Yes, I do this a lot, and it works just fine. But this is for places with a lot of people, where it would take a long time to, say, vote on everyone's favorite song. Or what if the person with the mouse likes really old country music where people regularly exclame "Yipee!"? You might have some problems. The downside is that you might have to strap a biometric thingy to yourself before listening to music.
I really like this song! I'm going to run around in circles!
This is my favorite song! Time to hyperventilate1
Serioiusly, though, this would be cool if it was easier to biometrically track things like heartbeat. If I went to a party, I wouldn't want to have some odd biometric device that could alert someone if I was having a "moment" with a pretty girl.
Exactly! Making things prohibited typically has an effect, but not the effect most people intend. Censoring the world won't make poeple better, it would just stifle the flow of opinions. If I hadn't read some controversy-raising books a while ago, I might have very different opinions from the ones I have now. Those books made me think.
Prohibiting speech creates a bunch of people who don't think regularly. Letting people have freedom of speech lets a few more people think.
If I want to it is my right to be able to say, for example, that black people should all be slaughtered. I don't think this, and I don't want to associate with anyone who does, but they have a right to say it if they want.
Hate speech is hateful, but it is speech none the less.
Think of how many billions of dollars go to taking away people's rights to liberty and the puruit of happiness via the Drug Enforcement Agency. Think of how many people that could put in orbit if they made drugs legal...
Gath commands you to go out and tell people all the wonderful things He will give you. If you don't repent and be made anew in the holiness of Gath, you will burn forever in the flames of Ghemmon.
Without Gath, you are nothing. You have no hope of surviving without Gath. Humble yourself to Gath and devote your life to His teachings, and you will be saved.
If you find those preaching the word of Gath to be revolting, then I have serious concerns for your soul.
It's been 30 years. How far has UNIX (or some workalike) come since then? I know we have the internet as a common thing, and UN*X has been moved to a side of the computer market by Windows, even with shockingly crazy technology (they still use drive letters!), but a lot of smart people have made cool things for UN*X.
The thing I like most about Gnome is the pretty icons and graphics. For general ease of use, I use KDE. If KDE would get some cooler icons, or just 'borrow' Gnome's....
Re:Remembering DOS
on
MS DOS: A Eulogy
·
· Score: 2, Informative
They can never completely get rid of DOS. Not while there are people with the intelligence to do things without Microsoft holding their hands.
As long as filesystem design stays the same, we can always port bash to Windows, or make a DOS emulator. Go to www.delorie.com/djgpp for links to cygwin, where you can find a shell for Windows. You might find a DOS emulator on the web.
We can resist the evil command line crushing power of Microsoft!
True, most apps don't benefit from SMP. Your word processor won't, unless you have some sort of super-souped-up emacs thing. Your web browser wouldn't benefit much even if it were made multi-processed, despite all the Intel hype about enhancing your internet experience.
But some programs will benefit. Have you ever run a heavily used web server? They fork off lots of processes. It will benefit greatly from SMP.
Most processor intensive programs have become multithreaded, and the rest can be if SMP becomes popular.
I see too many people asking what the use of something is if all their existing stuff wouldn't benefit from it. This is often because their stuff hasn't had any reason to adapt to this cool new thing that people are going to reject because their stuff doesn't benefit from it now. Take the plan9 OS for example. It does the Right Thing for a great networked internal structure, but the GUI stinks. It is not popular, partly because people don't like the UI. But if poeple used it, the GUI would be improved and we would have all its cool benefits.
We should have this code out. We should have any resource available that points out a security hole. Cracking is almost self-defeating; you alert people forcefully that there is a problem. Take the nimda worm for example. It wrought havoc, and pretty soon everyone was fixing the security holes it used.
If we want secure software, we should write it. If we don't want to write it ourselves, we should be ready to pay for it. If we do want to write it ourselves, we can call it open source. Either way, there is a motivation to make secure programs.
It is possible to write non-trivial programs without security bugs. It is very difficult, so in the mean time we should settle for the best security we can get. The best security is pretty good if you take reasonable precautions like not choosing a password like 'ant'.
So get off your buts, MS, and make your soft ware secure, and not through obscurity!
Email is faster that regular mail, costs less to transport, and won't transmit diseases. Perhaps once people use email more regularly they will start caring more when the government tries to open people's email and look around for suspicious things.
On the other hand, some people do actually send things other than letters through the mail.
It seems like the only places you can go to have a big discussion about technical issues without a lot of ignorant people saying stupid things are places like Slashdot. Scoff as all the "only on/." people may, there actually are some people who post on/. who are polite, reasoned, and well informed.
