The wacky shit that Scientologists are taught to believe is no more wacky than the shit Christians are taught to believe in.
In regards to fraud, the only difference is that the Christians have been around longer, so the only lies they tell are the ones that are not verifiably false.
The Nazis invaded their neighbors to reform the greater Germany. The ideology was simply that all these neighboring countries are full of Germans who are suffering under the tyranny of non-German governments. If you'd studied history at all you'd know that. If the people inside these countries had thought of the Nazis the same way the allies did, the war would have been over pretty quickly (btw, it wasn't). "The resistance" wasn't a lot of people.. it wasn't the majority.. it was a small bunch of rebels. If Germany had won the war you'd be referring to them as terrorists.
Yes, I ignored your 3 laws question.. sorry. I thought it was too silly to warrant a response. Obviously no-one who makes armed robots for warfare is going to make them 3 laws safe (quite apart from the fact that it was a literary device, sheesh).
It's simple, as robot technology matures, armed robots will appear on the battlefield.. they will be programmed to determine friend from foe and carry out specific missions. Maybe it will indeed be like playing a game of C&C.. but that's irrelevant.. you asked what the point was of that. I told you what the point is; specifically, you use your robot army to kill their robot army, and then their regular army, then anyone that resists, so the people who are cowering in fear will believe what you tell them.
This isn't some new "Cyber Warfare" idea. This is what wars are about, it's what they've always been about.
I can't believe people can actually ask these questions with a straight face. It's like we've all forgotten how a military dictatorship works.
Ya don't invade your neighboring country to kill everyone (ok, maybe you do if you're in Africa).. you invade your neighboring country to dominate them, remove their ability to fight back, then take control of their government and their media and rule them. That's why, in this day and age, the first thing to go in a war would be access to the Internet. If you can control everything a dominated people see and hear then you can easily convince them that they are better off following you than fighting you. When dissenting opinions are quashed the masses quickly fall into line.
So what are wars about? They're about stopping an invader from controlling the information. Even in our highly digital world you still need to have physical dominance over a country to maintain that kind of control. If people can freely travel across borders then they can bring with them information which you can't control. So you build a wall.. and put guards on it to shoot anyone who tries to cross without your permission. You build an air force and shoot down any planes that try to come into your airspace. Same for a navy and the coastline.
Wars are not "competitions". You don't send your most strapping men to kill their most strapping men, in the snappiest uniforms you can design, and then do a body count to determine the winner. You win by controlling the terms that everyone uses to refer to what happened. The war isn't over when everyone stops fighting. If you are seen as a "liberator" who is now fighting "insurgents" then the war is over.. you won.
War is ugly. It's the ugliest thing there is. Cause it's not about killing them.. it's about forcing your point of view down their throat.
You can build your own version of the Raven drone, which is a widely used military drone, for about $1,000.
You mean this? Raven Drone. Umm.. maybe you could build the airframe for under $1000.. or at least something that looks like it. I seriously doubt you could get the radio control equipment, let alone the camera or milspec GPS receivers (which cost $10k each and you have to justify why you want them and promise not to export them).
If the book is as accurate as this interview, I think I'll just read fiction.
Um, in case you haven't realized it the USA is not fully free market, if it had been then these things wouldn't have happened. A free market wouldn't be tied down to union wages, sure, unions could exist, but laws preventing you from firing striking workers, non-union workers working, etc. wouldn't happen.
You just described India - the most capitalist nation on earth - and still one of the poorest.
No it doesn't. Give me a single example how in a fully free market someone messing up so badly ends up hurting everyone.
Gee, I don't know, how about the continual boom and bust of coffee in Brazil before regulation?
I'm a big free market capitalist.. but the fact is that the market is game-able, and so people game it.
Heh.. that certainly sounds like a good theory. But personally I think it was because it was significantly more effort to move around large amounts of data (a whole game) vs a small amount of data (the demo). The reasons being:
1. Modems were slow (even slower than they are now). 2. We all still used floppy disks.
Demos were often exactly 1 floppy disk. The whole game was often many more.
That, and the fact that the guys who made these games were totally awesome people and you didn't want them to go broke and stop making games. There was an actual cult of personality in shareware.. whereas retail games (as much back then as now) are made by big business who can go spin. That's the way the small-tribe-logic of the brain works.
