he's talking about the following type:
$i++ if ($i > 0);
which I like - I normally prefer reading it that way than if ($i > 0) { $i ++; } which would be the "standard" way of writing it.
Laz
Are you allowed to reverse engineer something to prove your innocence (or at least prove the possibility of your innocence) if such reverse engineering is against the DMCA?
I'm more interested in knowing this: if you can prove that a method of controlling access is not "effective", or whatever wording they used in the DMCA, does that mean the law's no longer applicable? Then, this thing doesn't seem to effectively control access to data, since they claim it was easily circumvented...
That's because often it IS Logitech, rebranded. At least, that's what I've always heard.
Can't be. Logitech still hasn't figured out how to put buttons on a trackball;) Note the Microsoft Trackball Explorer and Logitech semi-equivalent. The MS one has two buttons for fingers, three and scroll for thumb. This gets set up by X to be left is down click, scroll properly, ring is mid pinky is right. Logitech has one fingers button.
What you are describing is the pretty much the way the first season went. One of the best things about "Buffy" is that it's evolved considerably. Virtually all of the characters have become "real people".
Hell, even the bad guys evolve over time and eventually the watcher can see some of the reasons why they did whatever they did. Look at the geek guy from the trio (the short one)... he's actually been in the show as a recurring character since season 1.
Um... forgive me if I'm mistaken, but it seems to be that there are pure OGL datafiles for free still on SF. This means that it's more useful than it has been for a while, since the recent data sets didn't have things like page numbers etc. while these would have descriptions (haven't checked myself yet)...
Just a note here: remember that the Two Towers is *not* a movie in and of itself... it is the middle section of exposition in the work that is The Lord of the Rings.
There is only one weak point of the Two Towers that I saw: Arwen. Yup, Arwen. Horrible actress, not as hot as Eowyn (not supposed to be that way)... and just bad scenes all in all.
Now, you need to remember this: this is *not* a movie. The movie is the 9-12 hour beast that is called "The Lord of the Rings", *not* "The Two Towers". As such, it is a weaker element since it doesn't have a beginning or an end, but just a constant state of in-between.
Also, the way I tend to look at the movies is that it's a film adaptation of history... traditionally, filmmakers have taken liberties with history, and as such, I see that this is the "Dramatic Version" of what happened and the books are the "Actual Events" edition.
So, what makes this a bad movie in your oppinion is the in-betweenness and the dramatification (not really dramatization - fiddling with the details until it's dramatic enough)? And maybe Arwen? And what they did to Gimli? or, is it the fact that most reviewers don't see this as the middle part of a movie?
Ok, this has gotten rantish, but one last question:
Can you name a movie where the middle section (after the introduction of characters etc and before climax/resolution) holds up as good as or better? Think, like, acts 2.5-3 in a Shakespear tragedy template.
And I bet they'll find yet another place for the much-malinged backslash key!
I'm seriously thinking of getting another keyboard for my laptop for the sole reason that the \ key is between and...
The only reason for this, of course, is that LaTeX uses that key quite often, and notes in class need to be typed faster than:
need command, so press somewhere around the backslash key
oops... pressed... stupid vim for entering......
oops... also hit numlock... take that off
repeat
Now, the only thing keeping me from the extra keyboard, for the sole reason of the backslash, is that I'd need to cart it to school.
I wish someone would figure out where to put it properly... and not even the X11 dvorak keyboard moves it... (nevermind that I'm on QWERTY right now...)
MIKE
Re:You misunderstand completely
on
E ~ mc^2
·
· Score: 1
How do you tell something that's designed from something that wasn't?
To use Robert Sawyer's argument from Calculating God (a novel - read it; it's worth it even if you are fundamentalist religious or fundamentalist scientist), consider the ``Game of Life'':
There are a few rules to the game that are set up beforehand (that I don't quite remember) - something along the lines of if there is an unoccupied square beside one that is it becomes occupied... and a few others to guide it.
There are just a few rules set about. Now, the interesting thing is that the program develops into predictable patters. That certainly wansn't designed.
Now, given those results and the fact that there were rules in the first place, then *someone* (read: whoever invented that thing) set those rules in the first place.
As I believe it to be, God is the being that set up the rules for our Universe. We have the rules right? How are they what they are?
Therefore, to me, science and religion can coexist peacefully.
Well, a scientist would answer a), that an unseen force, etc. Since that is a theory that can be tested, and that has predictive and explanatory power. God figuratively pulling stuff out of his cosmic hat, hasn't. It fails the "adequatly explains" of the "two theories that adequatly explains...".
As a science student (well, computer science... ) *and* a Christian (yes, I *can* be both... read on), I prefer to see it as a combination answer between a) and b):
God set the rules that the Universe plays by and the Universe went and played by those rules... if God did not set the rules, who/what did? And since something must have set those rules, then couldn't that something be considered to be God?
