Objective-C is a strict superset of C, any C code will work just fine as part of an Objective-C project.
C++ is not a strict superset of C, although a lot of the incompatable C++ syntax has been added back into C as of late. Even with that there are still a lot of gotchas when switching between C++ and C code.
Honestly I've found Objective-C to be very powerful, intuitive, and easy to use. C++, although powerful, has a lot of tricky syntax and ideas behind it. It's a great language for experts and because it is a statically-typed language it is fairly quick, but I think Objective-C is a much better programming language overall. Oh and even though Objective-C is a dynamically-typed language you can still run it fairly quickly by "freezing" some of the method calls and making them static. This gives you the freedom of choice between the ease of a dynamic language and the speed of a static language.
Apple has also worked it so that you can use C, C++, Objective-C, and several other languages fairly transparently in a single project.
Smart electronics try to learn from past discharge behaviours, but for many gadgets, its just not possible: The ipod you left in your car in the summer will behave diffrent for the next charging cycle than the one that was near freezing in the winter.
The cellphone that was just running for a week in standby will behave different after the next charge compared to the one that was drained dry in 3 hours by watching divx videos on it.
It's actually not that difficult.
Any change in the rate at which the battery drains is still likely to follow a similar curve. If you can monitor some indicator (such as voltage) then you can monitor the rate of change of the indicator and use that to get an approximation of the current equation governing the behavior of the battery. You can then integrate that equation to get an approximate charge level and time remaining.
Yes, there is some error introduced in these approximations but most times you can still get a fairly accurate estimate.
I'm pretty sure that a linear run time indicator is wildly more useful than an actual charge indicator.
Which is why I love the battery indicator on my Mac Powerbook. It can show you the estimated time left on your battery with your current usage pattern. If you change your activity, such as going from reading a text document to watching a DVD, it will revise the time left based on the new power drain.
It's pretty accurate too, I've gotten almost exactly the usage out of a battery that the meter said I would. I love the feature and I wish other devices did something similar.
And note that my original comment was in response to a suggestion that a Mac would be a good network server for a small shop with little net expertise. Unless you have a lot more expertise than I do, I'd recommend against it. It might be OK for an expert Internet hacker, but it's not suitable for use by novices. You're expected to understand things like file-system formats, NAT, DHCP, etc.
If you don't know much about those topics then you shouldn't be running a server operating system in the first place. You should either hire someone who does know these things or you should just get a hardware network appliance where you don't need to know much about servers.
Honestly I have found that Mac OS X Server is a lot easier to administrate than most other server operating systems but it doesn't substitute for not having the proper level of sysadmin experience. Yes, there are some "gotchas" in running a Mac OS X server but there are also tricks to running a Windows, Linux, or BSD server. If you don't have the knowledge then you stand a good chance of falling flat on your face at some point.
By the way, Apple stopped using HFS back in the 90's. They moved on to HFS+ and every Apple-shipped drive in the last decade has come with HFS+. A HFS+ journaled partition is HFS+J and a journaled and case-sensitive partition is HFSX.
When I tried this a couple of years ago, it took me the longest time to figure out why not only that machine, but also a lot of machines in the neighborhood, were so flakey.
One of the issues was the "Internet Sharing" buzz phrase. If you google that now, you'll find lots of warnings that if you enable this in OSX, it silently starts up a DHCP server. If there's already a DNCP server anywhere on the local network, you now have two of them battling it out, and the symptoms aren't something I'd wish on anyone but a networking expert.
You mean the "Internet Sharing" feature that when you click the help icon it says this:
If your Internet connection and your local network use the same port (Ethernet, for example), investigate possible side effects before you turn on Internet sharing. In some cases (if you use a cable modem, for example) you might unintentionally affect the network settings of other ISP customers, and your ISP might terminate your service to prevent you from disrupting their network.
I don't know, I think that spells it out pretty clearly to me: don't start this feature on the same port that the rest of your LAN is running on. Then again I don't usually enable settings I don't know much about without first reading the documentation.
Oh, and Mac OS X drives come formatted with HFS+, what you are talking about is the case-sensitive formatting option for HFS+. The journaled and case-sensitive HFS+ is called HFSX. You don't want to enable that on a boot disk because Mac OS X is not designed to boot from a case-sensitive disk and it will cause all sorts of odd issues. If you need case sensitivity then you make a non-boot partition and set it up as case-sensitive HFS+. You can then use that partition for anything you need to have case-sensitive, such as web pages and the like.
