My more or less standard observation is that when media of any sort declares something as "dying" or "dead", it generally isn't. One poster noted that Chess is clearly not dying, and the equally old (if not older) games of Go and Mahjongg still enjoy popularity in their respective circles.
But the death thing, think of it - people declare Linux dead on a daily basis, and ZDNet has been known for going so far as to state that IBM was rescinding all support for OS/2 as of this past January. (They're not.)
With that in mind, Pinball is very much the classic game. Never mind the more feature-encrufted games (the Star Wars episode 1 game comes to mind), in general the idea of knocking a ball around a board is just fun - it requires high reflexes and major hand-eye coordination, and who here hasn't gotten jazzed when they heard the familiar "snap!" that indicated you got a free game?
Spammers say they are simply tilting the Internet's sales power away from big corporations that can afford fancy campaigns. They blame anti-spam vigilantes for forcing them to increasingly use underhanded techniques.
Since when i=did the internet have any perceived "sales power"? Last I checked, the internet was just a bunch of wires tying a bunch of computers together using TCP/IP. It's great, but please....
Look, I'll leave it at this: no matter how you work it, it is still a dumb and irresponsible idea to rely solely on domain names. I don't know about anyone else, but most people I know, the first trip is to the search engines if they need to research anything.
One has to remember that the 'net wasn't really designed with that in mind. Keep in mind that it was originally a Department of Defense project - when it was first started, Admiral Random didn't expect that J. Random Civilian would ultimately be using it from his America Online account.
It also comes back to the purpose of TLD's..net was for networks out there,.com was for commercial entities,.org was for non profit organizations,.edu and.gov remain to this day for schools and government agencies respectively. Somewhere along the life of the 'net, the lines between.com,.net and.org became blurred - which is why you get domains like "IAmCarbonatedMilk.com". By your logic, I will assume that the registrant of this domain was into some seriously hardcore zen.
Admittedly, if we harken back to the original TLD logic, my website should be on "northarc.org" as it is clearly not for profit.
But nonetheless, the respondent to the root of this tree is right - assuming you type "civilwarbattles.com" and you will get data on the American Civil War of the 19th century is just plain dumb and irresponsible. If you want civil war battles, you go to Google and type (with quotes) "civil war battles" at the prompt.
Just think, now I can move my family to Cape Cod without packing my family and belongings out of our apartment in Garden Grove, CA! What a way to get closer to my inlaws! Um, waitasec....
Considering the original comment in the article, that the author does not like to click the click-wrap before using software he may (not) like, what of modeling something off of the shareware principle?
For those who are unfamiliar with the concept, it's simple - you download the software and install it. You might have to deal with click-wrap. If you like it, you pay some fee for it (I've never seen more than $50, and that was for an OS/2 PPP dialer with features), and if you don't like it, you don't pay and presumably uninstall the program.
With this in mind, perhaps click-wrap could be slightly redesigned. You disagree, you uninstall, you fuhgetabadit.
Thoughts?
The.com=commercial entity means nothing anymore. For the longest time, I maintained an address on Speakeasy using the.org TDL that they to this day maintain. I still use it, but not for much. But that's another story.
Point being, I have to concur with other respondents. I think "dot-com" and I think "something on the 'net". Likewise, Speakeasy is a for-profit business, and if I register something of mine, it's going to probably be a ".net" just because I can. =^^=
The only problem I would forsee is the Maytag problem - that is, if the flywheel gets off balance, your UPS will start walking across the room it's contained in.
Of course, as discussed in another post, that probably won't matter, as your flywheel will likely explode spectacularly. And this brings up another problem.
And that reminds me, how much does it cost to replace one of those flywheels? Is it really cheaper than a UPS?
The flywheels could not go in the train because the bumpy ride would continuously siphon off power, and you know power siphoned off would be in the form of heat.
I know LACMTA has effectively solved the problem by building vast ventilation systems in teh red line stations. I think the principle idea here would be to direct the heat elsewhere through a grating outside. It has to go somewhere, why not put it someplace where it's going to have an easier time dissipating than the subway station?
