Why in the world would you want access to matrix3 from the plus operator???
To fill the matrix (which we assume is large enough to make copying the values expensive) directly, instead of copying it into a temporary matrix with the overloaded '+' operator then copying it over with the overloaded '=' operator. You could do
The higher ups feared the bad publicity of course, but the real reason is the MPAA doesn't want the bad publicity that would come from theaters ignoring their ratings. IIRC those voluntary ratings were adopted as a solution when the same very vocal minority wanted legislation to regulate sex and violence in movies. The MPAA probably fears such laws would be passed and to that end, as an AC already pointed out, would give fewer movies to theaters that didn't enforce them.
It's not so much about the money. I was a manager of a movie theater, and we didn't give a crap about letting people into R-rated movies (unless said person was very young) for a long time. Then some TV show did an "investigation" that showed how often kids could get into movies and we were forced to start being strict and ruining 16 year olds' dates (as if dating at that age isn't hard enough).
It pissed me off because it seems so obvious an extremely vocal minority is causing this. We got more complaints from parents calling in the first day we started enforcing the ratings than we ever got from parents whose kids had seen movies they weren't allowed to.
What exactly is your anecdotal evidence? Children played with guns and swords before TV was invented. What I don't understand is why playing a video game is so fundamentally different than playing samurai or cops and robbers. The violence is there. Either the pixels fall over and "die" or your friend does, so the same feedback is given. Do a bunch of red pixels carry that much psychological impact?
Regardless, anecdotal evidence is highly suspicious. I have a cousin who has played DOOM-like games since he was way too young to be playing them, and he started demonstrating serious violent tendencies, which made me think video games might affect that sort of thing after all. Turns out he is seriously bipolar (among other things) and demonstrated symptoms at a much earlier age, but no one paid attention.
Do we have to like every stance an organization takes to agree with them once?
-rant- That comment reminds me of all the friends I have who are [democrats|republicans] and can't admit a [republican|democrat] is right about a single goddamn thing, lest their whole belief structure founded on their party always being right crumble to the ground. -/rant-
We can all support organizations when we agree with them, and work against them when we don't. That is not a paradox.
I use so many programs on a daily basis that were just thrown together (by me or someone else). They are not extensible, they have a limited set of features, and they'd be a pain to maintain, but they do what I need them to do now, and no one else really uses them.
It's much different when you're designing a program that will be used by many people for many years, and as such will need to be maintained and extended throughout it's lifetime, possibly after you've left. If you're on a tight deadline and you have to kludge something to get a contract or whatnot, make sure your boss fully understands that the program will not have a long lifespan, and let them make the call. (that will depend on how pointy your boss' hair is, of course.
Yes, which is why the "dept" on this one read "well-there's-a-shocker." The question is, why is Cmdr-Taco posting something he admits is obvious? Not to flame, but is it a slow news day, and they need a story that's a sure-fire 300 comments?
I find it hard to believe people who were informed and brave enough to switch over to Linux changed their plans because of an obvious vapor-suit. The 9% yes answer means they are at "least thinking about" "reducing their Linux deployment," which could mean as little as one of the geeks hypothetically asked "What do we do if SCO wins?" and someone said "Stop using Linux."
To stop counterfeit bills, not to stop anonymous cash transactions.
Once a system is in place, it's relatively easy to make it do other things. If you're worried about governments having too much power, you start opposing the systems they are setting in place instead of just their intentions for those systems.
you still don't have anonymous cash transactions because people still see you!
And people can't inquire about my purchasing habits anonymously because they'll have to talk to people that saw me. That seems much different to me than running a database query.
Funny you mention that. Mine isn't completely anonymous, but was given to me by my mother when I went off to college. So, the grocery store in question believes a menopausal woman living in a rich neighborhood has been buying nothing but alcohol, red bull, and top raman for the past few years.
Messing with their data is much more fun than simply being anonymous.
I'm not sure why this is a "rights" issue. Is there a right to privacy written somewhere?
Perhaps not explicitly, but I believe most privacy advocates argue that privacy is a prerequisite for many other rights, including both our explicit protections in the constitution and the implicit rights for citizens to have enough power to provide checks and balances for both government and corporatations. Briefly, if the average citizen lacks privacy with respect to corporations/government, it follows there is an imbalance of information, and therefore an imbalance of power.
Great idea. Every time I load slashdot (or any other news site), I would really like the headlines to read:
"Status Quo Followed"
"No risks taken"
"Company X maintains same infrastructure"
I know slashdot is repetitive choir-preaching, but how on earth would it be news for someone to decide to keep using Microsoft Products. It's only news when someone switches from one to the other, and how often do companies running Linux decide to go back?
Their "about us" page seems to say they are an "consultancy" (is that a word) for international standards. Ironic, eh? Do like I did and email them to make fun of them.