In June 2005, J. Craig Venter co-founded Synthetic Genomics, a firm dedicated to using modified microorganisms to produce clean fuels and biochemicals.
Ok, it's been 4 years, do you have any progress to show us or what? I mean, if ya gunna pick such a topical issue to found a company on, you've gotta at least give us a time line.
Looking at the web site it's pretty clear that this is still the hype that they're pushing... so where is it? 10 years away? 20? Is this the new fusion?
The part where he makes a distinction between the control parts of DGA vs the video parts and you don't. Wow, ya really gotta spell shit out for some people.
Umm.. bullshit. I've had patches accepted that were definitely not the "right way".. they were stubs that did "return 0" for an entire function.. no-one could possibly say that's the right way to do it.. Why? Because *any* solution is better than a broken app. The user doesn't care about the intricate interplay of X11 and kernel to control they frame buffer, they just want their game to work.
Never let the best or perfect be the enemy of the good enough.
If you're personally capable of fixing it then I recommend you do the following:
1. Make a good patch. 2. Post to the mailing list with "Fix for [name of the game] mouse issue". Do not mention any other previous work or discussion that has been done on this bug. 3. Wait for someone to review your patch and fix anything they want fixed. 4. Ignore anyone who says your patch is no good or that it is already fixed, or whatever.
The guy who reviewed it in 3 has already taken your patch.. he will not take it out of his tree unless you respond to the people in 4, he will simply write them off as nah-sayers who haven't written any code.. if you, a person who has written code to fix a bug, can ignore them, then so can he.
In the next point release your patch will appear, along with your name, enjoy being on the contributors list.
Just submit your patches and do any fix ups that they request.. if you submit too much, they won't review it at all.. so don't do that!
After that, if they don't want your code, it's their loss. The great thing about git hosted projects is that anyone can merge in your changes with ease. In the case of WINE, the best way to get your patches noticed is to say FIXES [APP NAME] in the subject line and actually address a real bug witnessed in a real program that people actually use.
Other than that, hey, welcome to the politics of open source development.
"idiot proof" doesn't mean what you think it does either. That's the thing about words.. they have meanings that are assigned by people who use them and cannot be deciphered by those "not in the know". The term tamper-proof is thrown around a lot but it has a meaning.. specifically that if you tamper with it, it'll stop working, so you can't tamper with it anymore, or even cause guys with guns to come stop you from tampering with it.
Of course, some people are of the belief that if you can't make something 100% secure that you shouldn't even try. I think that's retarded. If you can make it difficult to attack or make it obvious that someone has attacked it, you should.
Well, just to get this out of the way.. this is bullshit. And dear god when did Slashdot become Digg?
Anyway, I think the comments are more interesting, especially this one:
From Inner Loop Realtor:
Y'know about 3 years ago I was mugged in the Hobby Airport parking garage. I told them at the time that they needed cameras in the garage. This is typical of bureaucratic idiocy. Meanwhile, watch your back.
1. I thought Houston was in Texas.. why weren't you packing? Defend yourself asshole. 2. Ya know that security cameras are completely useless for identifying people, right? I mean, if *you* couldn't identify the guy, then how is a security camera gunna help? You don't actually believe that "we zoomed in and cleaned it up a bit" shit that you see on 24, right? 3. Has anyone ever done a study (a real study) of the effectiveness of security cameras at preventing crime? Any sort of crime. 4. It's this kind of knee jerk "we need more surveillance" reaction that the DHS contractors are banking on. You are the problem.
Walmart would have a very short period of exclusivity.
Indeed. The publishing world would become segregated into two types: first publishers and secondary publishers. Over time, the period between first release and secondary publishing would diminish. First publishers could only counter this by embracing technology.. I imagine they'll do personalized delivery of watermarked serialized preorders at significantly hirer cost. People who want first editions will pay that premium.
Slashdot Mirror
Try attending church regularly and never donating a cent. Watch how the other people treat you.
The wacky shit that Scientologists are taught to believe is no more wacky than the shit Christians are taught to believe in.
In regards to fraud, the only difference is that the Christians have been around longer, so the only lies they tell are the ones that are not verifiably false.
umm.. I believe I said exactly that. And went on to say how terrible war is. Check your reading comprehension, it's down.
