SCO want to huff and puff, draw attention to themselves and generally scream bloody murder. They'll say anything, no matter how stupid (see the IBM & Linux support Terrorism thread.) in order to get bought, or at least inflate the stock price long enough for certain people to cash out.
I doubt the actual merit of their claims rank very high compared to chock-value when they decide what to include in the next of their seemingly endless stream of press releases.
The Linux is used by terrorists! argument is almost too stupid to even bother arguing against.
I mean, sure, Linux is probably used by terrorists (however you define that) but statistically speaking it is almost certainly less used than Microsoft operating systems.
Simply put, a lot more people use Windows, terrorists or otherwise.
This "OMG, the Terrorists are using toilet paper too! We must stop them from wiping us all out with it!" attitude every single PR-weasel in the entire US seems to be spewing out is getting a little old, to say the least. Admittedly this is my impression from across the pond, but... people can't really be buying this bs, can they?
Someone in the US please tell me this seems as stupid to you as it does to me.
Try "Deathrow" for the xbox. (I'm lazy, you have to google for it.)
It plays very much like a modern Speedball 2.
It's full 3D, the ball is not a ball (it's a disc), you may only have 4 team members on the field at once, etc. But despite the differences you do get the same kind of fast, demanding and violent gameplay, with a futuristic feel to it.
I'd say it's the only game besides Halo that would make me go buy an xbox.
Unfortunately the game had no marketing and sold lousy despite pretty decent reviews, so most people has never heard of it. It's a pity, really.
Wouldn't playing the Saint of Killers get boring pretty quickly?
He never misses, his hits are always fatal, he never has to reload and he is totally indestructible.
The best issue ever of the comic Preacher... After being nuked, not to mention physsicaly assaulted by God, Jesse Custer meets a very odd character in the desert.
You could always move out into the desert and dedicate your life to digging mile-high letters in the sand, spelling "FUCK YOU" for the next shuttle crew that passes by.;-)
The ultimate in bloat! Imagine; an XML document describing the vector points and bezier curves required to draw each and every character in an entire eBook! If nothing else, it would push the price of multi Tb drives down.
You don't know squat about the SVG format, do you?
If you took 2 minutes to check the SVG-specification you'd see that you are totaly wrong.
Text in SVG is described as... wait for it... ordinary text. The characters are then mapped to glyphs in your SVG-viewer.
Just like in MS Doc, or Adobe PDF.
Just to show you the "ultimate bloat" I'll include an example. If you just want an ordinary plain vanilla book this is all it takes.
I find it hard to believe that the reported 1% drop falls outside the margin of error.
Well, if you just pull the numbers you use as input out of the thin air, does it really matter if you don't bother with the other scientific crap like margin of error?
I believe an accurate acronym here would be SISU. Shit in, shit out.
This whole thing is just another propaganda scheme. They want the "piracy rate" to be high (fund us!), but not as high as last year (we are making progress, fund us!) so they make up a "scientific analysis" that produces the desired result.
Now why the hell should ".NET be a web standard". The parts of it that are both good and have something whatsoever to do with the web are mostly standardized already.
The rest of the.NET framework has, and should have, nothing to do with the W3C.
This guy has his GPS cellphone periodically sending a single UDP package with his coordinates to his server, that builds a http-GET you can click to locate him on MapQuest.
Pretty neat.
It's also more portable than, say, a TOW, and much cheaper.
My most vivid memory of it is still that it is really heavy and a bitch to carry long distances. (Well, I have a BMI of 18 wish may affect my impression.) Well, I should note that we used the stainless steel barrel, not the composite one. I hear it is a lot lighter, but also a lot more fragile.
And, no, I have never been a SEAL or a Ranger.
I don't think that the civilian casualties were a mere byproduct.
No, the timing was not a coincident. More dead increase the propaganda value, I am sure they choose that time based on both that the target would be densly populatet (thus ensuring a frightening bodycount) and that the planes they used would be near empty (making them easier to take and hold).
It's just important to know that killing wasn't the main objective. To the terrorists (at least the masterminds) it was a means to an end.
One indication on this is that the attack on the WTC 9/11 could easily hav been much worse. Ever noticed that the first plane hit the tower close to the top? Obviously it could have hit lower if the pilot wanted to (as the second plane did). The pilot must have known that everyone above the point of impact would burn or suffocate regardless of if the towers would be left standing or not, and that the building was bustling with people.
Maybe the hit near the top was some last deranged act of "humanism" by the pilot, undoubtedly he could single-handedly have pushed the deathtoll into the tens of thousands by diving before inpact, but for some reason choose not to. Thus many in the first tower survived, and when the second plane hit that tower had been partly evacuated, so many of the inhabitants there also survived.