Obviously the FSF's definition of free is the GPL. Not freedom of choice.
What I don't get is how the FREE Software Foundation can even pretend that the GPL has anything to do with freedom, as in the liberty meaning of free: "not under the control or in the power of another; able to act or be done as one wishes" (from my handy Dictionary.app)
It seems to me that the GPL is the antithesis of "free software" and is more like "very rigidly controlled software" - 17 densely worded clauses with tons of legalese and limitations. If I was looking for "free software" I'd be using stuff that has a MIT or BSD license, licenses with 2 or 3 clauses that truly let you do ANYTHING you want with the source code.
Not that I think the GPL is this terrible, horrible thing. It can be put to good use and a lot of smart people have put out some damn good GPL software. I understand the argument for the GPL, I just don't agree that it can be called "free" software - unless you mean you are giving it away without cost.
On the other hand the FSF should be renamed the Fascist Software Foundation because of the tactics that they use. You don't get people to come over to your cause by being an idiot and messing around with them, you get them to come over by doing helpful stuff like making good software and making their lives easier.
That's the way I look at it. A choice between doin ten years, and takin out some stupid motherfucker, ain't no choice at all.
That's the example of not enough deterrence. Kill a guy and only get ten years, which isn't enough to stop Mr. White. Now, for some people ten years is enough, and for others it isn't. The point is that you have to have some serious penalty and it has to be enough that it would cause a large percentage of people to pause before they commit the crime. Of course that brings up the matter of how large a penalty for each crime, something that is hotly debated and is tough to get a consensus on.
Then there's the class of criminals such as Mr. Blond, people who don't apply logic to the penalties for doing a crime. For those sort of people it often doesn't matter what the penalty will be, they are committing the crime in any way they see fit. That's the sort of person who would kill for a pack of gum if they really wanted it and they wouldn't look back. There is no deterrence with them and probably very little chance of rehabilitation, maybe there is medical treatment but even that can be a crap shoot. With those sort of people you probably just have to use the death penalty and permanently remove them from society. Yes, you can lock them away forever but I don't think that's doing the person or the society that has to pay for his imprisonment any favors.
As far as the actual "punishment" part - why? The crime has been committed, and can't be undone. You can't deter this crime, only future crimes.
You said it, deterrent. If you commit a crime you will be punished. That fact has to be made clear. If someone commits a crime, gets caught, and gets away without any punishment at all then they will not be deterred from repeating the crime. In addition, other people considering doing a similar crime will see that there isn't any penalty and thus will not be deterred.
Now there are different levels of crimes and so there should be different levels of punishment. You don't hand out the death penalty for stealing a candy bar from a store because then you might as well just commit the biggest crimes you can whenever you do anything wrong. After all, why get just a candy bar when killing the owner will get you everything he has and the same penalty if you are caught?
Yes, there are people who want punishment to be revenge but that's the wrong reason for punishment. That doesn't make punishment wrong, it makes the desire to punish wrong.
There is one more reason for the penal system that you left out: Correction. That is, actually teaching people positive ways to fit into society and to become productive members of it. Unfortunately most penal systems (not just the one in the United States, it is a worldwide problem) are very hit-or-miss with actual correction.
A lot of prison populations actually bring a person further from being a positive member of society by putting them in close contact with other criminals and twisted minds. Unfortunately this is mainly a money problem, it would just cost so much to provide each prisoner with the best therapy, surround them with positive people, keep them separate from other criminals, etc. It's too bad too, I honestly think that a lot of criminals would respond well to the proper environment but never really got a chance. This doesn't mean I'm soft on crime, I believe in punishment and protecting the public, but it does mean that I don't think all the criminals should simply be discarded without a good attempt at correction.
As for the proven murders, molesters, and psychopaths without remorse, I'm all for the death penalty. Some people do need to be permanently removed from society and I don't think that permanent residence in lockdown is a solution.
It seems to me that he thoroughly demolished all of your arguments and left you looking very foolish. Ahh well, you posted anonymously so at least your friends don't know just how badly he owned you...
Let me tell you what life is like behind the bars at the "farm system"
You mean that people get PUNISHED for committing crimes? The horror!
As far as the punishment goes it is pretty mild. The military gets treated rougher than these guys do and there are a lot of jobs out there that are harder on a person. Yeah the farm system isn't a "country club" as some people put it but it certainly is pretty trivial for jail time.
