Remember, up here in Canada we all live in igloos and club baby seals for a living. Every now and then we pile into the dogsled and sneak across the border to visit our more civilized neighbours, but that's the only chance we ever have to see a "computer".
The only reason Jack Thompson does what he does is because he likes to watch the stink that get's made at sites like Slashdot.
I think you meant "networks like CNN and Fox". Jack-off doesn't care about a bunch of whining nerds when he can get sympathetic national coverage from the 'real' news.
However, until someone comes up with a way to store the, apparently, unlimited fuel necessary to power a suit such as Iron Mans, and have it weigh, again, apparently, next to nothing, we will never see flying suits of armor.
This problem was solved fifty years ago in Western movies. Once you can store 300 bullets in a single Colt Model 1873 Single Action Revolver, slipping a few thousand litres of jet fuel into someone's backpack is trivial.
According to a leaked recording from Microsoft's secret underground Quality Assurance Lair, the real reason was a bit more complicated. Here's a transcription from the files that I received:
"Hey, guys! Why is this chair stuck inside SP3? How does this kind of stuff get in here anyway? We can't ship it like this!"
This kind of thing happens more ofteh than you might think.
That does assume that the original maintainer actually respects anybody. But the key point is that there is no further input from the original creator, so it will naturally take a somewhat different direction than it otherwise could have.
The other thing is... Software is supported by programmers. When the sole maintainer of a project is sent to jail for a very long time and denied access to email and the Internet, there's going to be some effect. You didn't think that California Prison inmates had Fibre-to-the-cellblock net access, did you?
A better comparison would be with what happened to the "Wheel of Time" books when their creator Robert Jordan was convicted of being dead.
I'm disappointed in the majority of slashdotters who are are convinced he's innocent. Do you realize that is really stupid?
Yes, thinking that way is really stupid, but I won't hold it against you.
Maybe we're reading different Slashdots, but the most common opinion I have seen about this is not that people are convinced that he is innocent but that they are _unconvinced_ that he is _guilty_. Those are not the same thing.
If he is guilty then he should be convicted, but he can only be convicted if there is sufficient evidence to show beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it. Let's apply some logic here and call statement P "Hans Did It", Q "There Is Proof" and R "He Should Be Convicted".
Logically, (P AND Q) = R. If "Hans Did It" and "There Is Proof" are true then "He Should Be Convicted" is also true. However, if you bust out some elementary theories of propositional logic then we can turn the whole thing around to say that (NOT P) OR (NOT Q) = NOT R. If "Hans Didn't Do It" OR "There Is Not Enough Proof" then "He Should Not Be Convicted". We only require one of P or Q to be false, not both, in order to negate all of statement R.
People aren't saying P must be false, they're only saying that R is false because the truth of statement Q is in question. If Johnnie Cochran was with us I'm sure he could make a better rhyme, but all I can say is that NOT (P AND Q) = (NOT P) OR (NOT Q). It's not just a good idea, it's DeMorgan's Law.
No, the quoted text from TechReport doesn't say anything about how well the CPU works. It suggests that some applications were coded with performance hacks for two- or four-core systems and didn't deal too well with having three.
If the CPU executed faulty instructions, caused system crashes or failed to divide 4195835.0 by 3145727.0 properly then you could say that the CPU was not "working perfectly well". If causing Windows Vista to "have trouble" was a sign of a CPU not working then you would have much bigger problems than just this.
...Christian Fundamentalists who read the Lost Behind novels.
That's Left Behind. Lost Behind is the less successful spin-off where we discover that everybody who was carried off by the Rapture just got sent to a tropical island filled with Polar Bears.
Why are you formatting the first drive with FAT32? Do you just not like your data?
Linux OSes including Ubuntu have had stable read/write support for NTFS for over a year now. The only reason to subject yourself to FAT32 is if you plan on booting to Windows 98.
this is kind of a non-issue if only Lenovo is doing that because my employer won't buy from China... what with the phone home possibilities of hardware and all.
Let me guess: this is a pure Open Source company, right?
Oddly enough, half the laptops here are IBM's Thinkpads and the other newer half are Dell XPS's
Apparently what it is is a very confused company. One where nobody ever wondered where the IBM Thinkpads came from before they were sold under the Lenovo name.
One of the funniest things in life is watching believers get all bent out of shape when you laugh at them. Creationists, Scientologits, Vegan proselytizers, the Global Warming crowd, the 9/11 troofers, many kinds of new-age woo-woos, radical feminists, anti-feminists, and the list goes on and on.
It includes "people who think they are being dreadfully clever" too, you know.
Well, congratulations. Your company has just lost three major clients and is on the receiving end of millions of dollars in fines and a criminal investigation.
Why? Because your educated and empowered individuals just decided to share some information. Involving financial and health records belonging to millions of customers. With the whole of the Internet.
And now you have to explain to some very angry people who had their senses of humour surgically removed on their first day on the job just how it is that your security policy consists of "We just let the users control it all".
Your problem is that you are anthropomorphizing your users and assuming that they all want just what you want. Most people just want to do their jobs, and those jobs have nothing to do with endlessly tinkering around with the tools that they need to do so. The kind of permissive, anything-goes atmosphere that may be appropriate for a University CS lab just doesn't work in the private sector.
Or worse yet, try to imagine the damage that could have been done if the network had stayed _up_.
If the idea of some yo-yo thoughtlessly bridging your internal network out to everyone in a three hundred metre radius just because he thinks that the blue patch cable clashes with his new Ferarri-red notebook doesn't make you reach for a baseball bat then maybe corporate IT isn't for you.
When... er... If they did I don't think they would issue a press release about it.
Then again we are talking about Monsanto. They might not only brag about it but also try to sue the families of the zombies for theft of their patented 'Under Ground Ready" embalming fluids.
