Right, he's not been allowed flying now, so not being able to fly is a problem how?
BTW I assume he's actually interested in doing some protesting, if he's going to be wearing that kind of T-shirt in an airport. Otherwise he's just a dumbass.
What he should have done is asked everybody involved for their names, written them down, and posted them on his blog. Naming and shaming publically the dipshits is the only way to scare them and making them behave.
So, task for the Anonymous Legion: Who's the pilot of the airplane? What's his address? Who's the manager on duty? What's his address? Who are the TSA agents who were guarding the gate at that particular time? What's their address?
Send them all a complimentary T-shirt.
What kind of nonsense is that?
He pays for the privilege of visiting deliberately freely available content on web sites.
The site operators pay for the privilege of deliberately offering freely accessible content from a web server. That's the reality. Anyone can elect not to play. If he doesn't want to pay for websurfing, nobody's putting a gun to his head and forcing him to pay his ISP. If the web server operators can't afford to offer free content, nobody's putting a gun to their heads to do it either.
The truth is that this attitude of shaming web surfers into not blocking ads is hypocritical: it's a consequence of the fact that the web operators have a private monetary agreement with the advertisers to exploit a third party (the web surfer) who has no actual part in their agreement. There's really no reason at all for web surfers to feel an obligation to look at ads, just as there's no obligation for me to pay for the meal and movie tickets of my neighbours prior to them having sex in their home.
As long as there is more than a single monopoly providing a given good or
service then individuals really do need a way to become informed about
alternatives and make decisions.
That seems to be the crux of your argument, but I have to disagree with it.
There's no rule or reason why individuals have some obligation to be part of
a market, that is, to make a decision about alternatives available for sale. Many people elect to do so (eg the wife selecting a milk brand), but many people elect not to (eg the husband who doesn't go shopping).
The fact is that the internet is not an appropriate place to inform all people
about alternatives and potential decisions. I would go so far as to say that
in any one 24 hour period, 3/4 or more of the surfing population has no interest in decision making and obtaining information about products, and the fact that they are getting exposed to such information in the form of ads is a gross abuse of the common network resources, by marketing and advertising organisations alike.
We are not economic actors whose sole function is to buy products, and make decisions in every conceivable market. Ads are best treated as damage, that should be routed around by automatic systems. The few who don't want that should be able to disable them.
And that is how bureaucrats pervert the course of Justice when they want to. It's very Kafka-esque how they can join a small technicality with another small technicality into a snowball of a legal nightmare that, once viewed as a whole, has no sense of proportion with the alleged infraction.
Sadly, it's taxpayers who ultimately foot the bill for such abuses in Britain and Sweden yet again.
I want safe quick transportation for free. We should be aiming for social improvements, and getting out of the mindset that everything must be nickel and dimed. Let's think big, figure out how to capture the sun's energy from orbit, and
make transportation systems on earth that are literally free to use by all inhabitants.
It's even better for coding because one's thumbs don't brush up on trackpad causing the mouse to fly away. I generally refuse to use any laptop that has a trackpad.
To some extent, the GATTACA plot is at the more desirable end of the spectrum.
If it becomes available to the public as a whole, it will necessarily be regulated, subsidised and distributed/controlled by the government. And *that* has been tried in the 30s under the name Eugenics in various countries. The Nazis (yes, Godwin alert) had good intentions, in that they truly believed that Jews and various other populations were genetically inferior and the Aryan race had strong optimality properties in areas such as intelligence and morality, which should become the standard of Humanity.
Fast
forward 20 years and for $18.99 at Wal-Mart you'll be buying BabyGen pills
[citation needed]
Ferraris have been around for 20 years. Can you buy a new Ferrari for $30k?
No? But they've been around so long, their price should have come down to regular car prices already!
E-ink devices are great for nontechnical reading. What do I mean by that? Reading which starts on the first page, and traverses each page fully in a linear sequence. That's the use case where tablets just can't compete. But be careful.
Screen size matters. Pick a font size you feel comfortable with, and then see how many words can fit on a page. It gets very annoying if you have to press a button to flip pages too many times. With a normal paperback, you only flip the
page once every two pages, so that's the equivalent of one button press for 1000 words or so. An ereader increases the rate to at best two button presses for 1000 words, and often more.
For technical documents, e-ink devices fall over. There are two things that matter with technical docs: viewing images/equations/tables and easy searching.
For viewing images/equations/tables, you really want to see the full rendered page all at once, so any device that can't do it is a major problem. If you have to squint to decipher a full page, forget it. If you can't afford a big screen, you'll have to do a lot of zooming. That gets old very quickly, even with a tablet where zooming is responsive. You can try reading in landscape, but you'll only get 1/3rd of a page typically, so that means you'll be pressing the scroll button 3x for each page, ie 6x as often as a paperback.