Jesus, if they are ghostwritten, then somebody ought to have told him to hire a better fucking ghostwriter. I mean, have you read any of these books? I just assumed he really wrote them, as they are pretty fucking terrible, and any real writer would have done better.
I just kinda assumed he wrote them since they are written sort of like how he talks (at least as Kirk).
When people lost religion, they lost morality, pure and simlple.
The majority of people have not got the integrity or the energy to devise their own morality; their own values for actions and things do not exist ab initio.
Personally, I like paraphrasing Jesus for this kind of thinking...
Jesus was asked one time (by I think one of the priests, but I could be wrong) whether the Samaritans, who did not have the Law if they could get into Heaven.
Guess what Jesus said? He said that the Samaritan who has lived as a good person (by definition of the Jewish Laws) has a better chance of getting into Heaven than a Jew who has not followed the Laws.
Why did he say that? Because if you can be a person without being told, it doesn't matter if you know how to live your life or not. Moral: be a good person. That's it. There's no more to do.
This thing gives an impression of a website that is being run by a teenager who had smoked pot a lot and still does. This also gives the image of a teenager to his software. It would be much more appropriate for him to appear at a pro-pot website than to attach this theme to a linux/games/open-source website.
It's his life with his games. you can ignore him if you want. he's just some private coder who writes games and smokes pot. doesn't mean his games aren't any good or that playing his games supports his habit.
I personally feel that pot should be legalized and normal cigarettes banned. (I don't smoke either of them, tho) marijuana (I believe, I don't have support) is less dangerous than tobacco cigarettes, yet we let those go on.
And alcohol. Plus, if countries legalized pot, then they'd get 1) more jail space 2) more court space 3) (and here's the big one) more money. Think about #3 for a minute: in normal smokes, the gov't gets tax money. Why wouldn't they just distribute pot the same way with the same restrictions? (note: I don't smoke pot - already stated - nor do I ever intend on smoking it)
Care to explain to the regular user how to uninstall a Linux app that uses its own custom install script?
rm -r/path/to/app doesn't uninstall enough for you? maybe rpm -e package or the equivalent apt-get remove (I think that's right... I haven't used debian yet). Whatabout make uninstall? or seeing if there is a path/to/app/uninstall script (as in OOo, or loki)
In windows, most programs register an uninstall app, but some don't and some just don't uninstall. and thanx to that d*mned registry, just deleting the apps will clutter.
Multiple desktops are such an obvious advantage that I can't believe they aren't as prevalent as overlapping windows. Its all about being able to categorize when I organize. I am amazed that this wouldn't be considered obvious.
The only problem here is that it isn't obvious until you use it (I can attest to that... my first multiple desktop experience was Solaris CDE and even though I hated almost everything about it, I loved that). I know a guy that got quickly hooked on linux (but for some reason kept wiping it) and his biggest problem going back and forth between Win and Lin is that windows only had one desktop!
Does the EFF think that you should be able to obtain artist's work and not pay any money?
pro'lly what it is is that a lot of people have that as their goal and the EFF is attempting to show that you can't do it (unless the band wants you too).
That's what I don't get. YOU'VE ALWAYS BEEN ABLE TO GET CHEAP HARDWARE. Why this whole crap about the "Windows Tax". Its a lie, a myth!
What if I just want to buy a complete (near)top machine? I *must* buy a copy of Windows (& usually other stuff too) just so I can get my hardware. Some of these machines double in price when you introduce Win into the equation... but I run Linux! I don't need Win, but most often if I buy a complete machine I buy win too.
that was a bit rambling, but I hope my point came accross.
those times are bullshit. redhat takes 1minute to boot (even to X) on pretty much any hardware i've seen. ditto for XP and DOS. i cant speak for GEOS.
On my box (RH 7.2.92, Celeron Processor @ 366 MHz, lots of ram, HD etc.) it takes roughly 5 minutes, but that's due to about 3-4 minutes of ram testing - 384 MB testing at about 4MB/(every few) s is a long time.
Slashdot Mirror
he's talking about the following type: $i++ if ($i > 0); which I like - I normally prefer reading it that way than if ($i > 0) { $i ++; } which would be the "standard" way of writing it. Laz
One wonders, what language would have been used?
No doubt, they used LOGO
Nah, they'd write it in Machine language, of course
Are you allowed to reverse engineer something to prove your innocence (or at least prove the possibility of your innocence) if such reverse engineering is against the DMCA?
I'm more interested in knowing this: if you can prove that a method of controlling access is not "effective", or whatever wording they used in the DMCA, does that mean the law's no longer applicable? Then, this thing doesn't seem to effectively control access to data, since they claim it was easily circumvented...
So, thoughts?
MIKE
That's because often it IS Logitech, rebranded. At least, that's what I've always heard.