Why would any terrorist worry about getting boxcutters past airport security now when they could dump an assload of ricin into a big city's reservoir and watch hundreds of thousands of people croak?
Why did they bother to do it in the first place?
Maybe because the attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon was first and formost an attack on the symbols of the military and financial might of the US and that the civilian victims were just a side effect?
If they only were looking for a huge bodycount they would have choosen another target, or another method.
Contrary to popular opinion, terrorism (per definition) isn't just about killing people, it's about furthering your agenda through intimidation. This means that they are mostly primarily interested in maximizing the propaganda value of their actions, not the destructions they cause.
Take Usama Bin Laden for example. As I understand it one of his most important objectives was to get the US military out of Saudi Arabia. And, guess what, you're pulling out of there right now. From his point of view: Mission Accomplished. And all this essentialy because of the fear instilled by one operation.
As an added bonus you crushed a secular regime in the middle east. Be prepared for Al Quaida operatives (or others) trying to instigate a islamic revolution in Iraq sometime in the next few years...
I think most of the proposed methods for reducing terrorism misses the point.
Almost all methods try to take the terrorists on directly. But terrorism is only the symptom, not the decease. It's root cause is: A lot of people are so desperate that supporting these guys seems like a good idea.
A terrorist organization can't live without popular support somwhere. Take away this support for their cause and what you have left is a few extremists with a serious funding problem (ok, OBL might be an exception) and nowhere to hide.
In the case of islamic terrorism solving the Palestinian question would probably go a long way towards reducing the threat.
Besides, why should the average american be concerned for homeland security?
I'm sure domestic any number of different things, cars, tobacco, alcohol, etc. kills more people each year on american soil than terrorism does.
Yet, I see no huge overarching "war on speeding" for example.
I'm not american, but let me tell you. From the outside this fixation on security looks a lot like hysteria. Furthermore it seems like a lot of people in the position to do so is converting this paranoia into money and power for themselves.
I think the general US population would be much better of without these monsterously huge efforts to "increase security" att all costs.
"You had to live -- did live, from habit that became instinct -- in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized. "
Actually, these cameras come equipped with Infra-red.
So, you are telling me that George Orwell was to optimistic? *shudder*
Sadly, that means squat in the public mind.
If anything of this will stick it is the big sexy "fact" that "the gubmint is gonna bust you for trading files".
I mean, look at this example: A lot of people think they have found lots and lots of chemical weapons stached away in Iraq.
This is (at least this far) simply not the case, but the media has loadly claimed these findings, and then retracted them in fine print so many times that it has become the truth in a lot of peoples minds.
The big sexy news item, repeated again and again sticks, regardles of if it is true or not.
Exactly the RIAA's purpose with these lawsuits, I presume...
No, because the whole game is a piece of propaganda. I mean, the US army footed the bill, they must obviously feel they are getting something worth paying for.
It's basically a "infomercial", and by that I mean a bunch of fucking lies. At least if the US army is anything like the army I served in.
Java is slow for desktop applications because its graphics library is rubbish, not because the VM is inherently slow.
Partly true, but a VM do add some extra overhead. And about the platform independent part... follow your link and check out the current scope of the mono project. You will notice it currently doesn't cover 100% of the.NET framework *. So basically what we have a "platform independent" framework that currently only works 100% on one platform (No the BSD-port by MS isn't complete, it only covers the standardized parts.) In my eyes this is not really platform independent at all.
But it may be, in the future, if MS doesn't find it in it's interrest to work against true platform independence.
*) This is in no way meant as a bash directed at the mono-guys, for whom I feel nothing but complete and utter admiration.
There is an automagic Garbage Collector like Java, but you still have control if you don't want to wait for the automagic processes.
...and just like in Java, that control is less than perfect. If I remember correctly there is, for example, no way to guarantee a destructor will run for a particular instance before it is recycled.
Slashdot Mirror
SCO want to huff and puff, draw attention to themselves and generally scream bloody murder.
They'll say anything, no matter how stupid (see the IBM & Linux support Terrorism thread.) in order to get bought, or at least inflate the stock price long enough for certain people to cash out.
I doubt the actual merit of their claims rank very high compared to chock-value when they decide what to include in the next of their seemingly endless stream of press releases.
The Linux is used by terrorists! argument is almost too stupid to even bother arguing against.
I mean, sure, Linux is probably used by terrorists (however you define that) but statistically speaking it is almost certainly less used than Microsoft operating systems.
Simply put, a lot more people use Windows, terrorists or otherwise.
This "OMG, the Terrorists are using toilet paper too! We must stop them from wiping us all out with it!" attitude every single PR-weasel in the entire US seems to be spewing out is getting a little old, to say the least. Admittedly this is my impression from across the pond, but... people can't really be buying this bs, can they?
