A friend of mine from Qatar (on the Arabic peninsula) told me that it's a sign of social status to have a cell phone number with a lot of repeting digits. Those who have some of the most power get the phone numbers that consist of just one number (such as a personal guard to the king whose number consists only of '1's).
I think it's kind of silly; though, fads rarely make sense.
I had a telemarketer who called on behalf of an "organisation dedicated to aid of handicapped Americans". When I asked him for his company's information, he repeated the line about the organisation he was representing. When I iterated that I didn't want the organisation he represented, but the company he was working for, he called me a "punk" and started insulting my manhood. When I politely asked to speak to his manager, he put me on permanent hold. *69 revealed nothing (outside of calling area) I suspect this wasn't an actual telemarketing call, but still, where is the Federal help to prevent abusive telemarketers? I've come across some other isolated abusive telemarketers who've done the same or worse.
My personal anecdote is only told to pose the question: how can one punish a telemarketer if one cannot obtain there contact information. It seems to me with the new Federal DNC list that these types of calls will continue.
In the article, the example picture on the right lists four offenses:
Fighting
If you regularly start brawls, then this doesn't work out. But what happens when someone starts a fight with you and you only fight back to defend yourself?
Missed Payment
Understandable, unless the barman overcharges you, you disagree, and suddenly you're banned from every bar in town because some jerk tried to swindle you.
Excessive Drinking
"Get out and stay out, this bar isn't for drinkers!" This is just stupid. You take one too many tequila shots on your birthday and get sick. Banned from the bars.
Other
With no further explanation as to the incident? The potential for abuse is astounding. What happens when you dump the owner's sister/brother? He can put you down as an "other" offender and get you banned from Vancouver nightlife, with no way to officially contest the matter.
All of these are really scary. In all of these situations you're SOL. Doesn't this fall under vigilantism? I know Canada's all for personal freedoms, but isn't this going too far?
Couldn't someone create a cheap knockoff of the Segway by attaching a small shopping cart wheel to the back, and chucking all of the expensive gyros? They wouldn't even violate any Segway patents in the process.
In any event, $5,000 for a scooter is just sillyness (yes, it is just a scooter).
This article is really stretching it. Let me pick apart their arguments, as I have nothing better to do:
Argument 1: All Shopping, All the Time.
They say that Google puts mostly shopping hits at the top. Though this may be true, it's not completely unstoppable.
Solution:Try putting -buy in a search query.
Argument 2: Skewed Synonyms
They say that finding hits for synonyms of words like "Apple" are hard. Well, it's true, since there are probably thousands upon thousands of ways to interpret a single word search query.
Solution: Try narrowing your results by using better search queries. If you want to find information on Fiona Apple, try searching for "Fiona Apple", and not Apple.
Argument 3: Book Learning
They say that Google doesn't return search results on books that don't exist on the web. But this is only natural, since Google is a web search engine, it can therefore not return results with information not on the freakin' web.
Solution: You want books? Go to a library.
All this entire article seems to do is bitch about how Google's search method sucks, but fails to realize that Google's methods are sound, it's just the quality of the information on the web that's gotten worse.
With backscatter technology, rays deflected off dense materials such as metal or plastic produce a darker image than those deflected off skin.
Just hide a razor blade wrapped in tape in your mouth (the teeth will block the X-rays), put a small piece of wood in your carry-on for a handle, attach them when on the plane. Bob's your Uncle.
People will subscribe to this for the exact same reason you subscribe to DSL. Remember on 56k when web pages were "instant", "a while" was for music (if you're lucky), and video was "read war and peace and see if the stream is done downloading"? $10 more/month is definitely worth double bandwidth.
According to the article, Google just recently purchased Blogger, which made a set of Blogging tools. I'm sure there are certain characteristics shared by almost all blogs made with Blogger software. This will allow Google to at least take a large portion of definite blogs out, and then refine the system as it goes.
I'd say spite. I'll never forgive Apple for completely dumping their entire Apple II user base with nary a thought to their loyalty. Hence I never bought another Apple product again.
I'd make it to this meeting if I could, just to stick it to Jobs.
I've seen this magazine only twice - in an airport. I believe it was London-Heathrow both times. Certainly wasn't in the States. Probably why they never turned a profit...
Good airplane reading though. I would have bought more if I saw it anywhere.
It isn't clear to me how Symantec could know, hours in advance, about a worm which took ten minutes to spread throughout the entire Internet, unless they had something to do with its release.