I'd say that just about anyone can easily tough out 2 years in the farm system without much trouble. It's pretty obvious that this "spam king" was very psychologically damaged and managed to fly under the radar in his psych evaluations. He should have been put into some sort of institution and watched closely for his stay but no system is perfect. Lets face it, some people are VERY good at hiding their problems and they can pass as normal until some extreme stress causes them to break, as it did here.
Anyways these farm systems are not meant to completely rehabilitate prisoners, the assumption is that these prisoners are people who made bad choices and aren't hardened criminals. Supposedly all these people need is a punishment to show that there are consequences to committing their crimes and that the farm system is enough of a deterrent for them to stop committing crime. Does it work? I don't know about that I do know that we need to have both mild and severe punishments for different levels of offenses and the farms serve as about as mild of a punishment as we can easily create.
Using my Nokia N73 we watched quite a few youtube videos(asshole mario is fun when you're drunk, even if the screen is smallish). Since there was no TV we also watched the latest news broadcast from the web with my phone. So Flash videos do work. All you need is an decent phone, though I suppose since you Americans are hailing the iPhone as the second coming of Jesus you lack such things..
You DO know that the iPhone has built-in YouTube app and can view most YouTube videos, right? YouTube has been putting a lot of its videos in the H.264 format which the iPhone can use just fine.
Honestly, I hardly miss Flash on my iPhone. Most sites that matter have put up JavaScript and AJAX interfaces which the iPhone works with beautifully. A lot more sites are going this way every day and I personally am cheering the fact that all the PITA Flash junk out there is finally getting thrown out.
Before 500 AD, Saxons, Franks and all those other Germanic tribes didn't build anything bigger than a farm or a wooden fort. After 1000 AD, they built huge gothic cathedrals. Construction technology definitely advanced during that period. Especially for the Germans, who were not the direct descendants of the Romans of Greeks (who did have impressive construction tech, but still not good enough for a gothic cathedral).
Well, certainly at the end of that period there was technological growth but from what I've seen that sort of architecture didn't come about until the 12th century. The Europeans obviously retained some of their construction technology and build upon it but it took them quite a bit to get back to the level of the Romans. We are also talking about 2 entirely different regions of Europe, the Mediterranean and south verses the north. It's pretty easy to see that the Germanic and northern areas were in a period of revival while the south was still recovering.
As to Charlemagne, he ruled at around 800 AD and he did contribute towards the re-growth of technology but it was still very sluggish compared to the Romans 500 years before his time. His reign was definitely one of the contributing factors to the end of the dark ages.
Regardless of the exact time and length of the slowdown in technology, it did occur in certain areas. It's entirely plausible that it could happen again in the future and that's exactly why it makes for such good sci-fi.
One of the interesting things is that tech growth after a stagnation tends to be explosive. Once the conditions are good for a renaissance you seem to get an extremely cross-linked expansion of art, literature, mathematics, science, architecture, philosophy and other improvements. During a lot of the expansive periods you would have more advances in 100 years than had happened in the 500 previous years.
long periods of technological stagnation or even retardation are common in many SF settings.
Not just in sci-fi settings, there are numerous examples of it in the real world past. Take Europe in the middle ages for example, or China in the last half of the last millennia. Societies can easily reach a state where technology isn't viewed as important or technological advances get lost.
Just a few of the things that could cause this:
a great tragedy where enough people die off that society can't maintain the machinery and mechanisms of technology
a long migration where the industrial base for maintaining technology is lost
a loss of need for technical knowledge such as when the current technology is good enough to last for a long time and people lose the methods of discovering new technology.
There are many other reasons but you get the general idea.
Plagiarizing is a great way to get yourself some quick and easy positive karma. The downside is that someone almost always calls you out and then you end up with even more negative karma.
The moral of this story: if you have a point to make try to be original and write something yourself instead of stealing someone else's hard work. At the very least you should have the decency to give attribution for what you are quoting.
You run the wizard with the two computers hooked up on a network and it "just works."
I've used the Windows File and Settings Transfer Wizard and had it "just not work" several times. It seemed pretty hit-or-miss to me and it was a frustrating process all-around even when it did its job.
When I purchased my new MacBook Pro I saw it came with a cool little utility that will copy everything over from my old computer. So I hooked up both computers to my gigabit ethernet switch ready to copy, and then it told me it doesn't support network transfers (!!!) I have to hook up the computers to each other using a firewire cable.
