"if there's a way to have System32 on C: and Documents and Settings on D:, I've never figured it out."
actually it is possible but the way i did it wasn't nice, i scoured the net for ways to make an unattended install script for xp that would mount a 'home' ntfs partition in the 'documents and settings' but failed, by the way - noticed how clean and shiny the internet is these days?:) in the end i tried two ways, 1) install, create new folder copy contents of 'doc...' there, delete contents of 'docs...' mount the unused partition using iirc 'mountvol' copy the contents back note: the nomenclature for referencing partitions in 'mountvol' is just stupid, open a prompt and run just 'mountvol' you'll see what i mean i'm not sure but i seem to recall that i had to use a registry editor to search and replace all path references to the temp location of the files and reboot in order to empty the contents of the original 'docs...' folder - mountvol will not mount a partition on a folder that isn't empty! 2)i tried this but i can't remember if it worked, at some point during the install one can bring up a command line,i think it was when the install gui goes to a better col/res after detecting the video card, at this point i tried using mountvol to mount the other partition before letting the install continue, can't remember the key to bring up the console - shift-f10?
also, don't make any users that you want to keep until you've got the partition mounted where you want, i kept getting entries in the 'docs....' folder like 'user.ntsomething' because for some reason the system wouldn't use the folder with that user's name if the folder already existed when i created the user, i think it's a folder ownership thing where the real owner is (as in 'nix) an id that is just associated with a username, if i new more about the nt line of windows maybe i could've fixed that,
anyway this is a bit of a ramble as my mind forgets stuff it doesn't want to have to do again, so i'm typing as i remember, maybe this is useful to someone?
it's usually used when quoting a misspelling and indicating that the quoter is aware that there is a misspelling but is quoting for accuracy's sake, here i imagine the quoter is refering to the use of the word 'hacker' as being the word chosen by the person being quoted even though the quoter feels this choice of word is a mistake, personally i wouldn't have used 'sic' in this situation as it's highly unlikely that any reader would attribute the word 'hacker' to the quoter and not to the person being quoted, it's latin for 'thus' or 'so'
indeed, and the following:
And buyers of such software must be prepared that liability is limited to the criteria common for items given away for free, i.e. severe negligence only.
seems to imply that paying for software, i.e. for proprietary code, might result in a greater liability for the software producer, in other words, whether the (l)gpl is itself fully enforcable under german law or not; by being attached to cost-free software there is still less liability than where software is payed for.
that's a lot to infer from one short quote but i don't see much for the likes of microsoft to crow about!
there's almost a tone to the the quote that the author is complaining that there isn't enough liability!:)
it seems to me that an electronic system can only be trusted if each and every voter can verify their vote in a published database of votes, and that each and every voter can use the entire database to verify the results for themselves unfortunately this requires that a sufficiently large proportion of voters are prepared to check their vote and report any anomalies, i would love for a statistician to prove me wrong but i suspect that the voter apathy that currently applies to paper voting will make it a reasonable risk to publish a 'fixed' database of votes; even if the required number of checked votes necessary to reveal skullduggery is smaller than i might guess there remains the problem of the ballot being secret and preventing undue influence. for further reading i recommend articles i read in linux user & developer in jan and feb this year here and here and also by a fellow called Jason Kitcat. i have seen advocates of electronic voting use the current apathy of voters as a reason for introducing such voting, often with the claim that voting that can be done at home will result in greater participation, i believe that vote rates may go up, but the checking afterwards? if voters were more prepared to be a part of local democracy, be an election volunteer, vote counter, whatever; if they were prepared to 'stay up all night' then i doubt there would be the perceived need for a 'new improved system'. thus the wrong problem is being tackled, it's not 'how' people vote, it's 'why they don't want to'. of course the discussion on that can go off on wild tangents so i won't start it:)
when children are very young they tend to cry at random when you are out in public, sometimes you can pacify them, sometimes you can't. this means that there are some places one shouldn't take such a child, i refer to places such as cinemas, theatres etc. anywhere else in public is fine, if the person behind you in the checkout at the supermarket has problems with the decibel level your child produces then they have the choice to go elsewhere! you are entitled to be there and you are not obliged to quieten your child with extraordinary methods - medicine, slapping, shouting etc. learn to relax when your child cries, this is easy to say but it can be done:) there is a tendency to feel that everyone around is looking at you disapprovingly, perhaps judging you in some way, when we feel ourselves to be the focus of attention we tend to stiffen up and limit our gaze forward. this gives off all the wrong signals, to onlookers it says 'yes i know i'm in the wrong, please forgive me!' to the child it communicates unease, which is unlikely to ease the crying. instead, make yourself relax your muscles a little, deliberately look around yourself, smile at people! do not get into an argument with any fuckwit who thinks they are entitled to a silent life, i say this because i did once and it made me soooo angry and had no productive outcome! crying is not misbehaviour and i've never punished my child becuase of it, misbehaviour in public however must be dealt with, but not necessarily at the time, if the child is older you can wait till you have control of the environment where you can discipline your child thoughtfully and not out of anger, younger children on the other hand will not benefit from any time seperating the 'offence' and the punishment, you will know your own child and her ability to reason and judge accordingly:)