;) Note the Microsoft Trackball Explorer and Logitech semi-equivalent. The MS one has two buttons for fingers, three and scroll for thumb. This gets set up by X to be left is down click, scroll properly, ring is mid pinky is right. Logitech has one fingers button.
Can't be. Logitech still hasn't figured out how to put buttons on a trackball
MIKE
as soon as it was obvious that SMG was too old to be a high school student.
Hence, that brief stint with Buffy in college, and now with Buffy having a job at the HS.
MIKE
What you are describing is the pretty much the way the first season went. One of the best things about "Buffy" is that it's evolved considerably. Virtually all of the characters have become "real people".
... he's actually been in the show as a recurring character since season 1.
Hell, even the bad guys evolve over time and eventually the watcher can see some of the reasons why they did whatever they did. Look at the geek guy from the trio (the short one)
MIKE
Example (the only one I can think of right now, but I'm sure others will add...):
The zombies episode -
Giles (ironic): "See my mask? Isn't it pretty? it raises the dead. *sigh* Americans"
Um... forgive me if I'm mistaken, but it seems to be that there are pure OGL datafiles for free still on SF. This means that it's more useful than it has been for a while, since the recent data sets didn't have things like page numbers etc. while these would have descriptions (haven't checked myself yet)...
MIKE
Just a note here: remember that the Two Towers is *not* a movie in and of itself ... it is the middle section of exposition in the work that is The Lord of the Rings.
... and just bad scenes all in all.
... traditionally, filmmakers have taken liberties with history, and as such, I see that this is the "Dramatic Version" of what happened and the books are the "Actual Events" edition.
There is only one weak point of the Two Towers that I saw: Arwen. Yup, Arwen. Horrible actress, not as hot as Eowyn (not supposed to be that way)
Now, you need to remember this: this is *not* a movie. The movie is the 9-12 hour beast that is called "The Lord of the Rings", *not* "The Two Towers". As such, it is a weaker element since it doesn't have a beginning or an end, but just a constant state of in-between.
Also, the way I tend to look at the movies is that it's a film adaptation of history
So, what makes this a bad movie in your oppinion is the in-betweenness and the dramatification (not really dramatization - fiddling with the details until it's dramatic enough)? And maybe Arwen? And what they did to Gimli? or, is it the fact that most reviewers don't see this as the middle part of a movie?
Ok, this has gotten rantish, but one last question:
Can you name a movie where the middle section (after the introduction of characters etc and before climax/resolution) holds up as good as or better? Think, like, acts 2.5-3 in a Shakespear tragedy template.
MIKE
I'm seriously thinking of getting another keyboard for my laptop for the sole reason that the \ key is between and
The only reason for this, of course, is that LaTeX uses that key quite often, and notes in class need to be typed faster than:
- need command, so press somewhere around the backslash key
- oops
... pressed ... stupid vim for entering ... ...
- oops
... also hit numlock ... take that off
- repeat
Now, the only thing keeping me from the extra keyboard, for the sole reason of the backslash, is that I'd need to cart it to school.I wish someone would figure out where to put it properly
MIKE
How do you tell something that's designed from something that wasn't?
To use Robert Sawyer's argument from Calculating God (a novel - read it; it's worth it even if you are fundamentalist religious or fundamentalist scientist), consider the ``Game of Life'':
There are a few rules to the game that are set up beforehand (that I don't quite remember) - something along the lines of if there is an unoccupied square beside one that is it becomes occupied... and a few others to guide it.
There are just a few rules set about. Now, the interesting thing is that the program develops into predictable patters. That certainly wansn't designed.
Now, given those results and the fact that there were rules in the first place, then *someone* (read: whoever invented that thing) set those rules in the first place.
As I believe it to be, God is the being that set up the rules for our Universe. We have the rules right? How are they what they are?
Therefore, to me, science and religion can coexist peacefully.
MIKE
Well, a scientist would answer a), that an unseen force, etc. Since that is a theory that can be tested, and that has predictive and explanatory power. God figuratively pulling stuff out of his cosmic hat, hasn't. It fails the "adequatly explains" of the "two theories that adequatly explains...".
... ) *and* a Christian (yes, I *can* be both ... read on), I prefer to see it as a combination answer between a) and b):
... if God did not set the rules, who/what did? And since something must have set those rules, then couldn't that something be considered to be God?
As a science student (well, computer science
God set the rules that the Universe plays by and the Universe went and played by those rules
Just a thought...
MIKE
PS: Happy new year all
Damn true, using C for other thing than low-level stuff really is a bad habit :)
... mostly to get rid of junk like if (!str_cmp(...)) ...
... and it may or may not be Open Sourced ... I'm not the owner ... I just code ...