Migration Assistant also gives you the option to migrate from another hard drive. You should be able to share the drive over the network and then use Migration Assistant. They've improved Migration Assistant in Leopard so that it has more options, one of which is to do the transfer over a network without the extra steps. The Finder is also improved in Leopard and it does have better options for the default settings of windows.
The problem is, sometimes that doesn't work (like when finder is dying and you need to restart it, which you can only do through the right click menu) so I have to go find a USB mouse, plug it in, hope it works, and then use that to right click.
Press option-command-escape and a window will pop up that lets you select any running application and quit it. The Finder will be on that list and if you select it (which you can do with the arrow keys) you will be able to restart the Finder. Just select the Finder and hit the enter key.
It's a lot easier than trying to right-click on the Finder icon in the Dock or using the Apple Menu to force quit.
We threw them away because they weren't worth what it would take to use them in any sort of meaningful way.
Objects in space are under a lot of abuse. Wild swings in temperature, a nearly-perfect vaccum all around, bombardment by energetic radiation, micro-meteors and sometimes not-so-micro meteors. Anything we launch into earth orbit has to be constantly maintained or it will degrade into uselessness. Add to that the fact that there really is no such thing as a stable orbit, just one that takes a certain amount of time to degrade before the satellite will fall back to earth.
Keeping satellites operational and useful takes a lot of time, effort, and cash. You need to maintain the structure of the satellite, keep any equipment up to date, and periodically boost it back into it's proper orbit. If you don't do these things then you'll have a huge hazard (or worse a million little hazards) in orbit for a while. Then when the satellite's orbit begins to decay you'll have a rain of parts across the Earth, possibly in highly populated areas.
I'm all for reusing items we have already put into space but we have to be realistic about it. MIR and Skylab did their jobs and they had to be de-orbited for cost and safety reasons.
Same here, performed the restore with that file and it's all been working perfectly.
Just a note: you might get a.zip extension on that file after downloading it, just remove the.zip extension and perform the restore. It will take a bit but it seems to be official and it works just fine. I'm using apps and fooling around with the new features.
BTW - the new Remote app is pretty cool. Remote control of your Apple TV or the iTunes libraries on your computers, it works seamlessly. Very neat.
Try tolerating the retaliation battle group as a competent alliance player.
Reckoning isn't that great either. I think the problem has less to do with a particular realm or battlegroup and more to do with some of the people who are on the Alliance. We seem to get a ton more kids and immature adults, maybe because they want to play what they perceive as the "good" side or maybe because they want to play the prettier races.
Now that school is out for the summer, try PVPing during normal work hours and then PVPing again after the adults come home from work. It's like night and day. You go from losing 90% of the battlegrounds (75% if you only play AV) to losing 60% of them. The only factor is the fact that most of the mature players have jobs during the day and so the people doing battlegrounds are mostly kids on vacation.
I'm not saying that all kids can't PVP, a lot of them are good in 1v1, but I think that many of them lack what it takes to work as a team and win large-scale battles. They mostly wander off at the first shiny object ("ooo look a horde way over there, lemme leave this node I'm at") and let the rest of the team get owned.
I played WoW for 4 months a few years ago and was surprised at the number of trojans packed in the executable installers of some popular UI mods.
That has to be the height of laziness, it takes almost no effort to unpack and move a mod into place.
The only executable that I use is the Ace Updater which is a package manager that will note updated mods and install them for you. The ONLY reason I use that is because it is open source and I've downloaded the source, inspected it, and built it myself. Based on my inspection there's next to no chance that it contains a trojan.
I agree that you should have the ability to use a different username and password for account management and game login. That would make it tougher for someone to grab one from the other.
Why is this tagged 'Republicans' when it's a Democrat doing the deed? That would be because tags are nothing more than Slashdot graffiti. They are rarely relevant, they almost always mislead, and even when they are significant they are simply redundant to the actual article and discussion.
There's a reason a lot of people turn tags off and simply ignore them. I'm all for eliminating them entirely to stop wasting bandwidth, server storage, coding effort, and screen space.
I wish I had Steve Jobs' money, but alas I'm not him and so I don't. I don't think I could maintain his level of smug righteousness or radiate his powerful reality-distortion field either. Oh well, c'est la vie.
Slashdot Mirror
Objective-C is a strict superset of C, any C code will work just fine as part of an Objective-C project.