Slashdot Mirror
They only used that headline because "Why Does Google Hate America?" was already taken.
Remember, up here in Canada we all live in igloos and club baby seals for a living. Every now and then we pile into the dogsled and sneak across the border to visit our more civilized neighbours, but that's the only chance we ever have to see a "computer".
I think you meant "5/7, 5/9, 5/12, 5/13, 6/2, and 8/14 (so far) -- NEVER FORGET".
I think you meant "networks like CNN and Fox". Jack-off doesn't care about a bunch of whining nerds when he can get sympathetic national coverage from the 'real' news.
This problem was solved fifty years ago in Western movies. Once you can store 300 bullets in a single Colt Model 1873 Single Action Revolver, slipping a few thousand litres of jet fuel into someone's backpack is trivial.
According to a leaked recording from Microsoft's secret underground Quality Assurance Lair, the real reason was a bit more complicated. Here's a transcription from the files that I received:
"Hey, guys! Why is this chair stuck inside SP3? How does this kind of stuff get in here anyway? We can't ship it like this!"
This kind of thing happens more ofteh than you might think.
That does assume that the original maintainer actually respects anybody. But the key point is that there is no further input from the original creator, so it will naturally take a somewhat different direction than it otherwise could have.
The other thing is... Software is supported by programmers. When the sole maintainer of a project is sent to jail for a very long time and denied access to email and the Internet, there's going to be some effect. You didn't think that California Prison inmates had Fibre-to-the-cellblock net access, did you?
A better comparison would be with what happened to the "Wheel of Time" books when their creator Robert Jordan was convicted of being dead.
Yes, thinking that way is really stupid, but I won't hold it against you.
Maybe we're reading different Slashdots, but the most common opinion I have seen about this is not that people are convinced that he is innocent but that they are _unconvinced_ that he is _guilty_. Those are not the same thing.
If he is guilty then he should be convicted, but he can only be convicted if there is sufficient evidence to show beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it. Let's apply some logic here and call statement P "Hans Did It", Q "There Is Proof" and R "He Should Be Convicted".
Logically, (P AND Q) = R. If "Hans Did It" and "There Is Proof" are true then "He Should Be Convicted" is also true. However, if you bust out some elementary theories of propositional logic then we can turn the whole thing around to say that (NOT P) OR (NOT Q) = NOT R. If "Hans Didn't Do It" OR "There Is Not Enough Proof" then "He Should Not Be Convicted". We only require one of P or Q to be false, not both, in order to negate all of statement R.
People aren't saying P must be false, they're only saying that R is false because the truth of statement Q is in question. If Johnnie Cochran was with us I'm sure he could make a better rhyme, but all I can say is that NOT (P AND Q) = (NOT P) OR (NOT Q). It's not just a good idea, it's DeMorgan's Law.
I think it's "Screw-Ya".
You'd better not miss. If that rabbit is armed with a shotgun you may not get a second shot at him.
No, the quoted text from TechReport doesn't say anything about how well the CPU works. It suggests that some applications were coded with performance hacks for two- or four-core systems and didn't deal too well with having three.
If the CPU executed faulty instructions, caused system crashes or failed to divide 4195835.0 by 3145727.0 properly then you could say that the CPU was not "working perfectly well". If causing Windows Vista to "have trouble" was a sign of a CPU not working then you would have much bigger problems than just this.
They're the 89.7597399923's to me. I still have an original Pentium P54C.
That's Left Behind. Lost Behind is the less successful spin-off where we discover that everybody who was carried off by the Rapture just got sent to a tropical island filled with Polar Bears.
As it happens, many customs agents know their own magic commands to boot the system.
"Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to boot this computer."
Saying "No" isn't the most helpful answer to that request.
...and despite repeated requests, they won't tell you which one actually is patented. They will only say that you have infringed upon it.
Why are you formatting the first drive with FAT32? Do you just not like your data?
Linux OSes including Ubuntu have had stable read/write support for NTFS for over a year now. The only reason to subject yourself to FAT32 is if you plan on booting to Windows 98.
Apparently what it is is a very confused company. One where nobody ever wondered where the IBM Thinkpads came from before they were sold under the Lenovo name.
It includes "people who think they are being dreadfully clever" too, you know.
Cue the 'Soviet Russia' jokes in three...
Two...
One...
Well, congratulations. Your company has just lost three major clients and is on the receiving end of millions of dollars in fines and a criminal investigation.
Why? Because your educated and empowered individuals just decided to share some information. Involving financial and health records belonging to millions of customers. With the whole of the Internet.
And now you have to explain to some very angry people who had their senses of humour surgically removed on their first day on the job just how it is that your security policy consists of "We just let the users control it all".
Your problem is that you are anthropomorphizing your users and assuming that they all want just what you want. Most people just want to do their jobs, and those jobs have nothing to do with endlessly tinkering around with the tools that they need to do so. The kind of permissive, anything-goes atmosphere that may be appropriate for a University CS lab just doesn't work in the private sector.
Or worse yet, try to imagine the damage that could have been done if the network had stayed _up_.
If the idea of some yo-yo thoughtlessly bridging your internal network out to everyone in a three hundred metre radius just because he thinks that the blue patch cable clashes with his new Ferarri-red notebook doesn't make you reach for a baseball bat then maybe corporate IT isn't for you.
When... er... If they did I don't think they would issue a press release about it.
Then again we are talking about Monsanto. They might not only brag about it but also try to sue the families of the zombies for theft of their patented 'Under Ground Ready" embalming fluids.
Yes, but the Canadians asked nicely before doing it and brought along blankets and coffee for everyone who was put out by the fire.
I would say CompuGlobalHyperMegaNet, but it's already taken.
How about CutCo, EdgeCom or Interslice?