The other major issue is searching. When you have lots of papers/textbooks, the most common thing you'll be doing is looking for a paragraph within, not actually reading anything from start to finish. For that, both tablets and e-ink devices suck major donkey balls, but tablets suck a little less, because flipping pages is much faster.
You might think that text searching capability would solve that problem, it doesn't. Searching for pictures, diagrams, or equations doesn't work. Searching for keywords tends to return too many hits in a textbook. With heavy hypertext linking, you can get lost very quickly.
And the quality of indexes varies from book to book. Expect to be spending a lot of time flipping pages interactively, just like a real dead tree edition.
All that said, for technical reading I'm reasonably happy with a 10 inch tablet for now, although they are just not practical for carrying around everywhere, and can't be read in daylight.
I didn't quite forget that. Although you might have a hundred different kernels with slightly different patchsets, a lot of the patches won't have a direct impact on the subsystem that matters for video drivers, and when you do get patches that impact the drivers, the modifications in Nvidia's code would carry over to other kernels in the list.
If Nvidia wanted to do this, they'd have to set it up as a properly engineered automated regression suite though. It wouldn't work as quick and dirty system.
It's just not that simple. There is no foolproof way of rebooting a nation.
It's never been done. Nobody knows how.
Russia suffered the same fate many
companies suffer when they bring in outside consultants to reorganize them.
You get a lot of layoffs, department mergers and splits, and when the consultants go home, nobody knows how the new system is supposed to work, and those who knew how the old system worked are gone or lost themselves.
This also happened in Iraq and Afghanistan more recently. First, all the people who knew how things worked over there were purged for political reasons ("debaathification"), then some half baked plans were made by the provisional authority, finally the mess was handed over to the locals, who got accused of being corrupt and too primitive ("tribal") when things obviously failed. Oh yeah, and all this also caused civil war.
A spokesman for the Obama administration called the sentence [for Pussy Riot]
"disproportionate," as if the length of the prison term were the only problem
with open repression of political speech.
What do you expect? This is the exact same week that Assange got temporarily saved from the US led persecution against him. The current bunch of yahoos in power see nothing wrong with imprisoning people for speaking out, on both sides of the world. I'm actually surprised that there's even this much rumbling in the West about the Russian trial, although it *is* an election year.
so a
company like Nvidia who wants to keep their driver source secret (which may
not be ideal, but it practical in the real world of selling stuff)) cannot
put that driver on the CD for me - because they do not know which kernel
version I'm running, so they have to do a less-than-perfect job of it.
That's not true, a company like Nvidia has many options available to do just the equivalent of that (nobody has CD drives these days anymore).
What Nvidia needs to do is set up a server with precompiled drivers for all
the current major Linux distros. For Debian based distros, when you buy the
card, there should be a printed slip of paper with a URL for Nvidia's APT source repo. For RPM distros, there should be a URL for yum or whatever the packager of choice is. It's very easy to do, and if done right, the correct driver will be automatically downloaded and installed. And when you upgrade your kernel, your package manager will simply download and install the driver compiled for the new version, and so on.
It's not rocket science, Nvidia: make a list of all the major distros, for each major distro make a list of all the distributed kernels. Say there's 100 variations all in all. Now download the source for each of the variations, compile your drivers for each, and copy the.debs and.rpms onto the packaging server. That's it. Now most Linux users will get the correct drivers automagically, you can stay closed source, and everybody is happy.
Re:Not "Going out of Business," Persay...
on
Trouble At OnLive
·
· Score: 1
If that's the case, then that's what they SHOULD be doing. It's illegal for a company to operate when insolvent. The directors could go to jail for that.
He's not being obtuse. You're simply repeating his exact point. Americans think that American law applies to everybody on earth, and that nobody else's laws apply to them.
Really? Do you own a truck? Do you do deliveries? If so, do you own the roads that you're driving on?
Or are you an information worker? Do you own a computer? Do you own the phone lines that connect you to the internet?
Nobody owns all the means of production in capitalism. It's always about owning some small fraction of the means of production, and fudging the numbers on everything else that's needed (a.k.a. externalities).
You cannot justify the case in a vacuum. All rules and laws have to be interpreted, and decisions have to be made by people. Therefore you have to ask the question: how are similar cases handled routinely?
Is Assange the first person to be accused of rape in Sweden? No of course not. Is he the first who has "fled" to a different jurisdiction after being accused? No, of course not. How are similar cases handled normally? Do Swedish authorities issue Interpol warrants for such cases? No, of course not. Do governments threaten to invade a foreign embassy just because they have an "obligation" to help a Swedish prosecutor to investigate an alleged rape case? No of course not.
The usual way this kind of rape allegation is treated is nothing like the way it is being treated now. This indicates that the process of law isn't the problem, here. The process can be paused or stopped without a problem, it happens all the time when a case has insufficient evidence, and senior people in government make such decisions routinely. Even the law itself isn't the problem: the presumption of innocence already applies when there is insufficient evidence.