The Nazis invaded their neighbors to reform the greater Germany. The ideology was simply that all these neighboring countries are full of Germans who are suffering under the tyranny of non-German governments. If you'd studied history at all you'd know that. If the people inside these countries had thought of the Nazis the same way the allies did, the war would have been over pretty quickly (btw, it wasn't). "The resistance" wasn't a lot of people.. it wasn't the majority.. it was a small bunch of rebels. If Germany had won the war you'd be referring to them as terrorists.
Yes, I ignored your 3 laws question.. sorry. I thought it was too silly to warrant a response. Obviously no-one who makes armed robots for warfare is going to make them 3 laws safe (quite apart from the fact that it was a literary device, sheesh).
It's simple, as robot technology matures, armed robots will appear on the battlefield.. they will be programmed to determine friend from foe and carry out specific missions. Maybe it will indeed be like playing a game of C&C.. but that's irrelevant.. you asked what the point was of that. I told you what the point is; specifically, you use your robot army to kill their robot army, and then their regular army, then anyone that resists, so the people who are cowering in fear will believe what you tell them.
This isn't some new "Cyber Warfare" idea. This is what wars are about, it's what they've always been about.
Umm.. where are you getting this "stock model airplane" for $150... let alone one that can lift a phone. Put down the crack pipe.
I can't believe people can actually ask these questions with a straight face. It's like we've all forgotten how a military dictatorship works.
Ya don't invade your neighboring country to kill everyone (ok, maybe you do if you're in Africa).. you invade your neighboring country to dominate them, remove their ability to fight back, then take control of their government and their media and rule them. That's why, in this day and age, the first thing to go in a war would be access to the Internet. If you can control everything a dominated people see and hear then you can easily convince them that they are better off following you than fighting you. When dissenting opinions are quashed the masses quickly fall into line.
So what are wars about? They're about stopping an invader from controlling the information. Even in our highly digital world you still need to have physical dominance over a country to maintain that kind of control. If people can freely travel across borders then they can bring with them information which you can't control. So you build a wall.. and put guards on it to shoot anyone who tries to cross without your permission. You build an air force and shoot down any planes that try to come into your airspace. Same for a navy and the coastline.
Wars are not "competitions". You don't send your most strapping men to kill their most strapping men, in the snappiest uniforms you can design, and then do a body count to determine the winner. You win by controlling the terms that everyone uses to refer to what happened. The war isn't over when everyone stops fighting. If you are seen as a "liberator" who is now fighting "insurgents" then the war is over.. you won.
War is ugly. It's the ugliest thing there is. Cause it's not about killing them.. it's about forcing your point of view down their throat.
You can build your own version of the Raven drone, which is a widely used military drone, for about $1,000.
You mean this? Raven Drone. Umm.. maybe you could build the airframe for under $1000.. or at least something that looks like it. I seriously doubt you could get the radio control equipment, let alone the camera or milspec GPS receivers (which cost $10k each and you have to justify why you want them and promise not to export them).
If the book is as accurate as this interview, I think I'll just read fiction.
Um, in case you haven't realized it the USA is not fully free market, if it had been then these things wouldn't have happened. A free market wouldn't be tied down to union wages, sure, unions could exist, but laws preventing you from firing striking workers, non-union workers working, etc. wouldn't happen.
You just described India - the most capitalist nation on earth - and still one of the poorest.
No it doesn't. Give me a single example how in a fully free market someone messing up so badly ends up hurting everyone.
Gee, I don't know, how about the continual boom and bust of coffee in Brazil before regulation?
I'm a big free market capitalist.. but the fact is that the market is game-able, and so people game it.
Can't it be both?
Heh.. that certainly sounds like a good theory. But personally I think it was because it was significantly more effort to move around large amounts of data (a whole game) vs a small amount of data (the demo). The reasons being:
1. Modems were slow (even slower than they are now).
2. We all still used floppy disks.
Demos were often exactly 1 floppy disk. The whole game was often many more.
That, and the fact that the guys who made these games were totally awesome people and you didn't want them to go broke and stop making games. There was an actual cult of personality in shareware.. whereas retail games (as much back then as now) are made by big business who can go spin. That's the way the small-tribe-logic of the brain works.
Ya know why they were affordable? Because they were leased, at a loss, from the manufacturer.
