True but most arguments about privacy revolve around the unintended consequences that arise. Tinfoil hat conspiracies aside, add the phrase "Microsoft Executives say..." and it's enough to give anyone a slight case of the willies.
Here's a pretty good comment on the issue (the site name is misleading):
I was going to purchase Pagemaker in the next few weeks. The application is for uncomplicated but nice looking product pdfs which wouldn't necessarily need all the Adobe bells and whistles. After playing with it for a bit, Scribus looks like it will fit the bill perfectly.
Even after years of using open source, it's tough to get out of the commercial mindset (i.e. reflexively pull out the credit card and be done with it).
(Btw, there doesn't appear to be a donate link. Since I use programs like this in my business, I like kicking in $20 or more for good stuff)
It used to be that the scandal du jour was something like who's defacing the boy's bathroom. My daughter came home yesterday and told the story of a fellow third grader who was stealing Webkinz (don't ask) passwords and transferring Kinzcash (again, don't ask) to her own account.
It was kind of nice for her to see at such a young age a concrete example of why password security is important.
I've often wondered if a MP version of "boss vs. the rest" would work in CounterStrike, for example. In other words, a round robin match where you're scored on how well you did as "super-jesus" and as a "nonbeliever" (to use the article's context).
What would make it interesting is that since there's a single target, cooperation among "nonbelievers" would be emphasized moreso than it is now. Stealth and guerilla tactics on both sides would be paramount. The chances of one last "nonbeliever" defeating "super-jesus" would be much less than it currently is, two-guys-left with a somewhat even chance or a 10-1 blowout.
So the key is that instead of rushing and essentially using your teammates as 1) shields/canaries and 2) as a way to score easier kills on damaged opponents, more emphasis would be on protecting your teammates to avoid the "super-jesus" vs. last "nonbeliever" scenario.
Lastly, and probably toughest to achieve, the map would have to be really well thought out to support this type of gameplay.
As with other things in life, think money. Their lawyers get paid in dollars, not fuzzy warm feelings. The logical conclusion is don't buy the CDs produced by companies represented by the RIAA.
It's like the mouse in the "last act of defiance" graphic. Except the mouse was smart and earlier had anti-eagle kryptonite surgically implanted in his tail. After eating the mouse, the anti-eagle kryptonite is inside the eagle and said eagle therefore dies a slow agonizing death.
The mouse wins, balance in the universe is restored and Grandma Millie can resume downloading Eminem safe with the knowledge that she won't get sued.
This topic has been worn out on/. before but this quote is a good example of what's been discussed. Does it bother anyone else when a scientist makes a statement like this to a layman audience (i.e. majority of NYT's readership)?
It makes it seem like refinement or going back to the drawing board is a bad thing. As opposed to what it really is, a step forward to discovering the correct basis of how the universe works through the scientific method. Using words like "nervous" implies a thought process where science is equivalent to religion based on unwavering doctrine. Imho, half of the problem with the perception of science today is due to this (as an obvious example, ID).
It's kind of like if the original Ohm's Law was E=IR+1 and the "+1" was swamped out by tolerance. Then someone comes along and says that we haven't been looking at this right. Wouldn't the correct response be "Well, it's really exciting that we're discovering that E=IR may be the correct equation. If it pans out, it will add to scientific knowledge and open up all sorts of possibilities. If not, then we'll just keep searching."
Versus "This fundamental change to Ohm's equation makes us nervous."
Slashdot Mirror
"I also wish they'd make these flourescent bulbs in 40 watt (200 watt equivalent)"
r ew-In-s/75.htm
Me too. Out of curiousity, I surfed a bit and found this link that has up to 100W(!) CFL which is equivalent to 500W incandescant:
http://www.buylighting.com/Compact-Fluorescent-Sc
And it's available in full or warm spectrum. Very surprised to see such a high output CFL available.
(btw, sure there's many other vendors via Froogle, no affiliation, yada yada.)
A counter statement was later issued by attorney Flip Aeron, council representing the chairs in a civil suit against Mr. Ballmer.
"It hit, so you can't acquit".
Oh yeah? Well we think your nick shows suspiciousness.
/.ers!
Get out yer pitchforks fellow
Let's see if he floats!
True but most arguments about privacy revolve around the unintended consequences that arise. Tinfoil hat conspiracies aside, add the phrase "Microsoft Executives say..." and it's enough to give anyone a slight case of the willies.
Here's a pretty good comment on the issue (the site name is misleading):
http://www.overclockers.com/tips01084/
But, per President Bush himself, one event (9/11) was directly responsible for the second (attacking Iraq).
0 030319-1.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/2
Seems black and white, no?
Just wanted to say thanks for posting this.
I was going to purchase Pagemaker in the next few weeks. The application is for uncomplicated but nice looking product pdfs which wouldn't necessarily need all the Adobe bells and whistles. After playing with it for a bit, Scribus looks like it will fit the bill perfectly.
