The expression is "beating a dead horse". "Beating" can be taken at face value, or as something more naughty. Generally, when you accuse someone of "beating a dead horse", you mean it as a put-down, and especially in a context like the SCO saga, the more offensive the better, yes? Hence, "sadonecrobestiality". (plus it's fun to type)
If they really wanted to be helpful, they could publish the secret checksum algorithm that the software uses to validate the key, so users could compute the correct character instead of having to guess it.
(slightly more) Seriously, are they trying to help us educate people about the reasons to be annoyed by DRM?
Look people. Quit equating "piracy" as in "Arrrgh, matey. Ye be walkin the plank!" with "piracy" as in "I downloaded the latest Adobe Photoshop without paying for it!". They are spelled the same, but they aren't the same word (you know, a homonym).
It is the same word, but with two very different meanings. The word was chosen in order to create an association in people's minds between copyright infringement and one of the most despicable types of crime known at the time. If the phenomenon of copyright infringement were only now beginning, and in need of a catchy name, they'd be calling it "terrorism", and arguing that PATRIOT Act powers should be invoked for copyright enforcement. This matters. Arrrrr.
And when you get to space and arrive at the Japanese Sky Deck, you can eat very expensive steak, while being entertained by a Max Headroom stylized recreation of David Hasselhoff, and groped by Hentai-motivated space-whores.
In fact, forget the David Hasselhoff!... And the Sky Deck!
I don't think acting out of a perceived need of self preservation is how I would define cowardice.
No, but being too quick to "perceive" such a need -- that's cowardice.
(Over-re)acting out of all proportion to the severity of the threat -- that's cowardice.
Letting it skew your priorities to the point that you neglect to protect yourself against other (less dramatic but equally or more important) dangers -- that's not only cowardice, it's stupid and makes you less safe.
Allowing your rights to be violated whenever the administration says "Grant us this expanded executive power, or we'll let the terrorists kill you" -- that's cowardice.
While true, the only unfinished book that Douglas left around was The Salmon of Doubt - a Dirk Gently book. Admittedly there were some theories that it could become a HHGG book, but reading the manuscript as is (pick up The Salmon of Doubt if you haven't already for the last bit of Douglas greatness) it's just not possible to see where the plot is going.
Wasn't Adams himself was the originator of that theory? It's been a while since I read The Salmon of Doubt, but I seem to recall that in one of the commentaries, he said he'd started writing it as a Dirk Gently book, but along the way he felt like it was trying to turn into a Hitchhiker book. I don't know what, if any, additional notes he left regarding where he was going to go with that, and TFA didn't mention whether or not this project would be based on Salmon. Belgium!
Am I the only one who shouted that out in the theater at the scene in Matrix 3, when Agent Smith was using Trinity as a human shield in a hostage-faceoff with Neo?
Because, in the absence of such complaints, reusing the shuttle booster system is incredibly *smart*
It might seem that way at first glance, but remember that the parts of the shuttle were designed to work together when put together as the shuttle. For example, excess vibrations from the solid rocket boosters [...]
There's also the whole O-ring issue, but I guess that can be solved by operating the thing within its design parameters. (Amazing how many engineering issues that can be said of).
What I've been wondering (not a rocket scientist) is, what additional complications/issues might be introduced by changing from 4 segments to 5? Seems if we wanted to really get the maximum design re-use, we should use exactly the same SRB. If the 4-segment SSRB doesn't have the lift capacity we need, we could use two of them and have that much more payload capacity. We're already used to using two of them in tandem, and it occurs to me that the connector struts would be an easy place to add vibration-dampening bits. 'Zat make any sense?
Grandpa? Well, at least you're no longer accusing me of having bought this account. If I'd had any intention of selling it when I created it, would I have used my full name? Besides, for my first couple years on/., we didn't even have accounts -- we had to paste in our name, email, and sig every time... AND WE LIKED IT! (And the only reason my ID is so high is that, the right to anonymity being one of the big political arguments we had going at the time when they introduced accounts, I held out for a few months before creating one.) Now get off my lawn!
Slashdot Mirror
All we need is a million-ton olive, and our martini will be complete!
That explains sooooo much.
See Fig. 1
The expression is "beating a dead horse". "Beating" can be taken at face value, or as something more naughty. Generally, when you accuse someone of "beating a dead horse", you mean it as a put-down, and especially in a context like the SCO saga, the more offensive the better, yes? Hence, "sadonecrobestiality". (plus it's fun to type)
I don't know the source of this quote, but it seems relevant:
"There is nothing in human experience compared with which sendmail.cf could be considered 'simple'."
I'll be sticking with my default tag for all SCO stories: "sadonecrobestiality".
the governor, citing that the issue was of paramount import for stealth in the imminent rise of the machines, vetoed
There we go, fixed that for you.
Not quite: s/governor/Governator/
Now it's fixed.
Well, she has a LiveJournal. But she hasn't posted in almost two and a half years. What's up with that?