I think that one advantage of the internet is that you can set up special interest groups, and people will flock to them. Instead of dumbing everything down for everyone, special sites can present lots of actual interesting information.
Well, I did the same thing, except that _I_ did it in 1.3 femtoseconds, and I didn't even have 0's. I had to use the letter 'o'! I then communicated it telepathically to stonehenge.
Nimda is not a fun virus for people who have an unfortunate dependance on MS boxes to provide internet stuff for them. One network I use was shut down for two days completely, and the computers using it were turned on without internet access the next day. I don't know when we will get internet access back. And now it is getting set to propagate again. I wish that people placed more value on security in their networks and software. IIS and IE can only get away with having more security holes than swiss cheese because people let them.
and I'll say it again: you can't depend on some mysterious hand of the omnipotent government to protect you from crackers. You must secure everything yourself. Get only secure web servers and stuff. If that means ditching, say, IIS for Apache, you can bet that MS will beef up IIS security pretty fast!
This sort of thing should be legal. It would help security if you take protecting your data in to your own hands rather than being like a sheep and bleating when some script kiddie replaces your web site with a porn page.
"Poll Says Most Americans Ignorant on Topic of Crypto"
Having backdoors in crypto programs won't stop terrorists (or at least ones intelligent enough to pull of anything big). I will enumerate some reasons:
1. Steganography (you can't decrypt what you can't find!)
2. Illegal encryption programs (terrorists won't have any qualms about using them!)
3. If the internet is bugged, terrorists won't use it.
I think that cracking in to another computer should be legal. If you do a DOS on Ebay, and cost people money, then you should be punished. If you transfer money from someone else's bank account to yours, you should have to give back the money, and be punished. But the crime should not be affected by the fact that you used a computer, or that you're one of those "hackers" that are being made examples of. If you break in to your ISP and look around, that should not be a crime.
Why? For better internet security. If people have to actually protect their computers, rather than trusting some supposedly omnipotent government to toss crackers in the oubliette, they would pay a lot more attention to security. They would not buy products with a lot of security leaks, and patch them more often. IIS would become reasonably secure.
If you make all wireless data fair game for people to intercept, people would start using encryption.
There are a lot of nasty things you can do to the Sims, like locking guests in little chambers you just made, or placing the only toilet in the front yard. Or you could simply not build a toilet at all. Don't these count as violent?
Of course, if you don't have a slightly violent personality, you wouldn't do these things. Still, it's enough for some of the crazier people yo pounce on.
I don't see how this can be very useful as long as it is constrained to simple things like mice on the desktop. I can see my links perfectly clearly. Clearly enough to click on them, even. Having my mouse vibrate when it goes over something I can see easily does not help me.
If I were playing a game, this would be much different. It would be cool to have the mouse give a kick when I shoot. Can you think of other uses?
You said it. I really can't see a reason for online books to use Flash. You want quizzes? Use forms. You want Searches, indexes, page flipping, etc.? Use plain old HTML!
Perhaps the idea is to use Flash for flashy educational games or some such thing. Maybe they just suffer from a horrible malady that is becoming extremely common: overly decorating pages. Have you ever seen a page where practically everything is an image?
Yes, GNOME is pretty nice, but I will still offer my responses to your points:
1. GNOME programs usually have a menubar layout that is closer to what people are used to on the Mac and Windows.
How is the GNOME menubar layout more familiar? If you are talking about the menu options and their placement (e.g. `copy' in the `edit' menu), then I would say they all have that menubar layout.
2. The KDE interface is visually busy. GNOME has this problem too (the users complained about too much stuff and too many options), but KDE is worse.
This reminds me of an airline anology where if you flew on Linux Airlines they gave you seat parts and a copy of seat-HOWTO.html, but once you had made your seat, it was very comfortable. Making the interface visually spare would make things easier for first time users, but once you got used to the environment, it would not be as comforable.
3. KDE icons are terribly non-intuitive.
I can think of no justification for having non-intuitive icons if you can make other ones and have had enough time, but I haven't found KDE's icons non-intuitive. The GNOME icons are a whole lot prettier, though.
Slashdot Mirror
Go to the JAP page and see what they can do. They have a Java based proxy and are focusing on security over performance.
You're right; it is really geeky.
This is my favorite song! Time to hyperventilate1
Serioiusly, though, this would be cool if it was easier to biometrically track things like heartbeat. If I went to a party, I wouldn't want to have some odd biometric device that could alert someone if I was having a "moment" with a pretty girl.
Prohibiting speech creates a bunch of people who don't think regularly. Letting people have freedom of speech lets a few more people think.