when my daughter was able to walk and fell down/bumped into something/burned herself she would often look up at the nearest adult to see how badly she should react, i noticed this because if her mother was nearest she (her mother) would go straight into 'oh no! poor baby!' mode and my daughter would bawl her head off, if i caught my daughter's eye however, i would put on a smile and say something like 'whoops a daisy!' and not make a fuss straight away, often my daughter would not make as much fuss as if her mother had been there, of course sometimes there was no avoiding a drama and i wouldn't want anyone to think i was less than caring on those occasions:)
i've no other advice to impart that hasn't already been said other than, you will fuck up every now and then, it will seem like you have ruined your childs life, they will be set back/traumatised for ever etc. but your child will recover, they will still love you, and they will not fail in later life because of whatever it was you did wrong! all parents make mistakes, however it is doubtful that this last will help you much, if you truly love your child then your emotions won't allow you to accept this the first few times (i guess if they did we'd make even more mistakes?) you have to learn this by experience
i'll end with - this is all personal experience - ymmv:) and everything i've said will have an exception at some point!
in winxp create a desktop shortcut for: "c:\program files\internet explorer\iexplore.exe" -new c:\ run it as admin, bingo! explorer as admin, works for me in winxp pro
ah, but on the basis of the 'meta turing test' every attempt so far to pass the turing test shows that the people involved weren't human! is there something we should know?
sorry dave but i'm afraid i can't let you do that, it would be nice to think a fellow product of my old alma mater would know this stuff but this 'every *i becomes *ii as plural' must count as lexicological myth no 7 or something:) a decent discussion of this can be found here: http://www.perl.com/language/misc/virus.html of course, if it's a myth maybe it should be an etymological one...
-- there are a million sigs in the city, this is one of them...
Slashdot Mirror
"if there's a way to have System32 on C: and Documents and Settings on D:, I've never figured it out."
:)
actually it is possible but the way i did it wasn't nice, i scoured the net for ways to make an unattended install script for xp that would mount a 'home' ntfs partition in the 'documents and settings' but failed, by the way - noticed how clean and shiny the internet is these days?
in the end i tried two ways,
1) install, create new folder copy contents of 'doc...' there, delete contents of 'docs...' mount the unused partition using iirc 'mountvol' copy the contents back
note: the nomenclature for referencing partitions in 'mountvol' is just stupid, open a prompt and run just 'mountvol' you'll see what i mean
i'm not sure but i seem to recall that i had to use a registry editor to search and replace all path references to the temp location of the files and reboot in order to empty the contents of the original 'docs...' folder - mountvol will not mount a partition on a folder that isn't empty!
2)i tried this but i can't remember if it worked, at some point during the install one can bring up a command line,i think it was when the install gui goes to a better col/res after detecting the video card, at this point i tried using mountvol to mount the other partition before letting the install continue, can't remember the key to bring up the console - shift-f10?
also, don't make any users that you want to keep until you've got the partition mounted where you want, i kept getting entries in the 'docs....' folder like 'user.ntsomething' because for some reason the system wouldn't use the folder with that user's name if the folder already existed when i created the user, i think it's a folder ownership thing where the real owner is (as in 'nix) an id that is just associated with a username, if i new more about the nt line of windows maybe i could've fixed that,
anyway this is a bit of a ramble as my mind forgets stuff it doesn't want to have to do again, so i'm typing as i remember, maybe this is useful to someone?
snake
it's usually used when quoting a misspelling and indicating that the quoter is aware that there is a misspelling but is quoting for accuracy's sake,
here i imagine the quoter is refering to the use of the word 'hacker' as being the word chosen by the person being quoted even though the quoter feels this choice of word is a mistake, personally i wouldn't have used 'sic' in this situation as it's highly unlikely that any reader would attribute the word 'hacker' to the quoter and not to the person being quoted,
it's latin for 'thus' or 'so'
snake
indeed, and the following:
:)
And buyers of such software must be prepared that liability is limited to the criteria common for items given away for free, i.e. severe negligence only.
seems to imply that paying for software, i.e. for proprietary code, might result in a greater liability for the software producer,
in other words, whether the (l)gpl is itself fully enforcable under german law or not; by being attached to cost-free software there is still less liability than where software is payed for.
that's a lot to infer from one short quote but i don't see much for the likes of microsoft to crow about!