This would work if they encased the flywheels in outside-vented rooms, and would help cool things off by installing a blower in the room. Side effect: outside air is pulled in. Perhaps others can throw in other factors I'm missing and solutions to the inherent problems?
What the subject says. Personally speaking, I'm actually a bit surprised that it took so long, and didn't actually happen immediately on appearance in the news. OTOH, the servers are still thrashing, it appears.
I am going to go on record as saying that, while I won't participate, I certainly approve of what people are doing to their machines. But then, it's not like you needed some ham radio operator's approval. =^_^=
Does anyone see a connection? Mr. Auerbach raises a stink, and ICANN decides, "Hey! Let's not re-elect this SOB!"
Of course, this is me, just restating the obvious. But then, all is fair in love, war, and corporate politics.
Let's keep in mind that this is likely a bill passed in the heat of 9/11. They Who Know Best (TM) are still battening down the hatches, and continually trying to "securitize" this country.
Perhaps we need to remind or congresscritters and our president that the lack of freedom and high security are not a good mix.
....Flessner articulated Microsoft's response to Linux. "Linux is free like a puppy. It looks free but when you get all the pieces around it, it doesn't work out so free. There's a lot more than I/O and memory management to make up an operating system."
Pot. Kettle. Black. Mr. Flessner is speaking like a true suit.
I look around at the people running Linux servers, and what few I have asked of it (mostly friends, granted) have always stated that they don't want people breaking into their machinery, they don't want servers that you have to reboot once per week to clean up the swap space, and they don't want servers that are missing half the tools they need. This is amongst those who have installed on their home boxen Windows of some flavor, a Unix variant, an OSX user, and even an OS/2 Warp user. And of those, one Windows user has stated to me that instability is just something that he lives with, but he would NEVER install a Microsoft product on a server.
To take it to a different level (and I apologize to Ford enthusiasts), if you have had bad experience with the two Ford Broncos you bought in your lifetime over the course of three years, yet the one GMC and the one Honda you bought has lasted you for ten years with nothing more than the usual maintenance, would you ever go back to Ford?
My point here is that, IMO, Mr. Flessner has overlooked exactly why there are people who don't want to use his product. Personal bias aside, if you've had previously bad experience with a product, unless there's been a clearly defined change in quality that is highly visible, most (thinking?) people are not going to go back when the old product's manufacturer says "New and Improved".
Slashdot Mirror
But the death thing, think of it - people declare Linux dead on a daily basis, and ZDNet has been known for going so far as to state that IBM was rescinding all support for OS/2 as of this past January. (They're not.)
With that in mind, Pinball is very much the classic game. Never mind the more feature-encrufted games (the Star Wars episode 1 game comes to mind), in general the idea of knocking a ball around a board is just fun - it requires high reflexes and major hand-eye coordination, and who here hasn't gotten jazzed when they heard the familiar "snap!" that indicated you got a free game?
Just my opinions. I could be wrong.
Just think, all those computers on the corporate networks out there, and I without an install CD for the setiathome client.
Since when i=did the internet have any perceived "sales power"? Last I checked, the internet was just a bunch of wires tying a bunch of computers together using TCP/IP. It's great, but please....
73 DE KE6ISF
Look, I'll leave it at this: no matter how you work it, it is still a dumb and irresponsible idea to rely solely on domain names. I don't know about anyone else, but most people I know, the first trip is to the search engines if they need to research anything.
It also comes back to the purpose of TLD's. .net was for networks out there, .com was for commercial entities, .org was for non profit organizations, .edu and .gov remain to this day for schools and government agencies respectively. Somewhere along the life of the 'net, the lines between .com, .net and .org became blurred - which is why you get domains like "IAmCarbonatedMilk.com". By your logic, I will assume that the registrant of this domain was into some seriously hardcore zen.
Admittedly, if we harken back to the original TLD logic, my website should be on "northarc.org" as it is clearly not for profit.
But nonetheless, the respondent to the root of this tree is right - assuming you type "civilwarbattles.com" and you will get data on the American Civil War of the 19th century is just plain dumb and irresponsible. If you want civil war battles, you go to Google and type (with quotes) "civil war battles" at the prompt.
And for the benefit of my readers, this is the results of that search.