Hate speech is hateful, but it is speech none the less.
Think of how many billions of dollars go to taking away people's rights to liberty and the puruit of happiness via the Drug Enforcement Agency. Think of how many people that could put in orbit if they made drugs legal...
Without Gath, you are nothing. You have no hope of surviving without Gath. Humble yourself to Gath and devote your life to His teachings, and you will be saved.
If you find those preaching the word of Gath to be revolting, then I have serious concerns for your soul.
Nice troll, though.
And lastly, where is it going?
The thing I like most about Gnome is the pretty icons and graphics. For general ease of use, I use KDE. If KDE would get some cooler icons, or just 'borrow' Gnome's....
As long as filesystem design stays the same, we can always port bash to Windows, or make a DOS emulator. Go to www.delorie.com/djgpp for links to cygwin, where you can find a shell for Windows. You might find a DOS emulator on the web.
We can resist the evil command line crushing power of Microsoft!
But some programs will benefit. Have you ever run a heavily used web server? They fork off lots of processes. It will benefit greatly from SMP.
Most processor intensive programs have become multithreaded, and the rest can be if SMP becomes popular.
I see too many people asking what the use of something is if all their existing stuff wouldn't benefit from it. This is often because their stuff hasn't had any reason to adapt to this cool new thing that people are going to reject because their stuff doesn't benefit from it now. Take the plan9 OS for example. It does the Right Thing for a great networked internal structure, but the GUI stinks. It is not popular, partly because people don't like the UI. But if poeple used it, the GUI would be improved and we would have all its cool benefits.
If we want secure software, we should write it. If we don't want to write it ourselves, we should be ready to pay for it. If we do want to write it ourselves, we can call it open source. Either way, there is a motivation to make secure programs.
It is possible to write non-trivial programs without security bugs. It is very difficult, so in the mean time we should settle for the best security we can get. The best security is pretty good if you take reasonable precautions like not choosing a password like 'ant'.
So get off your buts, MS, and make your soft ware secure, and not through obscurity!
On the other hand, some people do actually send things other than letters through the mail.
I think that one advantage of the internet is that you can set up special interest groups, and people will flock to them. Instead of dumbing everything down for everyone, special sites can present lots of actual interesting information.
I groan when someone says, "Couldn't we do this in a group?"
Jon Katz liked a movie!
Chuckle...
Nimda is not a fun virus for people who have an unfortunate dependance on MS boxes to provide internet stuff for them. One network I use was shut down for two days completely, and the computers using it were turned on without internet access the next day. I don't know when we will get internet access back. And now it is getting set to propagate again. I wish that people placed more value on security in their networks and software. IIS and IE can only get away with having more security holes than swiss cheese because people let them.
This sort of thing should be legal. It would help security if you take protecting your data in to your own hands rather than being like a sheep and bleating when some script kiddie replaces your web site with a porn page.
Having backdoors in crypto programs won't stop terrorists (or at least ones intelligent enough to pull of anything big). I will enumerate some reasons:
1. Steganography (you can't decrypt what you can't find!)
2. Illegal encryption programs (terrorists won't have any qualms about using them!)
3. If the internet is bugged, terrorists won't use it.
Why? For better internet security. If people have to actually protect their computers, rather than trusting some supposedly omnipotent government to toss crackers in the oubliette, they would pay a lot more attention to security. They would not buy products with a lot of security leaks, and patch them more often. IIS would become reasonably secure.
If you make all wireless data fair game for people to intercept, people would start using encryption.
Legalize cracking: it's for security!(tm)
Of course, if you don't have a slightly violent personality, you wouldn't do these things. Still, it's enough for some of the crazier people yo pounce on.
If I were playing a game, this would be much different. It would be cool to have the mouse give a kick when I shoot. Can you think of other uses?
Perhaps the idea is to use Flash for flashy educational games or some such thing. Maybe they just suffer from a horrible malady that is becoming extremely common: overly decorating pages. Have you ever seen a page where practically everything is an image?
But for most purposes, any web browser should do.
How is the GNOME menubar layout more familiar? If you are talking about the menu options and their placement (e.g. `copy' in the `edit' menu), then I would say they all have that menubar layout.
This reminds me of an airline anology where if you flew on Linux Airlines they gave you seat parts and a copy of seat-HOWTO.html, but once you had made your seat, it was very comfortable. Making the interface visually spare would make things easier for first time users, but once you got used to the environment, it would not be as comforable.
I can think of no justification for having non-intuitive icons if you can make other ones and have had enough time, but I haven't found KDE's icons non-intuitive. The GNOME icons are a whole lot prettier, though.