C++ is not a strict superset of C, although a lot of the incompatable C++ syntax has been added back into C as of late. Even with that there are still a lot of gotchas when switching between C++ and C code.
Honestly I've found Objective-C to be very powerful, intuitive, and easy to use. C++, although powerful, has a lot of tricky syntax and ideas behind it. It's a great language for experts and because it is a statically-typed language it is fairly quick, but I think Objective-C is a much better programming language overall. Oh and even though Objective-C is a dynamically-typed language you can still run it fairly quickly by "freezing" some of the method calls and making them static. This gives you the freedom of choice between the ease of a dynamic language and the speed of a static language.
Apple has also worked it so that you can use C, C++, Objective-C, and several other languages fairly transparently in a single project.
Smart electronics try to learn from past discharge behaviours, but for many gadgets, its just not possible: The ipod you left in your car in the summer will behave diffrent for the next charging cycle than the one that was near freezing in the winter.
The cellphone that was just running for a week in standby will behave different after the next charge compared to the one that was drained dry in 3 hours by watching divx videos on it.
It's actually not that difficult.
Any change in the rate at which the battery drains is still likely to follow a similar curve. If you can monitor some indicator (such as voltage) then you can monitor the rate of change of the indicator and use that to get an approximation of the current equation governing the behavior of the battery. You can then integrate that equation to get an approximate charge level and time remaining.
Yes, there is some error introduced in these approximations but most times you can still get a fairly accurate estimate.
I'm pretty sure that a linear run time indicator is wildly more useful than an actual charge indicator.
Which is why I love the battery indicator on my Mac Powerbook. It can show you the estimated time left on your battery with your current usage pattern. If you change your activity, such as going from reading a text document to watching a DVD, it will revise the time left based on the new power drain.
It's pretty accurate too, I've gotten almost exactly the usage out of a battery that the meter said I would. I love the feature and I wish other devices did something similar.
And note that my original comment was in response to a suggestion that a Mac would be a good network server for a small shop with little net expertise. Unless you have a lot more expertise than I do, I'd recommend against it. It might be OK for an expert Internet hacker, but it's not suitable for use by novices. You're expected to understand things like file-system formats, NAT, DHCP, etc.
If you don't know much about those topics then you shouldn't be running a server operating system in the first place. You should either hire someone who does know these things or you should just get a hardware network appliance where you don't need to know much about servers.
Honestly I have found that Mac OS X Server is a lot easier to administrate than most other server operating systems but it doesn't substitute for not having the proper level of sysadmin experience. Yes, there are some "gotchas" in running a Mac OS X server but there are also tricks to running a Windows, Linux, or BSD server. If you don't have the knowledge then you stand a good chance of falling flat on your face at some point.
By the way, Apple stopped using HFS back in the 90's. They moved on to HFS+ and every Apple-shipped drive in the last decade has come with HFS+. A HFS+ journaled partition is HFS+J and a journaled and case-sensitive partition is HFSX.
When I tried this a couple of years ago, it took me the longest time to figure out why not only that machine, but also a lot of machines in the neighborhood, were so flakey.
One of the issues was the "Internet Sharing" buzz phrase. If you google that now, you'll find lots of warnings that if you enable this in OSX, it silently starts up a DHCP server. If there's already a DNCP server anywhere on the local network, you now have two of them battling it out, and the symptoms aren't something I'd wish on anyone but a networking expert.
You mean the "Internet Sharing" feature that when you click the help icon it says this:
If your Internet connection and your local network use the same port (Ethernet, for example), investigate possible side effects before you turn on Internet sharing. In some cases (if you use a cable modem, for example) you might unintentionally affect the network settings of other ISP customers, and your ISP might terminate your service to prevent you from disrupting their network.
I don't know, I think that spells it out pretty clearly to me: don't start this feature on the same port that the rest of your LAN is running on. Then again I don't usually enable settings I don't know much about without first reading the documentation.
Oh, and Mac OS X drives come formatted with HFS+, what you are talking about is the case-sensitive formatting option for HFS+. The journaled and case-sensitive HFS+ is called HFSX. You don't want to enable that on a boot disk because Mac OS X is not designed to boot from a case-sensitive disk and it will cause all sorts of odd issues. If you need case sensitivity then you make a non-boot partition and set it up as case-sensitive HFS+. You can then use that partition for anything you need to have case-sensitive, such as web pages and the like.
Obviously the FSF's definition of free is the GPL. Not freedom of choice.