Someone in the US please tell me this seems as stupid to you as it does to me.
Try "Deathrow" for the xbox. (I'm lazy, you have to google for it.)
It plays very much like a modern Speedball 2.
It's full 3D, the ball is not a ball (it's a disc), you may only have 4 team members on the field at once, etc.
But despite the differences you do get the same kind of fast, demanding and violent gameplay, with a futuristic feel to it.
I'd say it's the only game besides Halo that would make me go buy an xbox.
Unfortunately the game had no marketing and sold lousy despite pretty decent reviews, so most people has never heard of it.
It's a pity, really.
There is also much evidence for Creation. It's not a "done deal".
Right.
Anyway, I have a nice bridge to sell you. Interrested?
Wouldn't playing the Saint of Killers get boring pretty quickly?
He never misses, his hits are always fatal, he never has to reload and he is totally indestructible.
Sounds like god-mode in any FPS to me...
Polygamy and he isn't. Hes into "open mairrages" where your married but either side gets to wander around and screw anyone they want to.
Polyamory != Polygamy
And, yes, polyamoriyseems to translate to open relationships.
I know some people who are into that. Whatever floats your boat, I guess.
The best issue ever of the comic Preacher...
After being nuked, not to mention physsicaly assaulted by God, Jesse Custer meets a very odd character in the desert.
And some Europeans believe they're superior to everyone else...So we're even :):P
What can I say: Touche!
I think you just won this thread.
When your business consists of undercutting others, and providing services to willfully "outcompete" someone out of a job, don't expect pity.
Of course no American company would ever try to do this.
After all it's only the fucking definition of capitalism.
And, no, capitalism is not so hot when the pointy end is aimed at you. But judging by the bitterness oozing out of your post, you already know this.
You could always move out into the desert and dedicate your life to digging mile-high letters in the sand, spelling "FUCK YOU" for the next shuttle crew that passes by. ;-)
I really hope people get this reference...
The ultimate in bloat! Imagine; an XML document describing the vector points and bezier curves required to draw each and every character in an entire eBook! If nothing else, it would push the price of multi Tb drives down.
" >
You don't know squat about the SVG format, do you?
If you took 2 minutes to check the SVG-specification you'd see that you are totaly wrong.
Text in SVG is described as... wait for it... ordinary text. The characters are then mapped to glyphs in your SVG-viewer. Just like in MS Doc, or Adobe PDF.
Just to show you the "ultimate bloat" I'll include an example. If you just want an ordinary plain vanilla book this is all it takes.
<?xml version="1.0" standalone="no"?>
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11.dtd
<svg width="25cm" height="35cm" viewBox="0 0 2500 3500" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" version="1.1">
<text x="250" y="150" font-family="Verdana" font-size="55" fill="blue">
Insert book text here...
</text>
</svg>
I find it hard to believe that the reported 1% drop falls outside the margin of error.
Well, if you just pull the numbers you use as input out of the thin air, does it really matter if you don't bother with the other scientific crap like margin of error?
I believe an accurate acronym here would be SISU.
Shit in, shit out.
This whole thing is just another propaganda scheme.
They want the "piracy rate" to be high (fund us!), but not as high as last year (we are making progress, fund us!) so they make up a "scientific analysis" that produces the desired result.
Now why the hell should ".NET be a web standard".
.NET framework has, and should have, nothing to do with the W3C.
The parts of it that are both good and have something whatsoever to do with the web are mostly standardized already.
The rest of the
You can view this really cool hack here.
This guy has his GPS cellphone periodically sending a single UDP package with his coordinates to his server, that builds a http-GET you can click to locate him on MapQuest.
Pretty neat.
It's also more portable than, say, a TOW, and much cheaper.
My most vivid memory of it is still that it is really heavy and a bitch to carry long distances. (Well, I have a BMI of 18 wish may affect my impression.)
Well, I should note that we used the stainless steel barrel, not the composite one. I hear it is a lot lighter, but also a lot more fragile.
And, no, I have never been a SEAL or a Ranger.
I've seen numerous movies with more subtle themes. The Matrix is about kicking ass and wearing leather.
And shades, cool shades.
I don't think that the civilian casualties were a mere byproduct.
No, the timing was not a coincident. More dead increase the propaganda value, I am sure they choose that time based on both that the target would be densly populatet (thus ensuring a frightening bodycount) and that the planes they used would be near empty (making them easier to take and hold).
It's just important to know that killing wasn't the main objective. To the terrorists (at least the masterminds) it was a means to an end.
One indication on this is that the attack on the WTC 9/11 could easily hav been much worse. Ever noticed that the first plane hit the tower close to the top?