So, we have a company (or two) that have produced a searchable law database with cross-referencing. They don't want to sell to libraries, nor do they have to. I personally think they should, but that doesn't matter since it's their database/program. It's just like how Microsoft doesn't have to allow consumers to have an OS for free. That's were Linux stepped in - a community came together to fill the void made by a corporation who wants to maximise profits.
Sounds like the perfect time for a FreeLaw project to fill the void.
Sure, this could be used to count the number of machines behind broadband customers connections. The fact is, though, that it probably won't.
As you know, broadband service providers make money by assuming not everyone is using 100% of their bandwidth all the time. The only way they'll care as to whether you have multiple machines is if you use too much bandwidth. And even then, they'll probably only disconnect you for using too much bandwidth, and not having a shared connection.
I'm sure they won't give up a $50/month source of revenue because Joe has his mom's computer connected to a NAT box. Now, if Joe's mom was running a public FTP server...
This has already been done, and better (with SSH support, to boot).
Those damn skinny pieces
on
Tetris AI System
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
If you watch the video linked on the site, you'll notice that the computer has the tendency to leave a long empty row on the side(s), just like pretty much every human player I've encountered. Seems like that temptation transgresses all boundaries....
I never did, mainly because by the time I was old enough to think about sex, I was old enough to realize how lame and restrictive AOL is. No, I've never even had the urge to talk dirty to strangers on AOL. You really don't know what you're getting, and I'd much rather have the real thing.
That isn't to say that I don't, as you so elegantly put it, "whack my pud"; just not to an AOLuser's fervent one-handed typing.
Flanders: I just followed the three C's: clean living, chewing thoroughly, and a daily dose of vitamin church!
Homer: Geez, Flanders. You've never lived a day in your life!
Sure, I smoke cigs, drink beer, eat M&Ms, but at least I'll have had a good time (except for the morning after).
Slashdot Mirror
A friend of mine from Qatar (on the Arabic peninsula) told me that it's a sign of social status to have a cell phone number with a lot of repeting digits. Those who have some of the most power get the phone numbers that consist of just one number (such as a personal guard to the king whose number consists only of '1's).
I think it's kind of silly; though, fads rarely make sense.
Instead of a DDR pad, use a wireless joypad. Then you can follow the car around!
Wait...
I had a telemarketer who called on behalf of an "organisation dedicated to aid of handicapped Americans". When I asked him for his company's information, he repeated the line about the organisation he was representing. When I iterated that I didn't want the organisation he represented, but the company he was working for, he called me a "punk" and started insulting my manhood. When I politely asked to speak to his manager, he put me on permanent hold. *69 revealed nothing (outside of calling area) I suspect this wasn't an actual telemarketing call, but still, where is the Federal help to prevent abusive telemarketers? I've come across some other isolated abusive telemarketers who've done the same or worse.
My personal anecdote is only told to pose the question: how can one punish a telemarketer if one cannot obtain there contact information. It seems to me with the new Federal DNC list that these types of calls will continue.
In the article, the example picture on the right lists four offenses:
Fighting
If you regularly start brawls, then this doesn't work out. But what happens when someone starts a fight with you and you only fight back to defend yourself?
Missed Payment
Understandable, unless the barman overcharges you, you disagree, and suddenly you're banned from every bar in town because some jerk tried to swindle you.
Excessive Drinking
"Get out and stay out, this bar isn't for drinkers!" This is just stupid. You take one too many tequila shots on your birthday and get sick. Banned from the bars.
Other
With no further explanation as to the incident? The potential for abuse is astounding. What happens when you dump the owner's sister/brother? He can put you down as an "other" offender and get you banned from Vancouver nightlife, with no way to officially contest the matter.
All of these are really scary. In all of these situations you're SOL. Doesn't this fall under vigilantism? I know Canada's all for personal freedoms, but isn't this going too far?
Couldn't someone create a cheap knockoff of the Segway by attaching a small shopping cart wheel to the back, and chucking all of the expensive gyros? They wouldn't even violate any Segway patents in the process.
In any event, $5,000 for a scooter is just sillyness (yes, it is just a scooter).
This article is really stretching it. Let me pick apart their arguments, as I have nothing better to do:
Argument 1: All Shopping, All the Time.
They say that Google puts mostly shopping hits at the top. Though this may be true, it's not completely unstoppable.
Solution:Try putting -buy in a search query.
Argument 2: Skewed Synonyms
They say that finding hits for synonyms of words like "Apple" are hard. Well, it's true, since there are probably thousands upon thousands of ways to interpret a single word search query.