What I don't get is how the FREE Software Foundation can even pretend that the GPL has anything to do with freedom, as in the liberty meaning of free: "not under the control or in the power of another; able to act or be done as one wishes" (from my handy Dictionary.app)
It seems to me that the GPL is the antithesis of "free software" and is more like "very rigidly controlled software" - 17 densely worded clauses with tons of legalese and limitations. If I was looking for "free software" I'd be using stuff that has a MIT or BSD license, licenses with 2 or 3 clauses that truly let you do ANYTHING you want with the source code.
Not that I think the GPL is this terrible, horrible thing. It can be put to good use and a lot of smart people have put out some damn good GPL software. I understand the argument for the GPL, I just don't agree that it can be called "free" software - unless you mean you are giving it away without cost.
On the other hand the FSF should be renamed the Fascist Software Foundation because of the tactics that they use. You don't get people to come over to your cause by being an idiot and messing around with them, you get them to come over by doing helpful stuff like making good software and making their lives easier.
That's the way I look at it. A choice between doin ten years, and takin out some stupid motherfucker, ain't no choice at all.
That's the example of not enough deterrence. Kill a guy and only get ten years, which isn't enough to stop Mr. White. Now, for some people ten years is enough, and for others it isn't. The point is that you have to have some serious penalty and it has to be enough that it would cause a large percentage of people to pause before they commit the crime. Of course that brings up the matter of how large a penalty for each crime, something that is hotly debated and is tough to get a consensus on.
Then there's the class of criminals such as Mr. Blond, people who don't apply logic to the penalties for doing a crime. For those sort of people it often doesn't matter what the penalty will be, they are committing the crime in any way they see fit. That's the sort of person who would kill for a pack of gum if they really wanted it and they wouldn't look back. There is no deterrence with them and probably very little chance of rehabilitation, maybe there is medical treatment but even that can be a crap shoot. With those sort of people you probably just have to use the death penalty and permanently remove them from society. Yes, you can lock them away forever but I don't think that's doing the person or the society that has to pay for his imprisonment any favors.
As far as the actual "punishment" part - why? The crime has been committed, and can't be undone. You can't deter this crime, only future crimes.
You said it, deterrent. If you commit a crime you will be punished. That fact has to be made clear. If someone commits a crime, gets caught, and gets away without any punishment at all then they will not be deterred from repeating the crime. In addition, other people considering doing a similar crime will see that there isn't any penalty and thus will not be deterred.
Now there are different levels of crimes and so there should be different levels of punishment. You don't hand out the death penalty for stealing a candy bar from a store because then you might as well just commit the biggest crimes you can whenever you do anything wrong. After all, why get just a candy bar when killing the owner will get you everything he has and the same penalty if you are caught?
Yes, there are people who want punishment to be revenge but that's the wrong reason for punishment. That doesn't make punishment wrong, it makes the desire to punish wrong.
There is one more reason for the penal system that you left out: Correction. That is, actually teaching people positive ways to fit into society and to become productive members of it. Unfortunately most penal systems (not just the one in the United States, it is a worldwide problem) are very hit-or-miss with actual correction.
A lot of prison populations actually bring a person further from being a positive member of society by putting them in close contact with other criminals and twisted minds. Unfortunately this is mainly a money problem, it would just cost so much to provide each prisoner with the best therapy, surround them with positive people, keep them separate from other criminals, etc. It's too bad too, I honestly think that a lot of criminals would respond well to the proper environment but never really got a chance. This doesn't mean I'm soft on crime, I believe in punishment and protecting the public, but it does mean that I don't think all the criminals should simply be discarded without a good attempt at correction.
As for the proven murders, molesters, and psychopaths without remorse, I'm all for the death penalty. Some people do need to be permanently removed from society and I don't think that permanent residence in lockdown is a solution.
It seems to me that he thoroughly demolished all of your arguments and left you looking very foolish. Ahh well, you posted anonymously so at least your friends don't know just how badly he owned you...
Let me tell you what life is like behind the bars at the "farm system"
You mean that people get PUNISHED for committing crimes? The horror!
As far as the punishment goes it is pretty mild. The military gets treated rougher than these guys do and there are a lot of jobs out there that are harder on a person. Yeah the farm system isn't a "country club" as some people put it but it certainly is pretty trivial for jail time.
