Machining the case? Well CNC milling is very old. A new production process that makes it cheaper. Mildly interesting to the end user and only if it drops the price of the case.
Depends on who the end user is. I would imagine it could have a real interest if it means really solid cases without the premium price.
Back in the day the Steves tried to make computers for everyone. Now the Steve makes them for the "elite". Kind of sad in a way. Yes I do like their good design work and great OS but they are making money hand over foot so why not go for a knock out? The Apple Volksputer.
Back in the day a computer "for everyone" was a proprietary product in an industry of proprietary products. Today's market is largely dominated by commodity hardware with more and more pressure towards commodity software as well.
Commodity markets are difficult environments; especially to achieve growth. This market is difficult enough that IBM, the very company who introduced the platform that became the basis for this commodity market, has taken steps to distance itself from it (selling off their PC division to Lenovo). Meanwhile Compaq, the company that created the commodity market with the first "PC clone", has long since surrendered leadership of the market to the likes of Dell. And even Dell is having trouble in this space.
The interesting thing here is that Apple actually touches on this market. They are mixing in aspects of commodity software and hardware in to their products. But everything they do includes elements to distance themselves from the mainstream commodity market. Most of these steps are technical (proprietary firmware, APIs, etc). Pricing is just another method.
Actually, regardless of whether they are making a comeback or not, or what their advantages and disadvantages may be, this is probably just a PR story. Just like the "The Suit Is Back!" that got traced back to a PR agency a couple of years ago.
Paul Graham wrote a nice article about this. Well worth a read for anyone who hasn't seen it yet.
Simply because it wouldn't be so hard to just load a virus, written specifically to the Linux version that EEE is using. Shouldn't be hard and will achieve the same thing.
Isn't that always the way, though? Here the community has provided perfectly functional Linux malware and the manufacturer has ignored all that work. Talk about a missed opportunity.
wow.. that's crazy. it's not even a good photoshopping job. you can see the blurry lines around the foreheads, like it was done in 5 seconds.
I'm wondering if this all wasn't some kind of bad joke. The transcript and images have an air of "yeah - see? We can be jerks too." But its hard to tell. Sometimes people do really stupidly obvious things and try to pawn them off on an unsuspecting audience. Pity there's not more context.
No they're not, these cops are not just, "of moral excellence", or any of the other adjectives enumerated. Nor are they any of the adverbs listed.
I'm not saying that they achieve their aims. But in their minds, they are very much doing what they believe is right (morality being subjective). Even if they ultimately fail.
And don't get me wrong - I do believe these individuals are very much failing their office and duties.
So much for guilty until proven innocent. If the correct classification doesn't exist, then don't enter in the name until one does. You wouldn't put their names in as murderers or child pornographers. They are not terrorists, don't call them such.
You're confusing the role of cop and judge. The courts hash out the whole proof of guilt thing. The cop is focused on justice. They're not always the same thing.
This is why, as a general rule, one should not trust anyone in a policing role (at least until you have a REAL good idea how they work). I've seen bureaucrats and FBI agents come up with some rather elaborate scenarios to describe a perpetrator. And while these scenarios aren't always completely without merrit, they tend to be an extreme interpretation (imho) when additional understanding of the situation would imply a different scenario is more likely (the assessment of David Lightman in Wargames strikes a chord with reality).
I'm inclined to say that the people who do these things are not particularly evil. They have good intentions. But of course, we know where that leads. And they ultimately fail their professional duties in paving that road.
Point taken. However, I'm not sure exactly how obscure Nagios is. In the IT circles I run around, it's pretty well known. But then again, I'm in a fairly mixed environment.
From conversations I've had with Americans, I've been left with the impression that American citizens on the whole care less about NSA security letters, secret wiretapping, PATRIOT act misuse than they do about legislation that might inhibit car usage in some way.
Its pretty easy to explain. Issues such as freedom, rights, and security are fairly abstract to the average person. They are complex issues that tend to have little direct, noticeable effect to the average person (although I would argue that they do affect everyone - some very much more than others). Driving, however, is immediately noticeable. Cars are embedded in US culture for various practical and emotional reasons. Affect driving and Americans are going to notice.
Can't you set TiVo to strip commercials automatically?
Oh, heck no. Hollywood gets all kinds of upset about that kind of thing. It's such a touchy thing that the automagic 30sec skip is an easter egg for the TiVo (and you have to unlock it any time you reboot your device).
