Aren't we (the community) stooping to their level by even acknowledging such asinine comments by, in this instance, Microsoft?
I think that by trying to rebut anything that comes out of the anti-open source camp, we're making it look like we're on the defensive (which, I think, is a valid conclusion if I try to look at this objectively). And being on the defensive generally means one thing: There's some merit to whatever's being accused.
We don't need this tit-for-tat rebuttal silliness. I think that a simple *shrug* and a "So, let us be less than innovative - you'll see..." would have been more than plenty.
Chicago's main post office is 24/7 - the big place right down by the Sears Tower. Let me tell you - an 11:50pm postmark has saved my ass some late charges more than once!
I agree. Nuances mean a lot - the difference Aaron made on MacOS 7.5 was amazing. The difference Norton Desktop made on Win 3.x was what that bum needed. And those are more major adjustments - Something as small as "I wish this window's border could be smaller" might really make someone happy. Sure, there are lots of people who will take whatever the OS dumps at them, but then there are others, like me, who strive to make those tiny adjustments that make using the GUI truly an extension of my intent.
I say intent, though, because at times I can be caught up in what-ifs with the interface that waste a whole lot of time.:)
You can't anti-release something. Even if they make it "illegal" I can't imagine Mr. bin Laden saying, "Oh, crap! Now what will we do?" - I'm pretty sure he and his crew are just going to keep using what they're using now.
Maybe I have some amazing skill that I've just not been aware of until now, but, if you're getting such poor results on google, I'm thinking it just might be you who's doing it wrong. I can search for just about anything, technical or otherwise, and come up with good results.
That's not to say that it couldn't be improved - I'd love to be able to "for sure" get exactly what I wanted in the top three or four returns, but, often I'm searching for something a bit obscure that is only being described by common words (alas, I can't think of what was vexing me in that department last week).
But, I think my point is still valid even if this super-search engine comes around: The search is only as good as the searcher allows it to be.
And I just walked upstairs to the Dreamcast division and they say that it's not true. In fact, they said that they had just had a meeting last week about rumors being spread that Micros-ft or Nintendo was buying them out.
While I like the message, and perhaps re-iteration is good for the PHBs, I think all of the coders who dwell on Slashdot know this and try to make it their own (well, the good ones do, anyway).
And, if people aren't aware of what it takes by now, do you really think they're going to get it, now? Save for perhaps the younger folks just spreading their programming wings, I guess.
Okay, fine. say it again. If a few people get the message it was worth it.
There are several ways to look at this, I think...
It provides the same end effect for the viewer looking for such material - If that's what is morally wrong (the desire to see kids engaged in such behaviour/scenarios), then this is wrong.
Technology is advancing such that it will soon (already is?) difficult or impossible to distinguish between real and "virtual". So what's to stop producers of child porn of just saying "but they're virtual! I swear!". While this is a slippery slope argument, I think there's some validity.
But, then, if it IS distinguishable from real life (Bart Simpson porn?), then, who is it really satisfying. Most pedophiles aren't going to settle for some lame line drawing.
Personally, I just don't like new laws when they don't even enforce the old laws. I mean, seriously, in a country where NAMBLA (the North American Man-Boy Love Association) exists freely, shouldn't we start with the laws we have? (For the curious, NAMBLA doesn't have a web site anymore, apparently. It used to be nambla.org, but, that's not around any longer...)
Maybe I'm just feeling old and cynical today, but, this is how I'm feeling...
My time is worth enough that, instead of hacking at some little POS set-top machine, I'd much rather just buy a decent box. I mean, come on! a "decent" box (interpret that however you like) certainly outperforms one of these things, and I can slap one together for, what, $350, maybe? And, generally, I have enough extra parts around my place that I'm only buying a few key items!
I can't even think of an argument that I want to pre-emptively rebut; Most anyone that would be trying to hack these things are going to be in the same boat I am (the I-have-my-own-computer-flea-market type of person) and could easily create a second (or fifteenth) machine out of spare parts with a few strategic purchases.
This isn't to say that the pursuit of hacking into one of these isn't a noble venture in and of itself. I am just talking (or blathering, if you like) about proposing such a task to be some sort of low-cost solution to getting a new Nth machine.
...I would be holding my breath for an article on how to hack the CueCat scanner and make it more useful.
It's not like what we (the geek community) are proposing you do with the thing is illegal at all (though DC obviously wishes it were), but, we all know Wired isn't going to stick their neck out like that. I like to believe they might have 6 years ago...
People who want the newest fastest coolest best always pay a premium. If you choose to, then, that's your fault. I bought a 9500 when they were NEW. Does that make it a Good Deal? No. But, it's over 5 years old and it still holds its own - I can still out-photoshop a 2-year-old PC!
That said, I think he is one of the most admirable CEOs (well, iCEOs) around. He's brought Apple around to be the company that I fell in love with back in the pre-Gil era, and then some. OSX is very exciting...I don't think it's going to stand the computer world as a whole on it's ear, but it definitely is already having impact on Unix community, and for those of us who are cross-overs (Mac and Unix), this is a very exciting time (and I make that squinchy face like Tank in the Matrix).