I'd say that just about anyone can easily tough out 2 years in the farm system without much trouble. It's pretty obvious that this "spam king" was very psychologically damaged and managed to fly under the radar in his psych evaluations. He should have been put into some sort of institution and watched closely for his stay but no system is perfect. Lets face it, some people are VERY good at hiding their problems and they can pass as normal until some extreme stress causes them to break, as it did here.
Anyways these farm systems are not meant to completely rehabilitate prisoners, the assumption is that these prisoners are people who made bad choices and aren't hardened criminals. Supposedly all these people need is a punishment to show that there are consequences to committing their crimes and that the farm system is enough of a deterrent for them to stop committing crime. Does it work? I don't know about that I do know that we need to have both mild and severe punishments for different levels of offenses and the farms serve as about as mild of a punishment as we can easily create.
Using my Nokia N73 we watched quite a few youtube videos(asshole mario is fun when you're drunk, even if the screen is smallish). Since there was no TV we also watched the latest news broadcast from the web with my phone. So Flash videos do work. All you need is an decent phone, though I suppose since you Americans are hailing the iPhone as the second coming of Jesus you lack such things..
You DO know that the iPhone has built-in YouTube app and can view most YouTube videos, right? YouTube has been putting a lot of its videos in the H.264 format which the iPhone can use just fine.
Honestly, I hardly miss Flash on my iPhone. Most sites that matter have put up JavaScript and AJAX interfaces which the iPhone works with beautifully. A lot more sites are going this way every day and I personally am cheering the fact that all the PITA Flash junk out there is finally getting thrown out.
Before 500 AD, Saxons, Franks and all those other Germanic tribes didn't build anything bigger than a farm or a wooden fort. After 1000 AD, they built huge gothic cathedrals. Construction technology definitely advanced during that period. Especially for the Germans, who were not the direct descendants of the Romans of Greeks (who did have impressive construction tech, but still not good enough for a gothic cathedral).
Well, certainly at the end of that period there was technological growth but from what I've seen that sort of architecture didn't come about until the 12th century. The Europeans obviously retained some of their construction technology and build upon it but it took them quite a bit to get back to the level of the Romans. We are also talking about 2 entirely different regions of Europe, the Mediterranean and south verses the north. It's pretty easy to see that the Germanic and northern areas were in a period of revival while the south was still recovering.
As to Charlemagne, he ruled at around 800 AD and he did contribute towards the re-growth of technology but it was still very sluggish compared to the Romans 500 years before his time. His reign was definitely one of the contributing factors to the end of the dark ages.
Regardless of the exact time and length of the slowdown in technology, it did occur in certain areas. It's entirely plausible that it could happen again in the future and that's exactly why it makes for such good sci-fi.
One of the interesting things is that tech growth after a stagnation tends to be explosive. Once the conditions are good for a renaissance you seem to get an extremely cross-linked expansion of art, literature, mathematics, science, architecture, philosophy and other improvements. During a lot of the expansive periods you would have more advances in 100 years than had happened in the 500 previous years.
Just to clarify, by middle ages I meant what is usually called the early middle ages or the dark ages. That's from approximately 500 AD to 1000 AD.
Of course the dark ages might not have been as dire as it's made out to be but it definitely was a period of slow or negative technological growth.
long periods of technological stagnation or even retardation are common in many SF settings.
Not just in sci-fi settings, there are numerous examples of it in the real world past. Take Europe in the middle ages for example, or China in the last half of the last millennia. Societies can easily reach a state where technology isn't viewed as important or technological advances get lost.
Just a few of the things that could cause this:
There are many other reasons but you get the general idea.
That's a great job of plagiary you've got going there. I assume that you found it here:
The New Apple Walled Garden by Nik Cubrilov
Plagiarizing is a great way to get yourself some quick and easy positive karma. The downside is that someone almost always calls you out and then you end up with even more negative karma.
The moral of this story: if you have a point to make try to be original and write something yourself instead of stealing someone else's hard work. At the very least you should have the decency to give attribution for what you are quoting.
Perhaps it's an issue with Mac OS 10.3 but here's instructions from a website
Actually those instructions date from MacOS X 10.0 to MacOS X 10.1.5. MacOS 10.2 through 10.5 are a lot easier:
Official Apple documentation on hosts file.
You run the wizard with the two computers hooked up on a network and it "just works."
I've used the Windows File and Settings Transfer Wizard and had it "just not work" several times. It seemed pretty hit-or-miss to me and it was a frustrating process all-around even when it did its job.