So I got an insightful mod on this post. It has me pondering.
I mean - sure, thanks for the nod. But I was kind of expecting a "funny." I'm not sure what "insightful" is saying. Is that, in itself, the joke? It boggles my mind that someone might have been taking the quip seriously.
We have polls claiming a large percentage of people get their news from comedy shows. That's a bit of a sting on our mainstream journalism. But it's always given me this uneasy feeling that it's more of a statement on said people.
That this is all coming from a meme started by The Colbert Report just seems like poetic justice.
You might want to pay attention to the context of the statement. It goes like this:
Did you ever feel pride in your efforts, pride in how they were contributing back to humanity, pride in the fact that you were sharing?
If you did, and you do this, you will be a shamed man. Not to us. To yourself...
The idea here is whether the person could live with their decision or not. It's certainly NOT what the community would think nor the idea that paid work is shameful.
What you describe sounds more like what a psychologist/counselor; my understanding is that the job of a psychatrist is similar to that of your general care physician except applied to mental health: diagnose badness and suggest/prescribe interventions, and if the intervention is psychotherapy also carry it out.
Actually - you're quite correct. You caught me being lazy. I actually have had some exposure to those aspects of health care and have learned some of the differences. I suppose a real general way of contrasting the two is that psychiatrists use drugs while psychologists talk. Someone in the field could probably go in to considerable detail and outline how accurate but wrong that statement is.:)
It's all rather complex stuff. At the least, it appears to be sufficiently complex as to appear simple to the layman. I've gained more appreciation than I probably let on after having watched both psychiatrists and psychologists in action.
One of my insights doing a stint behind a helldesk was that some otherwise competent, intelligent people will disengage their thought process when sitting behind a keyboard. Sometimes I felt like psychiatrist - or at least what I suspect many of them do:
1. Listen to problem. 2. Restate problem as a question. 3. Confirm answer given by customer is correct. 4. Assure customer that while correct answer WAS somewhat obvious, we get it all the time and a lot of folks don't figure it out on their own. Add reassuring comment about their savvy in this situation.
Since he's playing & not gold farming, what part of "I probably would too if it was allowed by Blizzard" is so hard for you to parse when taking the previous sentence into consideration?
The issue is that I didn't notice him implying that. And he certainly didn't SAY it. So it would seem that the concept is entirely your interpretation.
I've seen desperate players as well. Doesn't mean I'm one of them (as I actually said - black and white - no interpretation needed).
It's not that difficult, but you're probably just trolling for this response anyhow.
One could argue that if that was the purpose of the game, they should have made it more fun and profitable to play than to automate and sell gold.
Yeah - sure... the argument can be made. But I'm not buying it. At least, not entirely.
WoW has grinds. Many of them. Some seem daunting at first but are fairly benign if you take them for what they are - rewards for casual play. Some are completely frustrating. Which ones are which is an exercise for the player.
And that's the key - the player. There are many in the WoW world(s) that desire quick fixes. They are under the illusion that the game must be "won" and that they are somehow entitled to everything everyone else has in the world around them without the luck or time invested in playing.
I would be tempted to say that these individuals should give up on WoW (and perhaps all MMORPGs) and look for a FPS where the game resets constantly and everyone starts new. Except, I know that won't solve the problem. Every FPS I've played has seen cheaters who justify their actions as leveling the playing field against other players who've honed their playing skills through hours of playing the game.
Sometimes gaming is more about the player than the game.
Uh, no. The parent poster specifically said that *after two whole months* of playing WoW he wouldn't mind using it to avoid the despairing grind of WoW. He didn't say a damn thing about gold bots.
Actually - he noted that in two months of playing, he saw desperate players. Whether he was one of those or not is up to interpretation. And it does make a difference.
I've played for considerably longer than 2 months and have yet to feel despair. But I have seen people really eager for the quick fix.
Slashdot Mirror
Machining the case? Well CNC milling is very old. A new production process that makes it cheaper. Mildly interesting to the end user and only if it drops the price of the case.
Depends on who the end user is. I would imagine it could have a real interest if it means really solid cases without the premium price.
Back in the day the Steves tried to make computers for everyone. Now the Steve makes them for the "elite". Kind of sad in a way.
Yes I do like their good design work and great OS but they are making money hand over foot so why not go for a knock out?
The Apple Volksputer.