My email to them:
on
Open Source Law
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Good afternoon, I am writing to inform you the web page listed in the subject line is completely illegible unless using Internet Explorer, as the text of the page is confined to a narrow column only a few words wide, with wide blank spaces on either side. A quick look at the source for the page reveals that the text has on both sides columns where the width is set to 720 pixels. As a programmer and web developer, I understand the difficulty in developing web pages for more than one browser, but your home pages contains the following description of your organization:
GTW Associates is an International standards and trade policy consultancy with expertise in the strategic role of standards in competitiveness of businesses, organizations and countries in the global marketplace.
Although I did not find specific references to W3, HTML 4.0, or other technical standards and specifications on the site, the lack of compliance with other web-browsers seems to undercut your qualifications. (As a side note, the page was apparently updated last on "June 3065.") I would very much like to be able to read your site with Opera or Mozilla.
Well, if it is, then if I use P2P software to download very small chunks of songs, is that legal? If so, would it be legal to combine them? If not, would it be legal to queue them up in a playlist?
The sound you hear is the collective popping of RIAA execs' forehead veins.
It's the modern day version of a "debate," e.g. the past presidential elections where one candidate speaking directly to the other was "against the rules", or just about every "debate" on cable news stations where drones from each side come on with prepared statements/speeches/sounds bytes they force out regardless of questions by the moderator or the opposing side.
This lack of real debate is pervasive in the US. Issues here are no longer resolved through real debate, but through whose speeches were more attractive.
They do recognize it as a threat, but they can't say "Freenet is the most dangerous P2P app out there, because it protects the user's anonymity! If everyone used it, we'd be in even bigger trouble!" because then everybody would start using it, and they really would be in bigger trouble. The RIAA shill describe Freenet as "clunky" to the average user more than once in that interview. He's simply trying to keep any average Joe's reading that article from making the switch from KaZaa.
However, to make it happen, all manufacturers will have to charge more for printers and less for cartridges. If even one player sticks with the old model, that player will see all the gains.
The problem is that without the DMCA protecting those damn ink cartridge chips from reverse engineering, the razor blade model wouldn't work for much longer. As soon as 3rd party ink manufacturers start undercutting the printer manufacturers ink prices would drop, and any printer manufacturer that sold printers below cost to make it up on consumables would be out of business pretty quickly.
What exactly are they keeping proprietary by doing this? The bit patterns chips on their ink carts send?
Furthermore, why do they get to keep anything proprietary? I can take a Lexmark printer(toaster, clock, whatever) apart and see how the mechanical portions work, and legally build a knock-off. But I can't figure out what bits a chip on the ink cartridge sends to the printer?
Slashdot Mirror
Why in the world would you want access to matrix3 from the plus operator???
To fill the matrix (which we assume is large enough to make copying the values expensive) directly, instead of copying it into a temporary matrix with the overloaded '+' operator then copying it over with the overloaded '=' operator. You could do
MatrixAdd(const matrix& m1, const matrix& m2, matrix& result);
but then what's the point of overloaded operators?
The higher ups feared the bad publicity of course, but the real reason is the MPAA doesn't want the bad publicity that would come from theaters ignoring their ratings. IIRC those voluntary ratings were adopted as a solution when the same very vocal minority wanted legislation to regulate sex and violence in movies. The MPAA probably fears such laws would be passed and to that end, as an AC already pointed out, would give fewer movies to theaters that didn't enforce them.
How in the name of christ is this insightful?
Are you honestly suggesting that if games can be educational, they logically must be able to cause violence? Can you explain this?
I think you posted AC and modded yourself up just to get a troll to +1.
Hey wouldn't it be better if there was a game that splattered gamers, hackers, junkies, and other politically correct targets
Don't forget Nazis. If we can't kill Nazis, the terrorists have won.
It's not so much about the money. I was a manager of a movie theater, and we didn't give a crap about letting people into R-rated movies (unless said person was very young) for a long time. Then some TV show did an "investigation" that showed how often kids could get into movies and we were forced to start being strict and ruining 16 year olds' dates (as if dating at that age isn't hard enough).
It pissed me off because it seems so obvious an extremely vocal minority is causing this. We got more complaints from parents calling in the first day we started enforcing the ratings than we ever got from parents whose kids had seen movies they weren't allowed to.
What exactly is your anecdotal evidence? Children played with guns and swords before TV was invented. What I don't understand is why playing a video game is so fundamentally different than playing samurai or cops and robbers. The violence is there. Either the pixels fall over and "die" or your friend does, so the same feedback is given. Do a bunch of red pixels carry that much psychological impact?
Regardless, anecdotal evidence is highly suspicious. I have a cousin who has played DOOM-like games since he was way too young to be playing them, and he started demonstrating serious violent tendencies, which made me think video games might affect that sort of thing after all. Turns out he is seriously bipolar (among other things) and demonstrated symptoms at a much earlier age, but no one paid attention.
Do we have to like every stance an organization takes to agree with them once?