I'm just glad I don't work for Sir Steve. He's just a little to militant for me - I think he'd kill me. I'll just reap the benefits of his psychoses from the consumer end.
Slashdot Mirror
Now those lovely little empty spaces that JunkBuster leaves will be a tiny bit bigger. How will I cope?
or does Hiroshi Yamauchi look like that old guy from Gremlins with glasses on.
Oh, wait. Obviously it's the Source part.
I think that by trying to rebut anything that comes out of the anti-open source camp, we're making it look like we're on the defensive (which, I think, is a valid conclusion if I try to look at this objectively). And being on the defensive generally means one thing: There's some merit to whatever's being accused.
We don't need this tit-for-tat rebuttal silliness. I think that a simple *shrug* and a "So, let us be less than innovative - you'll see..." would have been more than plenty.
Al here: Piss off, Dubyah - I invented firewalling and I say it stays! --Al P.S. You can reach me in Canada. Screw you and your dad's death squads!
Chicago's main post office is 24/7 - the big place right down by the Sears Tower. Let me tell you - an 11:50pm postmark has saved my ass some late charges more than once!
I say intent, though, because at times I can be caught up in what-ifs with the interface that waste a whole lot of time. :)
Am I the only one thinking "Duh"?
I can dream....
As if there's something Perl can't do! Psh!
No - damn it. Insurance will get me money to get a new one in a few weeks, though. But it still sucks.
Sometimes things are moving in a way that I think that might be more of a possibility than I'd like.
You know, "Transformers...Morgan meets The Eye!"
That's not to say that it couldn't be improved - I'd love to be able to "for sure" get exactly what I wanted in the top three or four returns, but, often I'm searching for something a bit obscure that is only being described by common words (alas, I can't think of what was vexing me in that department last week).
But, I think my point is still valid even if this super-search engine comes around: The search is only as good as the searcher allows it to be.
Rather, you should not run Micro$oft Streaming Server because it has to run on the POS Operating System by Micro$oft.
Semantics make a difference.
So there that is.
And, if people aren't aware of what it takes by now, do you really think they're going to get it, now? Save for perhaps the younger folks just spreading their programming wings, I guess.
Okay, fine. say it again. If a few people get the message it was worth it.
- It provides the same end effect for the viewer looking for such material - If that's what is morally wrong (the desire to see kids engaged in such behaviour/scenarios), then this is wrong.
- Technology is advancing such that it will soon (already is?) difficult or impossible to distinguish between real and "virtual". So what's to stop producers of child porn of just saying "but they're virtual! I swear!". While this is a slippery slope argument, I think there's some validity.
- But, then, if it IS distinguishable from real life (Bart Simpson porn?), then, who is it really satisfying. Most pedophiles aren't going to settle for some lame line drawing.
Personally, I just don't like new laws when they don't even enforce the old laws. I mean, seriously, in a country where NAMBLA (the North American Man-Boy Love Association) exists freely, shouldn't we start with the laws we have? (For the curious, NAMBLA doesn't have a web site anymore, apparently. It used to be nambla.org, but, that's not around any longer...)I thought non-competes couldn't cross state lines. Can't these people just incorporate elsewhere? Or even move?
My time is worth enough that, instead of hacking at some little POS set-top machine, I'd much rather just buy a decent box. I mean, come on! a "decent" box (interpret that however you like) certainly outperforms one of these things, and I can slap one together for, what, $350, maybe? And, generally, I have enough extra parts around my place that I'm only buying a few key items!
I can't even think of an argument that I want to pre-emptively rebut; Most anyone that would be trying to hack these things are going to be in the same boat I am (the I-have-my-own-computer-flea-market type of person) and could easily create a second (or fifteenth) machine out of spare parts with a few strategic purchases.
This isn't to say that the pursuit of hacking into one of these isn't a noble venture in and of itself. I am just talking (or blathering, if you like) about proposing such a task to be some sort of low-cost solution to getting a new Nth machine.
Or am I just getting old at 24?
It's not like what we (the geek community) are proposing you do with the thing is illegal at all (though DC obviously wishes it were), but, we all know Wired isn't going to stick their neck out like that. I like to believe they might have 6 years ago...
But, alas, the days of old are gone.
How feasible is it to add such a thing to an older game (if at all)?
Is there a method to derive such information from, say, a Spy Hunter game? (oh please, oh please)
Are there any other ways of extracting high scores, etc from an older game (other than copying it down and typing it in elsewhere, of course)?
You mean Do Not Make Illegal Copies of This Disk isn't working!?!?
People who want the newest fastest coolest best always pay a premium. If you choose to, then, that's your fault. I bought a 9500 when they were NEW. Does that make it a Good Deal? No. But, it's over 5 years old and it still holds its own - I can still out-photoshop a 2-year-old PC!
I'm just glad I don't work for Sir Steve. He's just a little to militant for me - I think he'd kill me. I'll just reap the benefits of his psychoses from the consumer end.