Solution: Try narrowing your results by using better search queries. If you want to find information on Fiona Apple, try searching for "Fiona Apple", and not Apple.
Argument 3: Book Learning
They say that Google doesn't return search results on books that don't exist on the web. But this is only natural, since Google is a web search engine, it can therefore not return results with information not on the freakin' web.
Solution: You want books? Go to a library.
All this entire article seems to do is bitch about how Google's search method sucks, but fails to realize that Google's methods are sound, it's just the quality of the information on the web that's gotten worse.
With backscatter technology, rays deflected off dense materials such as metal or plastic produce a darker image than those deflected off skin.
Just hide a razor blade wrapped in tape in your mouth (the teeth will block the X-rays), put a small piece of wood in your carry-on for a handle, attach them when on the plane. Bob's your Uncle.
People will subscribe to this for the exact same reason you subscribe to DSL. Remember on 56k when web pages were "instant", "a while" was for music (if you're lucky), and video was "read war and peace and see if the stream is done downloading"? $10 more/month is definitely worth double bandwidth.
According to the article, Google just recently purchased Blogger, which made a set of Blogging tools. I'm sure there are certain characteristics shared by almost all blogs made with Blogger software. This will allow Google to at least take a large portion of definite blogs out, and then refine the system as it goes.
What is it that keeps such an old platform going?
I'd say spite. I'll never forgive Apple for completely dumping their entire Apple II user base with nary a thought to their loyalty. Hence I never bought another Apple product again.
I'd make it to this meeting if I could, just to stick it to Jobs.
This man was no accountant.
the anniversary of the first drunk cell phone call at 3AM to Cooper's ex-girlfriend.
SecureCRT takes forever to start up.
So I suppose SP1 is to XP as beer is to me: a tool to slow your reaction time. Too bad it doesn't make XP more attractive...
...a math co-processor installed.
2+2? 5, of course. Dammit, I got an Intel.
I've seen this magazine only twice - in an airport. I believe it was London-Heathrow both times. Certainly wasn't in the States. Probably why they never turned a profit...
Good airplane reading though. I would have bought more if I saw it anywhere.
It isn't clear to me how Symantec could know, hours in advance, about a worm which took ten minutes to spread throughout the entire Internet, unless they had something to do with its release.
Or they're lying to get business.
So, we have a company (or two) that have produced a searchable law database with cross-referencing. They don't want to sell to libraries, nor do they have to. I personally think they should, but that doesn't matter since it's their database/program. It's just like how Microsoft doesn't have to allow consumers to have an OS for free. That's were Linux stepped in - a community came together to fill the void made by a corporation who wants to maximise profits.
Sounds like the perfect time for a FreeLaw project to fill the void.
Sure, this could be used to count the number of machines behind broadband customers connections. The fact is, though, that it probably won't.
As you know, broadband service providers make money by assuming not everyone is using 100% of their bandwidth all the time. The only way they'll care as to whether you have multiple machines is if you use too much bandwidth. And even then, they'll probably only disconnect you for using too much bandwidth, and not having a shared connection.
I'm sure they won't give up a $50/month source of revenue because Joe has his mom's computer connected to a NAT box. Now, if Joe's mom was running a public FTP server...
This has already been done, and better (with SSH support, to boot).
If you watch the video linked on the site, you'll notice that the computer has the tendency to leave a long empty row on the side(s), just like pretty much every human player I've encountered. Seems like that temptation transgresses all boundaries. ...
Damn skinny pieces. Always my downfall.
No shit, Sherlock...
:/
Keep digging, Watson.
Wget cut out midstream (connection reset by peer) and suddenly 404 upon reconnect. Guess they just gave up. Damn, already 3% finished, too.
Who here hasn't dirty chatted on AOL? No one.
I never did, mainly because by the time I was old enough to think about sex, I was old enough to realize how lame and restrictive AOL is. No, I've never even had the urge to talk dirty to strangers on AOL. You really don't know what you're getting, and I'd much rather have the real thing.
That isn't to say that I don't, as you so elegantly put it, "whack my pud"; just not to an AOLuser's fervent one-handed typing.
Flanders: I just followed the three C's: clean living, chewing thoroughly, and a daily dose of vitamin church!
Homer: Geez, Flanders. You've never lived a day in your life!
Sure, I smoke cigs, drink beer, eat M&Ms, but at least I'll have had a good time (except for the morning after).
Can I contact DIRECTV customer service for help?
...
No. DIRECTV customer service does not have any information.
Well, hell, I could have told you that. Damned DIRECTV customer service. 90 minutes only to tell me to "wait 24 hours".