And MUDs
I'm actually (re-)implementing a MUD in C++
MIKE
btw: any cool new lightweight window-managers out t
... nice tabs ... and runs wm or as or blackbox applets...
Fluxbox! It's what I use... with tabs
I just wish I knew how to do the transparency thing...
MIKE
(cbg impression): Funniest... Post ... Ever.
MIKE
Jesus, if they are ghostwritten, then somebody ought to have told him to hire a better fucking ghostwriter. I mean, have you read any of these books? I just assumed he really wrote them, as they are pretty fucking terrible, and any real writer would have done better.
I just kinda assumed he wrote them since they are written sort of like how he talks (at least as Kirk).
MIKE
When people lost religion, they lost morality, pure and simlple.
...
The majority of people have not got the integrity or the energy to devise their own morality; their own values for actions and things do not exist ab initio.
Personally, I like paraphrasing Jesus for this kind of thinking
Jesus was asked one time (by I think one of the priests, but I could be wrong) whether the Samaritans, who did not have the Law if they could get into Heaven.
Guess what Jesus said? He said that the Samaritan who has lived as a good person (by definition of the Jewish Laws) has a better chance of getting into Heaven than a Jew who has not followed the Laws.
Why did he say that? Because if you can be a person without being told, it doesn't matter if you know how to live your life or not. Moral: be a good person. That's it. There's no more to do.
MIKE
This font is just plain ugly.
... (yeah, I know, in *any* proportional font, but I only have a problem when they only use comic sans)
Not only that, but chord charts are a b*tch
MIKE
This thing gives an impression of a website that is being run by a teenager who had smoked pot a lot and still does. This also gives the image of a teenager to his software. It would be much more appropriate for him to appear at a pro-pot website than to attach this theme to a linux/games/open-source website.
It's his life with his games. you can ignore him if you want. he's just some private coder who writes games and smokes pot. doesn't mean his games aren't any good or that playing his games supports his habit.
I personally feel that pot should be legalized and normal cigarettes banned. (I don't smoke either of them, tho) marijuana (I believe, I don't have support) is less dangerous than tobacco cigarettes, yet we let those go on. And alcohol. Plus, if countries legalized pot, then they'd get 1) more jail space 2) more court space 3) (and here's the big one) more money. Think about #3 for a minute: in normal smokes, the gov't gets tax money. Why wouldn't they just distribute pot the same way with the same restrictions? (note: I don't smoke pot - already stated - nor do I ever intend on smoking it)
MIKE
Care to explain to the regular user how to uninstall a Linux app that uses its own custom install script?
/path/to/app doesn't uninstall enough for you? maybe rpm -e package or the equivalent apt-get remove (I think that's right ... I haven't used debian yet). Whatabout make uninstall? or seeing if there is a path/to/app/uninstall script (as in OOo, or loki)
rm -r
In windows, most programs register an uninstall app, but some don't and some just don't uninstall. and thanx to that d*mned registry, just deleting the apps will clutter.
but hey, I'm just a linux user...
MIKE
Multiple desktops are such an obvious advantage that I can't believe they aren't as prevalent as overlapping windows. Its all about being able to categorize when I organize. I am amazed that this wouldn't be considered obvious.
... my first multiple desktop experience was Solaris CDE and even though I hated almost everything about it, I loved that). I know a guy that got quickly hooked on linux (but for some reason kept wiping it) and his biggest problem going back and forth between Win and Lin is that windows only had one desktop!
The only problem here is that it isn't obvious until you use it (I can attest to that
MIKE
Does the EFF think that you should be able to obtain artist's work and not pay any money?
pro'lly what it is is that a lot of people have that as their goal and the EFF is attempting to show that you can't do it (unless the band wants you too).
MIKE
That's what I don't get. YOU'VE ALWAYS BEEN ABLE TO GET CHEAP HARDWARE. Why this whole crap about the "Windows Tax". Its a lie, a myth!
What if I just want to buy a complete (near)top machine? I *must* buy a copy of Windows (& usually other stuff too) just so I can get my hardware. Some of these machines double in price when you introduce Win into the equation... but I run Linux! I don't need Win, but most often if I buy a complete machine I buy win too.
that was a bit rambling, but I hope my point came accross.
MIKE
those times are bullshit. redhat takes 1minute to boot (even to X) on pretty much any hardware i've seen. ditto for XP and DOS. i cant speak for GEOS.
On my box (RH 7.2.92, Celeron Processor @ 366 MHz, lots of ram, HD etc.) it takes roughly 5 minutes, but that's due to about 3-4 minutes of ram testing - 384 MB testing at about 4MB/(every few) s is a long time.
MIKE
FAQ documents should not be copyrighted.
Yes, they should. The answers (The really important part of a FAQ) are the work of the author(s) - usually listed.
The odd part of the ruling, to me, was that it only applied to business.
MIKE