Yes, I was going to pay the ridiculous price for a Playstation 3, but since it didn't have a nifty visualization while it plays music (how often do people do this with their console?) I bought a Wii instead.
Couldn't you just save yourself a few hundred dollars and download a Winamp visualization?
what is the excuse for cameras and what the hell do cameras do?
Well, "the excuse for these cameras":... they are merely automatic speed traps.... and "what the hell do these cameras do? They detect when people are breaking the law In the larger scope, cameras take pictures. The excuse for cameras existing is some people enjoy having pictures.
you have enough braincells to figure this one out on your own I'm sure.
I can think of at someone who needs a roadmap. Are you one of those idiots against red light cameras because they infringe on your freedom to do something stupid, dangerous and illegal?
That was 1689. I don't know if you've noticed, but I think the whole "american government" thing has kind of drifted from what was originally intended...
Unless you have unlimited time on your hands, your theory is for shit. I've spent my entire life living in small towns and suburbia. Let's say I have to get from point A to point B where.A and.B are opposite corners of town (we'll assume "town" is a 5km square where most roads have a 50km/h speed limit), but being intrepid, I saunter on down to the bus stop. Unless the bus is there as I walk up, I'm looking at anywhere from a 15-40 minute wait. Let's be generous and say 20.
Now that I'm on the bus and buses generally don't go from.A to.B directly, I now find myself heading towards.C. After arriving at.C, I now have another 15-40 minute wait for another bus. Being conservative, we'll say 20 minutes here too.
Additionally, let's figure there's a bus stop ever half kilometer and each requires a 2 minute layover. We'll also figure buses stop in the dead center of town (they more or less do here), which our friend Pythagorean tells us is a 5km trip. This means that.A ->.C and.C ->.B will run us through 20 bus stops.
What does this mean? I've already wasted an hour of my day and doubled the distance travelled, merely via the underlying clag of taking the bus. This is without figuring in the speed of the bus itself, which will never reach the theoretical 50km/h speed limit due to the logarithmic nature of acceleration/deceleration. Basically double the "infrastructure" time and add (again, being generous) 30 minutes for an inter-city bus to show up and you're at an hour and a half one way, three hours both ways, and being in a bus doesn't make you immune to the correlation between travel time and traffic "fucked"ness. (ie. if I would've sat in traffic for an hour in a car, I'd sit for an hour in traffic in a bus. Actually, probably longer, as a car is more maneuverable, accelerates quicker and can jockey it's way to the front of a disturbance easier than a bus)
Remember, even though they're horrible for the environment and lead to nasty crap like this, there's a reason the planes won.
Seriously? Are you in the same Canada I am? These days it seems I can't open my mailbox, read a paper or walk down a street without seeing an ad for a DSL provider. Granted DSL is generally slower than cable, but I quite enjoy my unlimited transfers and next-to-nothing-per-year static IP.
It will be 6 dull months, but then it is over and remember that there are independent music and film
Welcome to 2007 (or 2006, it's an old map), there are 5 companies which have a stranglehold on everything you see and hear, and every one of them has worked hard to convince people that "independent" is merely a budgetary constraint. If you can find a movie that doesn't have one of those logos on them, congrats, you've found a true independent film and not something that's just an audition for the main stream. Bonus points if it's good.
Now all you have to do is convince the general public to not go watch the emotional pablum advertised by pretty people staring at them from every magazine cover and billboard, then convince the juggernaut multiplexes which are mostly owned by studios to show them. If that doesn't work, all you have to do is convince the "premium" cable channels (also owned by the same 5 companies) to throw it into their rotation. To round things out, you'd also have to find a distributor that's not either owned in part by or extremely friendly to those same 5 companies (otherwise you run the risk of your work being "vaulted", which means thrown away until Hollywood can churn out something similar) who'll try their best to convince rental outlets to waste valuable shelf space on it.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for independent media and stifle a slight bit of anger whenever a mom and pop theater closes or Disney releases another High School Musical, but too many people sat by idly while this system built itself for it to be easily stopped.
What else would you expect from the United Corporations of America? I explained this evilness recently to my cousin by likening it to the episode of South Park where Paris Hilton (evil corporate lobby groups, often with 4 letter acronyms) tries to buy Butters (picture Evil Legistation X) and his parents send him to dig for coal in an attempt to raise more than what Paris is offering (campaign donations).