The problem are certain elements in the Swedish government, who have either been bribed or threatened to pervert the normal Swedish process of law into an way of capturing Assange. And the same is true in the UK, as we are seeing.
The facts that changed are that Sweden's prosecution began harrassing him on bogus sex charges. By that event, Sweden was outed as an American lapdog (or if you like, elements of Sweden's ruling elite were shown to be, obviously not everybody in Sweden is corrupt). So it makes perfect sense to reevaluate the previous rating as a safe place for him.
If Sweden would (as alleged) be happy to hand him
over to the USA now, they would presumably have been happy to do so before
the rape case.
That's putting the cart before the horse. They have in fact been happy to do so before the rape case, since the rape case was the excuse that was chosen to arrest him. But setting up the rape prosecution wasn't trivial, the women had to be convinced to play along, the paperwork had to be filed, money had to change hands, etc. The simplest explanation is that Assange was lucky to escape just in time, and the plot failed.
Of course it's interesting that just today the UK is behaving in a highly unusual way, threatening to undo centuries of diplomacy by invading a diplomatic compound.
Slashdot Mirror
Right, he's not been allowed flying now, so not being able to fly is a problem how? BTW I assume he's actually interested in doing some protesting, if he's going to be wearing that kind of T-shirt in an airport. Otherwise he's just a dumbass.
So, task for the Anonymous Legion: Who's the pilot of the airplane? What's his address? Who's the manager on duty? What's his address? Who are the TSA agents who were guarding the gate at that particular time? What's their address? Send them all a complimentary T-shirt.
The truth is that this attitude of shaming web surfers into not blocking ads is hypocritical: it's a consequence of the fact that the web operators have a private monetary agreement with the advertisers to exploit a third party (the web surfer) who has no actual part in their agreement. There's really no reason at all for web surfers to feel an obligation to look at ads, just as there's no obligation for me to pay for the meal and movie tickets of my neighbours prior to them having sex in their home.
Or better yet, let's just blow up some nukes on the moon, and use it as a spaceship ;-)
That seems to be the crux of your argument, but I have to disagree with it. There's no rule or reason why individuals have some obligation to be part of a market, that is, to make a decision about alternatives available for sale. Many people elect to do so (eg the wife selecting a milk brand), but many people elect not to (eg the husband who doesn't go shopping).
The fact is that the internet is not an appropriate place to inform all people about alternatives and potential decisions. I would go so far as to say that in any one 24 hour period, 3/4 or more of the surfing population has no interest in decision making and obtaining information about products, and the fact that they are getting exposed to such information in the form of ads is a gross abuse of the common network resources, by marketing and advertising organisations alike.
We are not economic actors whose sole function is to buy products, and make decisions in every conceivable market. Ads are best treated as damage, that should be routed around by automatic systems. The few who don't want that should be able to disable them.
Sadly, it's taxpayers who ultimately foot the bill for such abuses in Britain and Sweden yet again.
Doubleclick is Google. This is probably just Microsoft trying to brown-nose its way with them...
I want safe quick transportation for free. We should be aiming for social improvements, and getting out of the mindset that everything must be nickel and dimed. Let's think big, figure out how to capture the sun's energy from orbit, and make transportation systems on earth that are literally free to use by all inhabitants.
Where's the best place to buy a turtleneck sweater?
It's even better for coding because one's thumbs don't brush up on trackpad causing the mouse to fly away. I generally refuse to use any laptop that has a trackpad.
To some extent, the GATTACA plot is at the more desirable end of the spectrum. If it becomes available to the public as a whole, it will necessarily be regulated, subsidised and distributed/controlled by the government. And *that* has been tried in the 30s under the name Eugenics in various countries. The Nazis (yes, Godwin alert) had good intentions, in that they truly believed that Jews and various other populations were genetically inferior and the Aryan race had strong optimality properties in areas such as intelligence and morality, which should become the standard of Humanity.
Technically, they are selfish because they accumulate wealth without spending it or expecting to spend it ("duh").
In other words, argument from authority.
[citation needed]
Ferraris have been around for 20 years. Can you buy a new Ferrari for $30k? No? But they've been around so long, their price should have come down to regular car prices already!
Screen size matters. Pick a font size you feel comfortable with, and then see how many words can fit on a page. It gets very annoying if you have to press a button to flip pages too many times. With a normal paperback, you only flip the page once every two pages, so that's the equivalent of one button press for 1000 words or so. An ereader increases the rate to at best two button presses for 1000 words, and often more.
For technical documents, e-ink devices fall over. There are two things that matter with technical docs: viewing images/equations/tables and easy searching.