Obviously it could have hit lower if the pilot wanted to (as the second plane did).
The pilot must have known that everyone above the point of impact would burn or suffocate regardless of if the towers would be left standing or not, and that the building was bustling with people.
Maybe the hit near the top was some last deranged act of "humanism" by the pilot, undoubtedly he could single-handedly have pushed the deathtoll into the tens of thousands by diving before inpact, but for some reason choose not to.
Thus many in the first tower survived, and when the second plane hit that tower had been partly evacuated, so many of the inhabitants there also survived.
Why would any terrorist worry about getting boxcutters past airport security now when they could dump an assload of ricin into a big city's reservoir and watch hundreds of thousands of people croak?
Why did they bother to do it in the first place?
Maybe because the attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon was first and formost an attack on the symbols of the military and financial might of the US and that the civilian victims were just a side effect?
If they only were looking for a huge bodycount they would have choosen another target, or another method.
Contrary to popular opinion, terrorism (per definition) isn't just about killing people, it's about furthering your agenda through intimidation.
This means that they are mostly primarily interested in maximizing the propaganda value of their actions, not the destructions they cause.
Take Usama Bin Laden for example.
As I understand it one of his most important objectives was to get the US military out of Saudi Arabia.
And, guess what, you're pulling out of there right now.
From his point of view: Mission Accomplished.
And all this essentialy because of the fear instilled by one operation.
As an added bonus you crushed a secular regime in the middle east.
Be prepared for Al Quaida operatives (or others) trying to instigate a islamic revolution in Iraq sometime in the next few years...
I think most of the proposed methods for reducing terrorism misses the point.
Almost all methods try to take the terrorists on directly. But terrorism is only the symptom, not the decease.
It's root cause is: A lot of people are so desperate that supporting these guys seems like a good idea.
A terrorist organization can't live without popular support somwhere. Take away this support for their cause and what you have left is a few extremists with a serious funding problem (ok, OBL might be an exception) and nowhere to hide.
In the case of islamic terrorism solving the Palestinian question would probably go a long way towards reducing the threat.
Besides, why should the average american be concerned for homeland security?
I'm sure domestic any number of different things, cars, tobacco, alcohol, etc. kills more people each year on american soil than terrorism does.
Yet, I see no huge overarching "war on speeding" for example.
I'm not american, but let me tell you. From the outside this fixation on security looks a lot like hysteria.
Furthermore it seems like a lot of people in the position to do so is converting this paranoia into money and power for themselves.
I think the general US population would be much better of without these monsterously huge efforts to "increase security" att all costs.
But what do I know, I'm just a dirty foreigner.
"You had to live -- did live, from habit that became instinct -- in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized. "
Actually, these cameras come equipped with Infra-red.
So, you are telling me that George Orwell was to optimistic?
*shudder*
...I'm glad it got rectified eventually.
Sadly, that means squat in the public mind.
If anything of this will stick it is the big sexy "fact" that "the gubmint is gonna bust you for trading files".
I mean, look at this example:
A lot of people think they have found lots and lots of chemical weapons stached away in Iraq.
This is (at least this far) simply not the case, but the media has loadly claimed these findings, and then retracted them in fine print so many times that it has become the truth in a lot of peoples minds.
The big sexy news item, repeated again and again sticks, regardles of if it is true or not.
Exactly the RIAA's purpose with these lawsuits, I presume...
The British and the Irish are the same race, please try to avoid using words against their meaning.
Technically all homo sapiens are the same race.
I wish people would fucking remember that.
There really isnt any [propaganda] in the game
No, because the whole game is a piece of propaganda.
I mean, the US army footed the bill, they must obviously feel they are getting something worth paying for.
It's basically a "infomercial", and by that I mean a bunch of fucking lies.
At least if the US army is anything like the army I served in.
Get a real job instead kids, the army isn't cool.
Java is slow for desktop applications because its graphics library is rubbish, not because the VM is inherently slow.
.NET framework *.
Partly true, but a VM do add some extra overhead.
And about the platform independent part... follow your link and check out the current scope of the mono project. You will notice it currently doesn't cover 100% of the
So basically what we have a "platform independent" framework that currently only works 100% on one platform (No the BSD-port by MS isn't complete, it only covers the standardized parts.)
In my eyes this is not really platform independent at all.
But it may be, in the future, if MS doesn't find it in it's interrest to work against true platform independence.
*) This is in no way meant as a bash directed at the mono-guys, for whom I feel nothing but complete and utter admiration.
There is an automagic Garbage Collector like Java, but you still have control if you don't want to wait for the automagic processes.
...and just like in Java, that control is less than perfect.
If I remember correctly there is, for example, no way to guarantee a destructor will run for a particular instance before it is recycled.
Is this still true?