Watching crap like this pass through Slashdot makes me glad I'm Canadian (with "our" DMCA looming on the horizon and the conservatives (read: our republicans) in power, I don't know how much longer that'll last).
Man am I glad my system seems to deal with this problem proactively: The Quicktime plugin crashes anything that contains it almost as soon as it's drawn!
Thank you Apple for protecting me from, well, Apple!
Until fairly recently they ran this web site on an old version of Red Hat with essentially no outside support.
and:
But even if they run RHEL on a mix of two and four socket machines, they're still looking at $50K per year minimum for the privilege of sticking the little red logo on their servers.
From what I gather (and I haven't been awake very long, so I might be wrong) they've been maintaining Linux boxes on their own for years (about 5, IIRC Redhat 7.3 came out 2002-ish), and the reason they're ditching Redhat is it costs too much for support they didn't need previously?
If I might go on a limb and make a bizarre suggestion: Don't pay it.
They know that the engineering effort at Red Hat costs serious money and that someone has to pay for it
I don't really think this is that true. I was under the impression (and unless this is wrong too) RHEL forked off Fedora whenever they feel like it, so in effect (according to this) isn't Fedora just a testbed where people do free QA work for Redhat?
My friend and his staff are Unix veterans, but they are not Linux geeks and they are definitely not the kind to muck around in the innards of their server OS just for the fun of it.
So they're UNIX veterans, have been administering Linux systems for years, and they haven't mastered './configure && make && make install'? TFA claims they're LAMP-based, with the exception of the L, I can start on the AMP portion first thing in the morning and have all three upgraded in time for lunch (My day starts at 10, Lunch is noon without fail). Sounds to me like they're just too lazy to upgrade the 2 or 3 dependencies something might have. That's a great reason for ditching a known good and stable kernel, right?
Hell, the first thing I do when I install a new OS is replace their Apache/MySQL/PHP with versions I compile myself (based on known-good versions we use on staging/test servers), that way I know 100% it's going to do what I want and I'm not going to see any crap in my error logs about PHP not loading it's GD extension because I opted not to install X on a server which really doesn't need it.
If they really wanted set-it-and-forget-it why not use Slackware? Or ditch Linux entirely and go to FreeBSD?
It is rated as M (or AO for the original), don't damn well give it to them. What? Actually pay attention to what my children are doing? Then who would I have to bitch at when the news tells me the goal of a game called "Manhunt"?
True, but after thinking about how a reactor works, he might have an unintended point: You could have some fun dropping all the control rods. It only takes a few seconds for a modern reactor to scram, but they take hours to get going again. Not destructive, but certainly a nuisance.
How long have you been using computers? I've seen "virii" in common use as the plural of "virus" for at least 15 years. Let me guess, "phreaking" is spelled with an F, right?
Is this methodology only available to applications retrieved from the ESOPHAGUS (Enterprise Structured Online Pervasive High Availability Generic Universal Storage) network?
Where's the story here? Someone turns on the "always check my email feature" (which defaults to off, as with every other data using cellular appliance), didn't actually turn the phone off, then complained when their standing by phone did exactly what they'd set it to do. You are the weakest link, good bye.
On a side note, does anybody else think Slashdot's going downhill? More and more I'm finding TFAs are nothing more than a half page write up with as much concrete information as a modern election campaign. Even worse when they're a blog entry and you have to follow a link there to actually get somewhere. What gives??!?
I can understand where Adobe's coming from. I mean, didn't anybody ever stop and think "Okay, maybe naming this thing Killustrator isn't the best of ideas?"
Don't get me wrong, I support free software and am against companies budding in and ruining things, but just because they're a for-profit non-open-source company doesn't mean they're automatically wrong, nor does it mean they should ignore someone violating (I'm assuming) a copyright they own.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I was going to pay the ridiculous price for a Playstation 3, but since it didn't have a nifty visualization while it plays music (how often do people do this with their console?) I bought a Wii instead.
Couldn't you just save yourself a few hundred dollars and download a Winamp visualization?
Well, "the excuse for these cameras":
In the larger scope, cameras take pictures. The excuse for cameras existing is some people enjoy having pictures.