In June 2005, J. Craig Venter co-founded Synthetic Genomics, a firm dedicated to using modified microorganisms to produce clean fuels and biochemicals.
Ok, it's been 4 years, do you have any progress to show us or what? I mean, if ya gunna pick such a topical issue to found a company on, you've gotta at least give us a time line.
Looking at the web site it's pretty clear that this is still the hype that they're pushing... so where is it? 10 years away? 20? Is this the new fusion?
Dear god. If you're gunna troll, at least get the URL right: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ
ha. LISP is pre-parsed.. as in, you're programming in the god damn intermediate language. () does not a syntax make.
The part where he makes a distinction between the control parts of DGA vs the video parts and you don't. Wow, ya really gotta spell shit out for some people.
For some reason I think you just made his point for him.
Thank you ex-Amiga user. BTW, how did that work out for you?
Umm.. bullshit. I've had patches accepted that were definitely not the "right way".. they were stubs that did "return 0" for an entire function.. no-one could possibly say that's the right way to do it.. Why? Because *any* solution is better than a broken app. The user doesn't care about the intricate interplay of X11 and kernel to control they frame buffer, they just want their game to work.
Never let the best or perfect be the enemy of the good enough.
Can you name one of these games that needs it?
If you're personally capable of fixing it then I recommend you do the following:
1. Make a good patch.
2. Post to the mailing list with "Fix for [name of the game] mouse issue". Do not mention any other previous work or discussion that has been done on this bug.
3. Wait for someone to review your patch and fix anything they want fixed.
4. Ignore anyone who says your patch is no good or that it is already fixed, or whatever.
The guy who reviewed it in 3 has already taken your patch.. he will not take it out of his tree unless you respond to the people in 4, he will simply write them off as nah-sayers who haven't written any code.. if you, a person who has written code to fix a bug, can ignore them, then so can he.
In the next point release your patch will appear, along with your name, enjoy being on the contributors list.
package the result with a copy of WINE
Or as a package that depends on WINE.. preferably with WINE broken up into smaller packages that you can dep to individually.
Just submit your patches and do any fix ups that they request.. if you submit too much, they won't review it at all.. so don't do that!
After that, if they don't want your code, it's their loss. The great thing about git hosted projects is that anyone can merge in your changes with ease. In the case of WINE, the best way to get your patches noticed is to say FIXES [APP NAME] in the subject line and actually address a real bug witnessed in a real program that people actually use.
Other than that, hey, welcome to the politics of open source development.
"idiot proof" doesn't mean what you think it does either. That's the thing about words.. they have meanings that are assigned by people who use them and cannot be deciphered by those "not in the know". The term tamper-proof is thrown around a lot but it has a meaning.. specifically that if you tamper with it, it'll stop working, so you can't tamper with it anymore, or even cause guys with guns to come stop you from tampering with it.
Of course, some people are of the belief that if you can't make something 100% secure that you shouldn't even try. I think that's retarded. If you can make it difficult to attack or make it obvious that someone has attacked it, you should.
Well, just to get this out of the way.. this is bullshit. And dear god when did Slashdot become Digg?
Anyway, I think the comments are more interesting, especially this one:
From Inner Loop Realtor:
Y'know about 3 years ago I was mugged in the Hobby Airport parking garage. I told them at the time that they needed cameras in the garage. This is typical of bureaucratic idiocy. Meanwhile, watch your back.
1. I thought Houston was in Texas.. why weren't you packing? Defend yourself asshole.
2. Ya know that security cameras are completely useless for identifying people, right? I mean, if *you* couldn't identify the guy, then how is a security camera gunna help? You don't actually believe that "we zoomed in and cleaned it up a bit" shit that you see on 24, right?
3. Has anyone ever done a study (a real study) of the effectiveness of security cameras at preventing crime? Any sort of crime.
4. It's this kind of knee jerk "we need more surveillance" reaction that the DHS contractors are banking on. You are the problem.
Walmart would have a very short period of exclusivity.
Indeed. The publishing world would become segregated into two types: first publishers and secondary publishers. Over time, the period between first release and secondary publishing would diminish. First publishers could only counter this by embracing technology.. I imagine they'll do personalized delivery of watermarked serialized preorders at significantly hirer cost. People who want first editions will pay that premium.