want to do "a simple name search
/personal/medical/ folder because it's related to feet, or is it in /information/real-world/clothing/ because we were shopping for clothing, or what? Did I put that file on a given technical issue in my /information/x86/hardware/drives/ folder, or did I put it in /information/my-computer/drives/ folder because it pertained to my specific computer as opposed to x86 hardware in general.
>> for a file across an entire drive"? The file
>> name is meaningless outside the context of its hierarchy.
>
> Again, you're assumiung you, a technically savvy user.
Yup, and even some of us technically savvy users can't remember which sub-sub-sub folder we put that one file whose name we can't quite remember into. We know we're looking for the file that contains the list of shoes we've owned and which ones were comfortable (because it's time to replace our current pair), but is it in our
I search for files ALL the time. Windows 2000 NTFS searches are so slow I actually have a nightly cron job using a win32 port of unix find build me a 2 MB index file in the root of my drive, and a little utility that runs grep against it. 10 times faster and more convenient than "explorer search", and takes up 100 times less space and CPU usage than turning on "index files" in NTFS (sucks bad when you have a half terrabyte in drives - and the thing seems to index only FILE CONTENTS and not file names, I never noticed a speed up in file name searching when drive indexing was turned on...)
Yup, I'm in the same boat.
Worse yet is when you attempt to browse through the directories, directories containing 5-10,000 plus files, directories with 20 subdirectories - Explorer or the file-open/save dialog can sit there for 30 seconds or more before it begins to display the directory contents.
Frequently I don't care about the file contents, I just want to drill down into a sub-sub-sub folder, or select a folder (not open/view it, select it to save/link/etc). It should show me the directory structure and not block while it goes off to build the list of files in the folder. Heck it blocks even when the one directory you are in only has 20 subdirectories and no files of it's own, it's like it's got to go through all 50,000 files in the sub-directories before it can display the parent directory. Stupid and slow.
Welcome to another exciting game of "Where's the most releveant fscking link!!?".
Move your mouse over any of the fifty different single-word semi-ambiguous hyperlinks and see if you can spot the one small word that links to an obscure URL that is actually the most relevant to the story at hand.
You too could win big.
NOT
Because of Neo's strong connection to her, he wasn't going to say 'fuck you' to the Architect and blow the whole place up. Blowing the whole place up would lead to the death of everyone in the matrix, and coupled with the destruction of Zion would lead to the extinction of the human race.
Wait, that's not right.
By going through the one door to save Trinitiy he *WAS* dooming the entire place and all of Humanity (as far as the Architect was concerned). It was only if he went through the other door and re-intergrated his code that the humanity in the Matrix would live on, and he and 28 remaining Zions would form the seed for the "next" Zion ready for the next incarnation of "The One".
He DID say 'fuck you' to the architect and doomed all Humanity to die just because he has a stronger connection to Trinity than he does to Humanity - and the machines will just have to "make do" with a lower level of existence (without all the power that the Matrix provides them).
I found the article highly useful as a personal development tool - to illuminate the things in life I could do differently to better my life - and I'm speaking IN GENERAL.
You sound like you assumed that the author was placing you in the one of two groups. He's in all probability not an a**h*le, so that assumption simply can't be right.
Place yourself in his shoes. He wants to list the things a person *could* do to increase their odds of eventually succeeding, and as an excellent counterpoint list the opposite, the things that will decrease your odds of succeeding.
Just because he's seperated it up into these two camps, doesn't mean he's accusing you or anyone else who isn't "successful" of being a brain-dead paranoid retard with *all* of those listed failings. But he is trying to list some of the things you could do to increase your chances of success.
>Isn't is possible to write good software and have it sell without huge amounts of thought about marketing
Sure, it could happen. If you want to leave things to chance and to whatever random assortment of luck and personal attributes you've been handed in life - you can do that.
But if you want some ideas to try and exceed whatever random thing happens to your effort, there they are. Pick and choose whatever bits you think might help you.
Bullshit.
Just yesterday I saw a graph that showed the number of people killed by lynching in the USA over the past century. It was 150 a year in 1900, and was a straight line down to zero by 1965 or so.
Don't tell me society can not evolve. Don't tell me the world isn't getting better, even if it is taking 50 years at a time.
Information cannot be posessed or owned. You are merely the first human being to arrange a given information set into that particular arrangement.
Somewhere out there is a planet where the molecular vibrations of a small block of gas or rock - at one instant in the history of the universe - perfectly replicated the information in the ILLIAD.
Your "posession" is only as unique as the number of bytes required to duplicate it. Three short strings of a couple dozen notes of a given waveform is not all that unique, and you are not allowed to claim ownership of it.
However if you take the time to create a particularly pleasing set of information, we will allow you a short artificial monopoly of this non-physical thing (that can in fact be replicated millions of times for nearly no cost) in order to make it worth your time to spend discovering such pleasing and useful forms of information.
Thank-you, and have a nice day.
That would make sense, what with the aluminum skin of the aircraft being a perfect base for a faraday cage.
I wonder if modern aircraft designers aren't starting to consider/try to put in internal EMI shielding, even if regs aren't requiring it yet.
.
:|
The problem isn't stupid people, it's people who haven't been informed about the issue and are making a perfectly reasonable assumption.
I was about to suggest we tell everyone why they're not allowed to use cell phones on planes (thinking that if they're informed they will realize why they shouldn't), but then I realized that if they didn't think it was a "safety" issue, suddenly all the arrogant selfish SOBs would begin using thier cellphones chronically on planes, to hell with whoever is in the cells down below
Stupid selfish humans.
Oh they are so dead. Please tell me someone got a copy.
Distributed Mirrors Project link
You've all got points, but Google may be falling behind fast in completeness of search results.
My home website hasn't been scanned by Google in 3 months, and even then they only did 2 of the dozens of pages.
However MSN has scanned all my pages regularly, and I currently get 7/10ths of my hits from MSN searches, 1/10th from other search engines, 1/10th from references in personal posts, and 1/10th from one old Google-ized page.
I think Google is falling behind in crawling the web. And that will eventually hurt them - not immediately as it will be a while before users (as opposed to webmasters) notce that they get more complete search results from MSN than Google, and they get links at MSN that Google does not have.
I'm a long time Google fanatic, have their toolbar, etc etc, but my webserver's access logs don't lie.
"Aggressive War" should also include when a country or a leadership murders tens of thousands to millions of their own citizens. I reject outright the "old" dogma that "the internal affairs of another country are no business of ours". There is a reason we call them "fundamental human rights" - they transcend borders.
Of course my Mom couldn't care less about the Iraqi people, she'd be happy to see them rot in Iraq under Sadaam, Sadaam's sons, and sons of sons for all eternity. She figures it's the Iraqi people's own problem if they are being ruled by a vicious dictator, why should we fight for them?