-rant-
That comment reminds me of all the friends I have who are [democrats|republicans] and can't admit a [republican|democrat] is right about a single goddamn thing, lest their whole belief structure founded on their party always being right crumble to the ground.
-/rant-
We can all support organizations when we agree with them, and work against them when we don't. That is not a paradox.
You can kill as many pig-cops as you want, but aliens warp in and punish you when you kill the hot chicks.
Best. Game. Ever.
I use so many programs on a daily basis that were just thrown together (by me or someone else). They are not extensible, they have a limited set of features, and they'd be a pain to maintain, but they do what I need them to do now, and no one else really uses them.
It's much different when you're designing a program that will be used by many people for many years, and as such will need to be maintained and extended throughout it's lifetime, possibly after you've left. If you're on a tight deadline and you have to kludge something to get a contract or whatnot, make sure your boss fully understands that the program will not have a long lifespan, and let them make the call. (that will depend on how pointy your boss' hair is, of course.
Yes, which is why the "dept" on this one read "well-there's-a-shocker." The question is, why is Cmdr-Taco posting something he admits is obvious? Not to flame, but is it a slow news day, and they need a story that's a sure-fire 300 comments?
I find it hard to believe people who were informed and brave enough to switch over to Linux changed their plans because of an obvious vapor-suit. The 9% yes answer means they are at "least thinking about" "reducing their Linux deployment," which could mean as little as one of the geeks hypothetically asked "What do we do if SCO wins?" and someone said "Stop using Linux."
To stop counterfeit bills, not to stop anonymous cash transactions.
Once a system is in place, it's relatively easy to make it do other things. If you're worried about governments having too much power, you start opposing the systems they are setting in place instead of just their intentions for those systems.
you still don't have anonymous cash transactions because people still see you!
And people can't inquire about my purchasing habits anonymously because they'll have to talk to people that saw me. That seems much different to me than running a database query.
Funny you mention that. Mine isn't completely anonymous, but was given to me by my mother when I went off to college. So, the grocery store in question believes a menopausal woman living in a rich neighborhood has been buying nothing but alcohol, red bull, and top raman for the past few years.
Messing with their data is much more fun than simply being anonymous.
Great idea. Every time I load slashdot (or any other news site), I would really like the headlines to read:
"Status Quo Followed"
"No risks taken"
"Company X maintains same infrastructure"
I know slashdot is repetitive choir-preaching, but how on earth would it be news for someone to decide to keep using Microsoft Products. It's only news when someone switches from one to the other, and how often do companies running Linux decide to go back?
If their food is as bad as their software, we'd slashdot the bathrooms next. I think I'll pass.
Was it worth it?
Their "about us" page seems to say they are an "consultancy" (is that a word) for international standards. Ironic, eh? Do like I did and email them to make fun of them.
Good afternoon,
I am writing to inform you the web page listed in the subject line is completely illegible unless using Internet Explorer, as the text of the page is confined to a narrow column only a few words wide, with wide blank spaces on either side. A quick look at the source for the page reveals that the text has on both sides columns where the width is set to 720 pixels. As a programmer and web developer, I understand the difficulty in developing web pages for more than one browser, but your home pages contains the following description of your organization:
GTW Associates is an International standards and trade policy consultancy with expertise in the strategic role of standards in competitiveness of businesses, organizations and countries in the global marketplace.
Although I did not find specific references to W3, HTML 4.0, or other technical standards and specifications on the site, the lack of compliance with other web-browsers seems to undercut your qualifications. (As a side note, the page was apparently updated last on "June 3065.") I would very much like to be able to read your site with Opera or Mozilla.
Thank you for your time,
Well, if it is, then if I use P2P software to download very small chunks of songs, is that legal? If so, would it be legal to combine them? If not, would it be legal to queue them up in a playlist?
The sound you hear is the collective popping of RIAA execs' forehead veins.
It's the modern day version of a "debate," e.g. the past presidential elections where one candidate speaking directly to the other was "against the rules", or just about every "debate" on cable news stations where drones from each side come on with prepared statements/speeches/sounds bytes they force out regardless of questions by the moderator or the opposing side.
This lack of real debate is pervasive in the US. Issues here are no longer resolved through real debate, but through whose speeches were more attractive.
They do recognize it as a threat, but they can't say "Freenet is the most dangerous P2P app out there, because it protects the user's anonymity! If everyone used it, we'd be in even bigger trouble!" because then everybody would start using it, and they really would be in bigger trouble. The RIAA shill describe Freenet as "clunky" to the average user more than once in that interview. He's simply trying to keep any average Joe's reading that article from making the switch from KaZaa.
Funny, I got "Could not connect to remote server." That is as accurate a review of SWG right now as one could write.
What exactly are they keeping proprietary by doing this? The bit patterns chips on their ink carts send?
Furthermore, why do they get to keep anything proprietary? I can take a Lexmark printer(toaster, clock, whatever) apart and see how the mechanical portions work, and legally build a knock-off. But I can't figure out what bits a chip on the ink cartridge sends to the printer?