Even after years of using open source, it's tough to get out of the commercial mindset (i.e. reflexively pull out the credit card and be done with it).
(Btw, there doesn't appear to be a donate link. Since I use programs like this in my business, I like kicking in $20 or more for good stuff)
"...it's because as video games increase in complexity they start to approach the model of a little universe :D"
Yeah, friggin Microsoft again. Even God got trapped in the DX path.
The universe would be way more free if he went OpenGL to begin with (using Linux for development, of course).
It used to be that the scandal du jour was something like who's defacing the boy's bathroom. My daughter came home yesterday and told the story of a fellow third grader who was stealing Webkinz (don't ask) passwords and transferring Kinzcash (again, don't ask) to her own account.
It was kind of nice for her to see at such a young age a concrete example of why password security is important.
"Yes, Daddy, I know that. Geez."
I've often wondered if a MP version of "boss vs. the rest" would work in CounterStrike, for example. In other words, a round robin match where you're scored on how well you did as "super-jesus" and as a "nonbeliever" (to use the article's context).
What would make it interesting is that since there's a single target, cooperation among "nonbelievers" would be emphasized moreso than it is now. Stealth and guerilla tactics on both sides would be paramount. The chances of one last "nonbeliever" defeating "super-jesus" would be much less than it currently is, two-guys-left with a somewhat even chance or a 10-1 blowout.
So the key is that instead of rushing and essentially using your teammates as 1) shields/canaries and 2) as a way to score easier kills on damaged opponents, more emphasis would be on protecting your teammates to avoid the "super-jesus" vs. last "nonbeliever" scenario.
Lastly, and probably toughest to achieve, the map would have to be really well thought out to support this type of gameplay.
Does this already exist in some form out there?
Please don't give MSFT any ideas about entering the gun market.
Please.
On the plus side though, it gives those of us who are sub-par CS players an alternate excuse to blaming ping.
"lucky shot n00b cuz if my tv wasnt lagging..."
As with other things in life, think money. Their lawyers get paid in dollars, not fuzzy warm feelings. The logical conclusion is don't buy the CDs produced by companies represented by the RIAA.
It's like the mouse in the "last act of defiance" graphic. Except the mouse was smart and earlier had anti-eagle kryptonite surgically implanted in his tail. After eating the mouse, the anti-eagle kryptonite is inside the eagle and said eagle therefore dies a slow agonizing death.
The mouse wins, balance in the universe is restored and Grandma Millie can resume downloading Eminem safe with the knowledge that she won't get sued.
"You may want to be sure of your own writing skills the next time you're inclined to jump someone's bones about his or hers.
Pssst...over here...yeah, you...
Your participle is dangling.
"Like the people here on Slashdot, everybody got opinions, but nobody DOES ANYTHING."
This morning I participated by reading an article about $100 laptops thereby increasing the general awareness about the issue.
Does that count?
(Well, ok, you got me. But I did skim the summary.)
"Dark energy makes us nervous."
/. before but this quote is a good example of what's been discussed. Does it bother anyone else when a scientist makes a statement like this to a layman audience (i.e. majority of NYT's readership)?
This topic has been worn out on
It makes it seem like refinement or going back to the drawing board is a bad thing. As opposed to what it really is, a step forward to discovering the correct basis of how the universe works through the scientific method. Using words like "nervous" implies a thought process where science is equivalent to religion based on unwavering doctrine. Imho, half of the problem with the perception of science today is due to this (as an obvious example, ID).
It's kind of like if the original Ohm's Law was E=IR+1 and the "+1" was swamped out by tolerance. Then someone comes along and says that we haven't been looking at this right. Wouldn't the correct response be "Well, it's really exciting that we're discovering that E=IR may be the correct equation. If it pans out, it will add to scientific knowledge and open up all sorts of possibilities. If not, then we'll just keep searching."
Versus "This fundamental change to Ohm's equation makes us nervous."
Excellent point. I'd mod you up if I could.
Which is offset by having one more paperclip off the streets and gainfully employed.
It would be irresponsible to their shareholders to give up on a market of a billion people. From TFA, Cisco too.
It's simply good PR posturing, that's all.
I know the greatest /. editor of all time is Hemos, bar none.
Consistently professional, wise, witty, handsome, master lover and never posts dupes.
(Is that good enough for a MacBook?)
"I *DO* work in marketing for a living"
Oh, the horror.
Lesson learned today: Don't mess with Billy Robertson.
Or his enemies.
Thank you for the question.
Only ass-kicking buddhas need apply.
(and thus an unfortunate meme is born)
If you really need an "enlightenment" icon, how about finding a simple Buddha image?
It's generic enough where pretty much everyone would catch on to the meaning.
5 minutes?
Did you at least allow him a bathroom break during this time?
Thanks, guys. Now I can't remember how to spell the word.