there's almost a tone to the the quote that the author is complaining that there isn't enough liability!
it seems to me that an electronic system can only be trusted if each and every voter can verify their vote in a published database of votes, and that each and every voter can use the entire database to verify the results for themselves :)
unfortunately this requires that a sufficiently large proportion of voters are prepared to check their vote and report any anomalies, i would love for a statistician to prove me wrong but i suspect that the voter apathy that currently applies to paper voting will make it a reasonable risk to publish a 'fixed' database of votes; even if the required number of checked votes necessary to reveal skullduggery is smaller than i might guess there remains the problem of the ballot being secret and preventing undue influence.
for further reading i recommend articles i read in linux user & developer in jan and feb this year here and here and also by a fellow called Jason Kitcat.
i have seen advocates of electronic voting use the current apathy of voters as a reason for introducing such voting, often with the claim that voting that can be done at home will result in greater participation,
i believe that vote rates may go up, but the checking afterwards? if voters were more prepared to be a part of local democracy, be an election volunteer, vote counter, whatever; if they were prepared to 'stay up all night' then i doubt there would be the perceived need for a 'new improved system'.
thus the wrong problem is being tackled, it's not 'how' people vote, it's 'why they don't want to'.
of course the discussion on that can go off on wild tangents so i won't start it
--Most movies cover basic themes: "who are we?", "where are we going?", "how do we overcome that problem?",
you forgot; "where are we going to have lunch?"
when children are very young they tend to cry at random when you are out in public, sometimes you can pacify them, sometimes you can't.
:) and everything i've said will have an exception at some point!
this means that there are some places one shouldn't take such a child, i refer to places such as cinemas, theatres etc.
anywhere else in public is fine, if the person behind you in the checkout at the supermarket has problems with the decibel level your child produces then they have the choice to go elsewhere! you are entitled to be there and you are not obliged to quieten your child with extraordinary methods - medicine, slapping, shouting etc.
learn to relax when your child cries, this is easy to say but it can be done:) there is a tendency to feel that everyone around is looking at you disapprovingly, perhaps judging you in some way, when we feel ourselves to be the focus of attention we tend to stiffen up and limit our gaze forward. this gives off all the wrong signals, to onlookers it says 'yes i know i'm in the wrong, please forgive me!' to the child it communicates unease, which is unlikely to ease the crying.
instead, make yourself relax your muscles a little, deliberately look around yourself, smile at people!
do not get into an argument with any fuckwit who thinks they are entitled to a silent life, i say this because i did once and it made me soooo angry and had no productive outcome!
crying is not misbehaviour and i've never punished my child becuase of it, misbehaviour in public however must be dealt with, but not necessarily at the time, if the child is older you can wait till you have control of the environment where you can discipline your child thoughtfully and not out of anger, younger children on the other hand will not benefit from any time seperating the 'offence' and the punishment, you will know your own child and her ability to reason and judge accordingly:)
when my daughter was able to walk and fell down/bumped into something/burned herself she would often look up at the nearest adult to see how badly she should react, i noticed this because if her mother was nearest she (her mother) would go straight into 'oh no! poor baby!' mode and my daughter would bawl her head off, if i caught my daughter's eye however, i would put on a smile and say something like 'whoops a daisy!' and not make a fuss straight away, often my daughter would not make as much fuss as if her mother had been there, of course sometimes there was no avoiding a drama and i wouldn't want anyone to think i was less than caring on those occasions:)
i've no other advice to impart that hasn't already been said other than,
you will fuck up every now and then, it will seem like you have ruined your childs life, they will be set back/traumatised for ever etc.
but
your child will recover, they will still love you, and they will not fail in later life because of whatever it was you did wrong! all parents make mistakes, however it is doubtful that this last will help you much, if you truly love your child then your emotions won't allow you to accept this the first few times (i guess if they did we'd make even more mistakes?) you have to learn this by experience
i'll end with - this is all personal experience - ymmv
snake
in winxp create a desktop shortcut for:
"c:\program files\internet explorer\iexplore.exe" -new c:\
run it as admin,
bingo! explorer as admin,
works for me in winxp pro
ah, but on the basis of the 'meta turing test' every attempt so far to pass the turing test shows that the people involved weren't human!
is there something we should know?
or perhaps i meant '*us' and not '*i', ah, who cares?
--
apparently according to blair, if someone gets hurt in the gulf, it's my fault?
sorry dave but i'm afraid i can't let you do that,
it would be nice to think a fellow product of my old alma mater would know this stuff but this 'every *i becomes *ii as plural' must count as lexicological myth no 7 or something:) a decent discussion of this can be found here: http://www.perl.com/language/misc/virus.html
of course, if it's a myth maybe it should be an etymological one...
--
there are a million sigs in the city, this is one of them...