The scary thing is, I know the people who would probably have registered "rentachicken.com" if they thought about it.
In ten years, am I going to go to the store and pick up six-pack bottles of Perri-Air?
Just think, now I can move my family to Cape Cod without packing my family and belongings out of our apartment in Garden Grove, CA! What a way to get closer to my inlaws! Um, waitasec....
For those who are unfamiliar with the concept, it's simple - you download the software and install it. You might have to deal with click-wrap. If you like it, you pay some fee for it (I've never seen more than $50, and that was for an OS/2 PPP dialer with features), and if you don't like it, you don't pay and presumably uninstall the program.
With this in mind, perhaps click-wrap could be slightly redesigned. You disagree, you uninstall, you fuhgetabadit. Thoughts?
Now, since when were asteroids created of elipses? With the overuse of them, I'd've thought they'd've run out....
Point being, I have to concur with other respondents. I think "dot-com" and I think "something on the 'net". Likewise, Speakeasy is a for-profit business, and if I register something of mine, it's going to probably be a ".net" just because I can. =^^=
Of course, as discussed in another post, that probably won't matter, as your flywheel will likely explode spectacularly. And this brings up another problem.
And that reminds me, how much does it cost to replace one of those flywheels? Is it really cheaper than a UPS?
I would so like to see a camera shot of that. =^_^=
I know LACMTA has effectively solved the problem by building vast ventilation systems in teh red line stations. I think the principle idea here would be to direct the heat elsewhere through a grating outside. It has to go somewhere, why not put it someplace where it's going to have an easier time dissipating than the subway station?
This would work if they encased the flywheels in outside-vented rooms, and would help cool things off by installing a blower in the room. Side effect: outside air is pulled in. Perhaps others can throw in other factors I'm missing and solutions to the inherent problems?
Maybe the LA County MTA can take a few hints from these guys on the Metro Rail. Or for that matter, any mass transit system using rails.
I am going to go on record as saying that, while I won't participate, I certainly approve of what people are doing to their machines. But then, it's not like you needed some ham radio operator's approval. =^_^=
Does anyone see a connection? Mr. Auerbach raises a stink, and ICANN decides, "Hey! Let's not re-elect this SOB!" Of course, this is me, just restating the obvious. But then, all is fair in love, war, and corporate politics.
Does this mean that Lintel (jargon file reference) is out?
I have to concur, Ted. Does anybody here remember prohibition's effect in the early part of the century, at least from the history books?
When in the course of...oh, fsck it.
Let's keep in mind that this is likely a bill passed in the heat of 9/11. They Who Know Best (TM) are still battening down the hatches, and continually trying to "securitize" this country.
Perhaps we need to remind or congresscritters and our president that the lack of freedom and high security are not a good mix.
The first time I heard about it, Gilligan was pedaling a dynamo in an episode of Gilligan's Island. Then he stopped pedaling.
Pot. Kettle. Black. Mr. Flessner is speaking like a true suit.
I look around at the people running Linux servers, and what few I have asked of it (mostly friends, granted) have always stated that they don't want people breaking into their machinery, they don't want servers that you have to reboot once per week to clean up the swap space, and they don't want servers that are missing half the tools they need. This is amongst those who have installed on their home boxen Windows of some flavor, a Unix variant, an OSX user, and even an OS/2 Warp user. And of those, one Windows user has stated to me that instability is just something that he lives with, but he would NEVER install a Microsoft product on a server.
To take it to a different level (and I apologize to Ford enthusiasts), if you have had bad experience with the two Ford Broncos you bought in your lifetime over the course of three years, yet the one GMC and the one Honda you bought has lasted you for ten years with nothing more than the usual maintenance, would you ever go back to Ford?
My point here is that, IMO, Mr. Flessner has overlooked exactly why there are people who don't want to use his product. Personal bias aside, if you've had previously bad experience with a product, unless there's been a clearly defined change in quality that is highly visible, most (thinking?) people are not going to go back when the old product's manufacturer says "New and Improved".
Shouldn't this article have the "It's Funny. Laugh." foot rather than the padlock?
Eye, you've forgotten the article, the rep was paid to introduce it!