For viewing images/equations/tables, you really want to see the full rendered page all at once, so any device that can't do it is a major problem. If you have to squint to decipher a full page, forget it. If you can't afford a big screen, you'll have to do a lot of zooming. That gets old very quickly, even with a tablet where zooming is responsive. You can try reading in landscape, but you'll only get 1/3rd of a page typically, so that means you'll be pressing the scroll button 3x for each page, ie 6x as often as a paperback.
The other major issue is searching. When you have lots of papers/textbooks, the most common thing you'll be doing is looking for a paragraph within, not actually reading anything from start to finish. For that, both tablets and e-ink devices suck major donkey balls, but tablets suck a little less, because flipping pages is much faster.
You might think that text searching capability would solve that problem, it doesn't. Searching for pictures, diagrams, or equations doesn't work. Searching for keywords tends to return too many hits in a textbook. With heavy hypertext linking, you can get lost very quickly. And the quality of indexes varies from book to book. Expect to be spending a lot of time flipping pages interactively, just like a real dead tree edition.
All that said, for technical reading I'm reasonably happy with a 10 inch tablet for now, although they are just not practical for carrying around everywhere, and can't be read in daylight.
If Nvidia wanted to do this, they'd have to set it up as a properly engineered automated regression suite though. It wouldn't work as quick and dirty system.
Russia suffered the same fate many companies suffer when they bring in outside consultants to reorganize them. You get a lot of layoffs, department mergers and splits, and when the consultants go home, nobody knows how the new system is supposed to work, and those who knew how the old system worked are gone or lost themselves.
This also happened in Iraq and Afghanistan more recently. First, all the people who knew how things worked over there were purged for political reasons ("debaathification"), then some half baked plans were made by the provisional authority, finally the mess was handed over to the locals, who got accused of being corrupt and too primitive ("tribal") when things obviously failed. Oh yeah, and all this also caused civil war.
What do you expect? This is the exact same week that Assange got temporarily saved from the US led persecution against him. The current bunch of yahoos in power see nothing wrong with imprisoning people for speaking out, on both sides of the world. I'm actually surprised that there's even this much rumbling in the West about the Russian trial, although it *is* an election year.
That's wishful thinking. America would never invade Russia, especially not to liberate a chess player.
That's not true, a company like Nvidia has many options available to do just the equivalent of that (nobody has CD drives these days anymore).
What Nvidia needs to do is set up a server with precompiled drivers for all the current major Linux distros. For Debian based distros, when you buy the card, there should be a printed slip of paper with a URL for Nvidia's APT source repo. For RPM distros, there should be a URL for yum or whatever the packager of choice is. It's very easy to do, and if done right, the correct driver will be automatically downloaded and installed. And when you upgrade your kernel, your package manager will simply download and install the driver compiled for the new version, and so on.
It's not rocket science, Nvidia: make a list of all the major distros, for each major distro make a list of all the distributed kernels. Say there's 100 variations all in all. Now download the source for each of the variations, compile your drivers for each, and copy the .debs and .rpms onto the packaging server. That's it. Now most Linux users will get the correct drivers automagically, you can stay closed source, and everybody is happy.
If that's the case, then that's what they SHOULD be doing. It's illegal for a company to operate when insolvent. The directors could go to jail for that.
He's not being obtuse. You're simply repeating his exact point. Americans think that American law applies to everybody on earth, and that nobody else's laws apply to them.
Nobody owns all the means of production in capitalism. It's always about owning some small fraction of the means of production, and fudging the numbers on everything else that's needed (a.k.a. externalities).
Is Assange the first person to be accused of rape in Sweden? No of course not. Is he the first who has "fled" to a different jurisdiction after being accused? No, of course not. How are similar cases handled normally? Do Swedish authorities issue Interpol warrants for such cases? No, of course not. Do governments threaten to invade a foreign embassy just because they have an "obligation" to help a Swedish prosecutor to investigate an alleged rape case? No of course not.
The usual way this kind of rape allegation is treated is nothing like the way it is being treated now. This indicates that the process of law isn't the problem, here. The process can be paused or stopped without a problem, it happens all the time when a case has insufficient evidence, and senior people in government make such decisions routinely. Even the law itself isn't the problem: the presumption of innocence already applies when there is insufficient evidence.
The problem are certain elements in the Swedish government, who have either been bribed or threatened to pervert the normal Swedish process of law into an way of capturing Assange. And the same is true in the UK, as we are seeing.
That's putting the cart before the horse. They have in fact been happy to do so before the rape case, since the rape case was the excuse that was chosen to arrest him. But setting up the rape prosecution wasn't trivial, the women had to be convinced to play along, the paperwork had to be filed, money had to change hands, etc. The simplest explanation is that Assange was lucky to escape just in time, and the plot failed.
Of course it's interesting that just today the UK is behaving in a highly unusual way, threatening to undo centuries of diplomacy by invading a diplomatic compound.