When I purchased my new MacBook Pro I saw it came with a cool little utility that will copy everything over from my old computer. So I hooked up both computers to my gigabit ethernet switch ready to copy, and then it told me it doesn't support network transfers (!!!) I have to hook up the computers to each other using a firewire cable.
Migration Assistant also gives you the option to migrate from another hard drive. You should be able to share the drive over the network and then use Migration Assistant. They've improved Migration Assistant in Leopard so that it has more options, one of which is to do the transfer over a network without the extra steps. The Finder is also improved in Leopard and it does have better options for the default settings of windows.
The problem is, sometimes that doesn't work (like when finder is dying and you need to restart it, which you can only do through the right click menu) so I have to go find a USB mouse, plug it in, hope it works, and then use that to right click.
Press option-command-escape and a window will pop up that lets you select any running application and quit it. The Finder will be on that list and if you select it (which you can do with the arrow keys) you will be able to restart the Finder. Just select the Finder and hit the enter key.
It's a lot easier than trying to right-click on the Finder icon in the Dock or using the Apple Menu to force quit.
We threw them away because they weren't worth what it would take to use them in any sort of meaningful way.
Objects in space are under a lot of abuse. Wild swings in temperature, a nearly-perfect vaccum all around, bombardment by energetic radiation, micro-meteors and sometimes not-so-micro meteors. Anything we launch into earth orbit has to be constantly maintained or it will degrade into uselessness. Add to that the fact that there really is no such thing as a stable orbit, just one that takes a certain amount of time to degrade before the satellite will fall back to earth.
Keeping satellites operational and useful takes a lot of time, effort, and cash. You need to maintain the structure of the satellite, keep any equipment up to date, and periodically boost it back into it's proper orbit. If you don't do these things then you'll have a huge hazard (or worse a million little hazards) in orbit for a while. Then when the satellite's orbit begins to decay you'll have a rain of parts across the Earth, possibly in highly populated areas.
I'm all for reusing items we have already put into space but we have to be realistic about it. MIR and Skylab did their jobs and they had to be de-orbited for cost and safety reasons.
Same here, performed the restore with that file and it's all been working perfectly.
Just a note: you might get a .zip extension on that file after downloading it, just remove the .zip extension and perform the restore. It will take a bit but it seems to be official and it works just fine. I'm using apps and fooling around with the new features.
BTW - the new Remote app is pretty cool. Remote control of your Apple TV or the iTunes libraries on your computers, it works seamlessly. Very neat.
Try tolerating the retaliation battle group as a competent alliance player.
Reckoning isn't that great either. I think the problem has less to do with a particular realm or battlegroup and more to do with some of the people who are on the Alliance. We seem to get a ton more kids and immature adults, maybe because they want to play what they perceive as the "good" side or maybe because they want to play the prettier races.
Now that school is out for the summer, try PVPing during normal work hours and then PVPing again after the adults come home from work. It's like night and day. You go from losing 90% of the battlegrounds (75% if you only play AV) to losing 60% of them. The only factor is the fact that most of the mature players have jobs during the day and so the people doing battlegrounds are mostly kids on vacation.
I'm not saying that all kids can't PVP, a lot of them are good in 1v1, but I think that many of them lack what it takes to work as a team and win large-scale battles. They mostly wander off at the first shiny object ("ooo look a horde way over there, lemme leave this node I'm at") and let the rest of the team get owned.
I played WoW for 4 months a few years ago and was surprised at the number of trojans packed in the executable installers of some popular UI mods.
That has to be the height of laziness, it takes almost no effort to unpack and move a mod into place.
The only executable that I use is the Ace Updater which is a package manager that will note updated mods and install them for you. The ONLY reason I use that is because it is open source and I've downloaded the source, inspected it, and built it myself. Based on my inspection there's next to no chance that it contains a trojan.
I agree that you should have the ability to use a different username and password for account management and game login. That would make it tougher for someone to grab one from the other.
There's a reason a lot of people turn tags off and simply ignore them. I'm all for eliminating them entirely to stop wasting bandwidth, server storage, coding effort, and screen space.
Oh wait, I'm not part of the left-wing, or the right-wing, or... Hmmm I think I'm gonna wander around the middle for a while.
That's Col. Graff to you, Ender!
I wish I had Steve Jobs' money, but alas I'm not him and so I don't. I don't think I could maintain his level of smug righteousness or radiate his powerful reality-distortion field either. Oh well, c'est la vie.