There is even one for if the LHC has destroyed the world or not!
For tracking it, I suggest the RSS feed.
Hey, it hasn't updated since... Oct. 16! OH, CRAP!!!
Marklar!
How did you figure Microsoft won the browser wars? In 2002 IE5 and IE6 had around 85% of the browser market. In 2008, IE7 and IE6 have under 50%.
Simple: the Browser Wars officially ended in 2002, at which time MS was in the dominant position. Mission Accomplished!
If they really wanted to be helpful, they could publish the secret checksum algorithm that the software uses to validate the key, so users could compute the correct character instead of having to guess it.
(slightly more) Seriously, are they trying to help us educate people about the reasons to be annoyed by DRM?
What's the difference between something not existing, and something existing but being impossible to detect?
Twelve.
Look people. Quit equating "piracy" as in "Arrrgh, matey. Ye be walkin the plank!" with "piracy" as in "I downloaded the latest Adobe Photoshop without paying for it!". They are spelled the same, but they aren't the same word (you know, a homonym).
It is the same word, but with two very different meanings. The word was chosen in order to create an association in people's minds between copyright infringement and one of the most despicable types of crime known at the time. If the phenomenon of copyright infringement were only now beginning, and in need of a catchy name, they'd be calling it "terrorism", and arguing that PATRIOT Act powers should be invoked for copyright enforcement. This matters. Arrrrr.
that's exactly what happens in real piracy - someone puts a music track/movie/book/etc. online with the intent that other people download it.
No, what happens in "real piracy" is that the pirates attack a ship on the high seas, rape/murder the crew/passengers, and steal the cargo.
That's okay. It's not the end of the world if it's not the end of the world.
(from V3, can't find the exact strip)
Yeah, pretty much.
And when you get to space and arrive at the Japanese Sky Deck, you can eat very expensive steak, while being entertained by a Max Headroom stylized recreation of David Hasselhoff, and groped by Hentai-motivated space-whores.
In fact, forget the David Hasselhoff! ... And the Sky Deck!
I don't think acting out of a perceived need of self preservation is how I would define cowardice.
No, but being too quick to "perceive" such a need -- that's cowardice.
(Over-re)acting out of all proportion to the severity of the threat -- that's cowardice.
Letting it skew your priorities to the point that you neglect to protect yourself against other (less dramatic but equally or more important) dangers -- that's not only cowardice, it's stupid and makes you less safe.
Allowing your rights to be violated whenever the administration says "Grant us this expanded executive power, or we'll let the terrorists kill you" -- that's cowardice.
Does that clear anything up?
While true, the only unfinished book that Douglas left around was The Salmon of Doubt - a Dirk Gently book. Admittedly there were some theories that it could become a HHGG book, but reading the manuscript as is (pick up The Salmon of Doubt if you haven't already for the last bit of Douglas greatness) it's just not possible to see where the plot is going.
Wasn't Adams himself was the originator of that theory? It's been a while since I read The Salmon of Doubt, but I seem to recall that in one of the commentaries, he said he'd started writing it as a Dirk Gently book, but along the way he felt like it was trying to turn into a Hitchhiker book. I don't know what, if any, additional notes he left regarding where he was going to go with that, and TFA didn't mention whether or not this project would be based on Salmon. Belgium!
Am I the only one who shouted that out in the theater at the scene in Matrix 3, when Agent Smith was using Trinity as a human shield in a hostage-faceoff with Neo?
Because, in the absence of such complaints, reusing the shuttle booster system is incredibly *smart*
It might seem that way at first glance, but remember that the parts of the shuttle were designed to work together when put together as the shuttle. For example, excess vibrations from the solid rocket boosters [...]
There's also the whole O-ring issue, but I guess that can be solved by operating the thing within its design parameters. (Amazing how many engineering issues that can be said of).
What I've been wondering (not a rocket scientist) is, what additional complications/issues might be introduced by changing from 4 segments to 5? Seems if we wanted to really get the maximum design re-use, we should use exactly the same SRB. If the 4-segment SSRB doesn't have the lift capacity we need, we could use two of them and have that much more payload capacity. We're already used to using two of them in tandem, and it occurs to me that the connector struts would be an easy place to add vibration-dampening bits. 'Zat make any sense?
Grandpa? Well, at least you're no longer accusing me of having bought this account. If I'd had any intention of selling it when I created it, would I have used my full name? Besides, for my first couple years on /., we didn't even have accounts -- we had to paste in our name, email, and sig every time... AND WE LIKED IT! (And the only reason my ID is so high is that, the right to anonymity being one of the big political arguments we had going at the time when they introduced accounts, I held out for a few months before creating one.) Now get off my lawn!
You must have bought that low UID on craigslist.
Guess again. But even yours seems low enough that you should understand the term "Whoosh!"
Besides, what has Bill Gates got to do with Microsoft? He doesn't even work there!