I can think of at someone who needs a roadmap. Are you one of those idiots against red light cameras because they infringe on your freedom to do something stupid, dangerous and illegal?
That was 1689. I don't know if you've noticed, but I think the whole "american government" thing has kind of drifted from what was originally intended...
Unless you have unlimited time on your hands, your theory is for shit. I've spent my entire life living in small towns and suburbia. Let's say I have to get from point A to point B where .A and .B are opposite corners of town (we'll assume "town" is a 5km square where most roads have a 50km/h speed limit), but being intrepid, I saunter on down to the bus stop. Unless the bus is there as I walk up, I'm looking at anywhere from a 15-40 minute wait. Let's be generous and say 20.
Now that I'm on the bus and buses generally don't go from .A to .B directly, I now find myself heading towards .C. After arriving at .C, I now have another 15-40 minute wait for another bus. Being conservative, we'll say 20 minutes here too.
Additionally, let's figure there's a bus stop ever half kilometer and each requires a 2 minute layover. We'll also figure buses stop in the dead center of town (they more or less do here), which our friend Pythagorean tells us is a 5km trip. This means that .A -> .C and .C -> .B will run us through 20 bus stops.
What does this mean? I've already wasted an hour of my day and doubled the distance travelled, merely via the underlying clag of taking the bus. This is without figuring in the speed of the bus itself, which will never reach the theoretical 50km/h speed limit due to the logarithmic nature of acceleration/deceleration. Basically double the "infrastructure" time and add (again, being generous) 30 minutes for an inter-city bus to show up and you're at an hour and a half one way, three hours both ways, and being in a bus doesn't make you immune to the correlation between travel time and traffic "fucked"ness. (ie. if I would've sat in traffic for an hour in a car, I'd sit for an hour in traffic in a bus. Actually, probably longer, as a car is more maneuverable, accelerates quicker and can jockey it's way to the front of a disturbance easier than a bus)
Remember, even though they're horrible for the environment and lead to nasty crap like this, there's a reason the planes won.
You need a camera crew simply because a lot of television production includes more unions than you can shake a stick at.
I agree with you wholly on dreading it, I have a vision in my head of something closely resembling the last 45 minutes of Hackers. *shudder*
Also, that one scene in Sneakers would've been pretty boring if Cosmo'd simple had a rack of boring beige boxes.
Seriously? Are you in the same Canada I am?
These days it seems I can't open my mailbox, read a paper or walk down a street without seeing an ad for a DSL provider.
Granted DSL is generally slower than cable, but I quite enjoy my unlimited transfers and next-to-nothing-per-year static IP.
Welcome to 2007 (or 2006, it's an old map), there are 5 companies which have a stranglehold on everything you see and hear, and every one of them has worked hard to convince people that "independent" is merely a budgetary constraint. If you can find a movie that doesn't have one of those logos on them, congrats, you've found a true independent film and not something that's just an audition for the main stream. Bonus points if it's good.
Now all you have to do is convince the general public to not go watch the emotional pablum advertised by pretty people staring at them from every magazine cover and billboard, then convince the juggernaut multiplexes which are mostly owned by studios to show them. If that doesn't work, all you have to do is convince the "premium" cable channels (also owned by the same 5 companies) to throw it into their rotation. To round things out, you'd also have to find a distributor that's not either owned in part by or extremely friendly to those same 5 companies (otherwise you run the risk of your work being "vaulted", which means thrown away until Hollywood can churn out something similar) who'll try their best to convince rental outlets to waste valuable shelf space on it.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for independent media and stifle a slight bit of anger whenever a mom and pop theater closes or Disney releases another High School Musical, but too many people sat by idly while this system built itself for it to be easily stopped.
What else would you expect from the United Corporations of America? I explained this evilness recently to my cousin by likening it to the episode of South Park where Paris Hilton (evil corporate lobby groups, often with 4 letter acronyms) tries to buy Butters (picture Evil Legistation X) and his parents send him to dig for coal in an attempt to raise more than what Paris is offering (campaign donations).
Watching crap like this pass through Slashdot makes me glad I'm Canadian (with "our" DMCA looming on the horizon and the conservatives (read: our republicans) in power, I don't know how much longer that'll last).
Man am I glad my system seems to deal with this problem proactively: The Quicktime plugin crashes anything that contains it almost as soon as it's drawn!