Back in the day a computer "for everyone" was a proprietary product in an industry of proprietary products. Today's market is largely dominated by commodity hardware with more and more pressure towards commodity software as well.
Commodity markets are difficult environments; especially to achieve growth. This market is difficult enough that IBM, the very company who introduced the platform that became the basis for this commodity market, has taken steps to distance itself from it (selling off their PC division to Lenovo). Meanwhile Compaq, the company that created the commodity market with the first "PC clone", has long since surrendered leadership of the market to the likes of Dell. And even Dell is having trouble in this space.
The interesting thing here is that Apple actually touches on this market. They are mixing in aspects of commodity software and hardware in to their products. But everything they do includes elements to distance themselves from the mainstream commodity market. Most of these steps are technical (proprietary firmware, APIs, etc). Pricing is just another method.
Actually, regardless of whether they are making a comeback or not, or what their advantages and disadvantages may be, this is probably just a PR story. Just like the "The Suit Is Back!" that got traced back to a PR agency a couple of years ago.
Paul Graham wrote a nice article about this. Well worth a read for anyone who hasn't seen it yet.
Simply because it wouldn't be so hard to just load a virus, written specifically to the Linux version that EEE is using. Shouldn't be hard and will achieve the same thing.
Isn't that always the way, though? Here the community has provided perfectly functional Linux malware and the manufacturer has ignored all that work. Talk about a missed opportunity.
I bet it doesn't come on the Linux version.
When will we get equal treatment from hardware vendors?
wow.. that's crazy. it's not even a good photoshopping job. you can see the blurry lines around the foreheads, like it was done in 5 seconds.
I'm wondering if this all wasn't some kind of bad joke. The transcript and images have an air of "yeah - see? We can be jerks too." But its hard to tell. Sometimes people do really stupidly obvious things and try to pawn them off on an unsuspecting audience. Pity there's not more context.
No they're not, these cops are not just, "of moral excellence", or any of the other adjectives enumerated. Nor are they any of the adverbs listed.
I'm not saying that they achieve their aims. But in their minds, they are very much doing what they believe is right (morality being subjective). Even if they ultimately fail.
And don't get me wrong - I do believe these individuals are very much failing their office and duties.
So much for guilty until proven innocent. If the correct classification doesn't exist, then don't enter in the name until one does. You wouldn't put their names in as murderers or child pornographers. They are not terrorists, don't call them such.
You're confusing the role of cop and judge. The courts hash out the whole proof of guilt thing. The cop is focused on justice. They're not always the same thing.
This is why, as a general rule, one should not trust anyone in a policing role (at least until you have a REAL good idea how they work). I've seen bureaucrats and FBI agents come up with some rather elaborate scenarios to describe a perpetrator. And while these scenarios aren't always completely without merrit, they tend to be an extreme interpretation (imho) when additional understanding of the situation would imply a different scenario is more likely (the assessment of David Lightman in Wargames strikes a chord with reality).
I'm inclined to say that the people who do these things are not particularly evil. They have good intentions. But of course, we know where that leads. And they ultimately fail their professional duties in paving that road.
Point taken. However, I'm not sure exactly how obscure Nagios is. In the IT circles I run around, it's pretty well known. But then again, I'm in a fairly mixed environment.
Why is the parent post modded funny?
Sorry - that information is on a need-to-know basis.
The only difference is that I have accepted it. Nay, embraced it!
Hear, hear! Abandon anonymity! Just like onion2k! Whoever that is.
From conversations I've had with Americans, I've been left with the impression that American citizens on the whole care less about NSA security letters, secret wiretapping, PATRIOT act misuse than they do about legislation that might inhibit car usage in some way.
Its pretty easy to explain. Issues such as freedom, rights, and security are fairly abstract to the average person. They are complex issues that tend to have little direct, noticeable effect to the average person (although I would argue that they do affect everyone - some very much more than others). Driving, however, is immediately noticeable. Cars are embedded in US culture for various practical and emotional reasons. Affect driving and Americans are going to notice.
42 dancing gnomes
How many gnomes must an orc mow down? 42.
Hmmm....
Can't you set TiVo to strip commercials automatically?
Oh, heck no. Hollywood gets all kinds of upset about that kind of thing. It's such a touchy thing that the automagic 30sec skip is an easter egg for the TiVo (and you have to unlock it any time you reboot your device).
So I got an insightful mod on this post. It has me pondering.