Thank you Apple for protecting me from, well, Apple!
- Waste an assload of money every step of the way to make sure it has an 8 or 9 digit budget
- Make sure news about the latter half of point 1 is leaked
- Throw a bunch of big names into it so people "in the know" will go see it even though it's a piece of crap
- Give out very nice, very expensive (see point #1) gift bags at the premiere so it gets good review
- Plan sequels, hire Saw production team as they seem adept at getting people to watch the same movie over and over again
Wait, that sounds alarmingly like how they work anyways...From TFA:
Until fairly recently they ran this web site on an old version of Red Hat with essentially no outside support.and:
But even if they run RHEL on a mix of two and four socket machines, they're still looking at $50K per year minimum for the privilege of sticking the little red logo on their servers.From what I gather (and I haven't been awake very long, so I might be wrong) they've been maintaining Linux boxes on their own for years (about 5, IIRC Redhat 7.3 came out 2002-ish), and the reason they're ditching Redhat is it costs too much for support they didn't need previously? If I might go on a limb and make a bizarre suggestion: Don't pay it.
They know that the engineering effort at Red Hat costs serious money and that someone has to pay for itI don't really think this is that true. I was under the impression (and unless this is wrong too) RHEL forked off Fedora whenever they feel like it, so in effect (according to this) isn't Fedora just a testbed where people do free QA work for Redhat?
My friend and his staff are Unix veterans, but they are not Linux geeks and they are definitely not the kind to muck around in the innards of their server OS just for the fun of it.So they're UNIX veterans, have been administering Linux systems for years, and they haven't mastered './configure && make && make install'? TFA claims they're LAMP-based, with the exception of the L, I can start on the AMP portion first thing in the morning and have all three upgraded in time for lunch (My day starts at 10, Lunch is noon without fail). Sounds to me like they're just too lazy to upgrade the 2 or 3 dependencies something might have. That's a great reason for ditching a known good and stable kernel, right?
Hell, the first thing I do when I install a new OS is replace their Apache/MySQL/PHP with versions I compile myself (based on known-good versions we use on staging/test servers), that way I know 100% it's going to do what I want and I'm not going to see any crap in my error logs about PHP not loading it's GD extension because I opted not to install X on a server which really doesn't need it.
If they really wanted set-it-and-forget-it why not use Slackware? Or ditch Linux entirely and go to FreeBSD?
Sometimes people hurt my head.
Ever use Windows? I don't think Microsoft is capable of much else.
Those who don't learn from Dark Angel are doomed to repeat it...
Switches? Ignition keys? Everybody knows valves are better ways of shutting down tubes.
r33t. All I can find is this thing that asks me if I'd like to play a game.
True, but after thinking about how a reactor works, he might have an unintended point: You could have some fun dropping all the control rods. It only takes a few seconds for a modern reactor to scram, but they take hours to get going again. Not destructive, but certainly a nuisance.
How long have you been using computers? I've seen "virii" in common use as the plural of "virus" for at least 15 years.
Let me guess, "phreaking" is spelled with an F, right?
How dare you comment on a Windows article using facts? This is Slashdot.
Is this methodology only available to applications retrieved from the ESOPHAGUS (Enterprise Structured Online Pervasive High Availability Generic Universal Storage) network?
According to https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/as.html, Australia only makes 530,000 barrels of oil a day, they're not worth liberating.
Where's the story here?
Someone turns on the "always check my email feature" (which defaults to off, as with every other data using cellular appliance), didn't actually turn the phone off, then complained when their standing by phone did exactly what they'd set it to do. You are the weakest link, good bye.
On a side note, does anybody else think Slashdot's going downhill? More and more I'm finding TFAs are nothing more than a half page write up with as much concrete information as a modern election campaign. Even worse when they're a blog entry and you have to follow a link there to actually get somewhere. What gives??!?
I can understand where Adobe's coming from. I mean, didn't anybody ever stop and think "Okay, maybe naming this thing Killustrator isn't the best of ideas?"
Don't get me wrong, I support free software and am against companies budding in and ruining things, but just because they're a for-profit non-open-source company doesn't mean they're automatically wrong, nor does it mean they should ignore someone violating (I'm assuming) a copyright they own.