I mean - sure, thanks for the nod. But I was kind of expecting a "funny." I'm not sure what "insightful" is saying. Is that, in itself, the joke? It boggles my mind that someone might have been taking the quip seriously.
We have polls claiming a large percentage of people get their news from comedy shows. That's a bit of a sting on our mainstream journalism. But it's always given me this uneasy feeling that it's more of a statement on said people.
That this is all coming from a meme started by The Colbert Report just seems like poetic justice.
Elephants are an expanding computing market.
jesus. Taking paid work makes you 'shamed'?
You might want to pay attention to the context of the statement. It goes like this:
Did you ever feel pride in your efforts, pride in how they were contributing back to humanity, pride in the fact that you were sharing?
If you did, and you do this, you will be a shamed man. Not to us. To yourself...
The idea here is whether the person could live with their decision or not. It's certainly NOT what the community would think nor the idea that paid work is shameful.
What you describe sounds more like what a psychologist/counselor; my understanding is that the job of a psychatrist is similar to that of your general care physician except applied to mental health: diagnose badness and suggest/prescribe interventions, and if the intervention is psychotherapy also carry it out.
Actually - you're quite correct. You caught me being lazy. I actually have had some exposure to those aspects of health care and have learned some of the differences. I suppose a real general way of contrasting the two is that psychiatrists use drugs while psychologists talk. Someone in the field could probably go in to considerable detail and outline how accurate but wrong that statement is. :)
It's all rather complex stuff. At the least, it appears to be sufficiently complex as to appear simple to the layman. I've gained more appreciation than I probably let on after having watched both psychiatrists and psychologists in action.
One of my insights doing a stint behind a helldesk was that some otherwise competent, intelligent people will disengage their thought process when sitting behind a keyboard. Sometimes I felt like psychiatrist - or at least what I suspect many of them do:
1. Listen to problem.
2. Restate problem as a question.
3. Confirm answer given by customer is correct.
4. Assure customer that while correct answer WAS somewhat obvious, we get it all the time and a lot of folks don't figure it out on their own. Add reassuring comment about their savvy in this situation.
No interpretation required. If you didn't see the poster say
I probably would too if it was allowed by Blizzard.
then either you didn't read the same post as everyone else, or your reading comprehension is abysmal.
....
Hmmm... going back and re-reading the post... you might be on to something after all. ;)
Yeah. Apparently I didn't pay attention.
Richard Nixon could have used more people like you.
US$6 million? How much is that in gold?
Depends on whether you buy the gold directly or use it to fund a gold-farming sweatshop.
Since he's playing & not gold farming, what part of "I probably would too if it was allowed by Blizzard" is so hard for you to parse when taking the previous sentence into consideration?
The issue is that I didn't notice him implying that. And he certainly didn't SAY it. So it would seem that the concept is entirely your interpretation.
I've seen desperate players as well. Doesn't mean I'm one of them (as I actually said - black and white - no interpretation needed).
It's not that difficult, but you're probably just trolling for this response anyhow.
There you go with those interpretations again. :P
One could argue that if that was the purpose of the game, they should have made it more fun and profitable to play than to automate and sell gold.
Yeah - sure... the argument can be made. But I'm not buying it. At least, not entirely.
WoW has grinds. Many of them. Some seem daunting at first but are fairly benign if you take them for what they are - rewards for casual play. Some are completely frustrating. Which ones are which is an exercise for the player.
And that's the key - the player. There are many in the WoW world(s) that desire quick fixes. They are under the illusion that the game must be "won" and that they are somehow entitled to everything everyone else has in the world around them without the luck or time invested in playing.
I would be tempted to say that these individuals should give up on WoW (and perhaps all MMORPGs) and look for a FPS where the game resets constantly and everyone starts new. Except, I know that won't solve the problem. Every FPS I've played has seen cheaters who justify their actions as leveling the playing field against other players who've honed their playing skills through hours of playing the game.
Sometimes gaming is more about the player than the game.
Uh, no. The parent poster specifically said that *after two whole months* of playing WoW he wouldn't mind using it to avoid the despairing grind of WoW. He didn't say a damn thing about gold bots.
Actually - he noted that in two months of playing, he saw desperate players. Whether he was one of those or not is up to interpretation. And it does make a difference.
I've played for considerably longer than 2 months and have yet to feel despair. But I have seen people really eager for the quick fix.