> The suit is in the public record, so then it's > libel (assuming you really are innocent).
Yes, the truly massive numbers of people who bought smart card writers and didn't use them to get free DirecTV (note, not DirectTV) will completely swamp them with libel suits.
> If prize was set at 1000000$, 10000000$, or > even more money, contest winners will likely > build SUPER sun vehicles that can over-take > 4-wheel ram rods and pollutant S.U.V.s.
Umm, in a free-market, free-country, capitalist world, the prize is at least five orders of magnitude larger than that.
It's not an easy problem.
Oh, and one old clunker driven by a starving environment-loving artist gives off more pollutants than any 50 modern SUVs.
I can only show you the door. You're the one who has to walk thru it.
(P.S. Listen to what you're saying. You're bitching at me because my philosophy of life is that one should leave other people the hell alone instead of pointing a gun at them and telling them to walk this way, talk this way.)
In spite of the way people talk around here, operating systems are not religions!
The government does not have to give equal shrift to them.
It does not say, "Congress shall make no law establishing an operating system, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of Britney MP3s, or of the Napster; or the right of the people peaceably to download, and to petition the government for a return to MP3s on Google."
Reminds me of the time in Jr. High someone asked me the old saw, "Do you want to go to a Jimmi Hendrix concert?" People who are (I guess) "cool rocker wannabes" are supposed to say "yes!", then the questioner says, "Haha! He died years ago, you wanabee faker!"
Sadly for my questioner, I merely replied, "Who is that?" as I did not know. (Hey, my parents were teenagers in the '50's, and, contrary to popular movies, many of them did NOT follow Elvis and the new thing called "rock". Their album collection consisted of things like the sound tracks to "The Music Man", and "South Pacific".
Then when I was a small child, I asked my dad, "Whatcha eatin' under there?", who which he was supposed to respond, "Under where?", to which I would, theoretically, reply, "You're eating underwear? Hahaha!" Sadly, he was downstairs in the basement at the time and said, "Nothing, why?"
He created an even bigger tax increase than George senior (after whining about how big George's tax increase was.)
And we all know tax increases help the economy! They must! I mean, all the Democrats are talking about how George, Jr.'s tax decrease will hurt the economy!
If it weren't for the Internet boom, Clinton possibly (probably?) would have been a 1-termer like Bush.
Clinton whined about Bush's giant tax increase (which he was an idiot to do, buying votes for GWI) then proceeded to create an even bigger one, along with further proposed asinine leftist taxes like a BTU tax and full nationalization (same effect as taxation) of health care (actually, since it would be nominally still private, it was technically a facist plan. Privately owned, but government-run to the nth degree, government "permission" required for entry into the field, etc.)
Anyhoo, had that not all been stomped, and had Clinton's BTU and other tax plans gone thru, we'd have had a Republican in '96 (who wouldn't have been throwaway Dole since Republicans would have smelled blood, i.e. victory, much like the Dukakis/Ferraro was a throwaway. Had Duke had a chance in Holy Hell, his running mate would have been another white dude.)
This is, of course, not a defense of the current GW. But let's just say I doubt the first carrier of the new class will be named the USS William Jefferson Blythe Clinton.
As someone who unashamedly defends freedom, and capitalism as derivative of freedom, I've had my share of unfair flamebait mods for posts that disagree with a generally "flaming" liberal attitude by some around places like this, so yes, it is unfair to do the same to those who flamebait mod liberal posts, too.
As for the issue raised, part of the point is that a freedom-based capitalist country is so damned economically powerful (that is the true fear of many, not that it's "inferior" to communim or socialism or whatever, but that it's too powerful) that we could easily afford the debt in ratchetting up the conventional arms race. As big as our debt was, it was still just a fraction, per capita, of many western European countries, none of which had a productivity anywhere near ours. (And the shabby secret is that many liberals, while denouncing our debt, actually subscribed to the philosophy that we should, i.e. could, match those Europeans, running the debt up much, much further, buying social programs for the purpose of buying votes. A sickening, evolution-like philosophy.)
And had that happened, we wouldn't be talking about a next generation carrier in 10 years sporting directed energy weapons. (And, as a similar economic reality, we wouldn't be whining about high drug costs because we'd be mired in mid '80's level drug technology, maybe 1990. Woo Hoo. Free 1987 drugs!)
Greed combined with the freedom to not have your stuff taken, literally, by thugs, powers things along much more rapidly. That, alone, allows technological advancement so fast that to do anything else would be immoral and reprehensible.
Political "science" -- the only science that thinks it moral to force experiments on the test subjects. Murderous experiments. How about just leaving people the hell alone? There's a damned novel idea!
> After the next carrier, the George H.W. Bush, > the Navy intends to unveil a new design; it > will be roughly the size of a Nimitz-class ship > but with automated systems that could cut the > ship's company of 3,200 by one-third or more > and a new reactor able to power electromagnetic > catapults and directed-energy weapons.
As to the parent's observation of the use of long-range bombers, it's been pointed out by GWII observers that there's nothing like having a massive and ready strike force of fighters you can ship somewhere without a local base to serve them.
I mean think about it. How many people across the world, and through time, would give everything they had just to be left alone from thugs and gangs of thugs with weapons?
99%?
99.9%?
99.999999999%?
Probably more than that, friends.
Yet how many in free countries sit there, pining for a dictator -- of the type I like! (and one you'll have, whether you like it or not!)
> The Soviet Union collapsed only because it had > been corrupt from the start...
Sheesh, murderer.
Political "Science" -- the only science that forces itself on unwilling test subjects.
What's wrong with good, old-fashioned, rights-protecting freedom?
Given all the murderous history of mankind, and how it all orients around a violation of that principle, what's wrong with just leaving other people the hell alone?
Properly speaking, people do best when they are free to pursue their own affairs. Capitalism, properly, derives from freedom.
See, the dirty little secret to all these "experiments" is that reality doesn't care if you laws are "well meaning" or not -- they restrict freedom, and have an easily predictable effect. If all you braniacs who think themselves so scientific would just look at all the massive death and destruction and redarding of progress caused by non-free societies, you'd be screaming for freedom, and it's corollary, capitalism.
"Op Op Op!" you go, all apopleptic. "But if only we controlled people my way then things would be even better than freedom and capitalism!"
(Small example: who the hell wants free medical care if it's 1954 level medicine?)
> had fielded no fewer than 5 complaints from your peers
1. "He keeps looking at me." 2. Surfing too much 3. Trying to hack past surfing porn filter 4. "He keeps looking at my feet." 5. I keep having to fix his bugs.
> "Put together the quick & dirty solution, then > fix and document afterwards when you have the > benefit of time!" > > *cough* Microsoft *cough*
Every time some boothead makes a comment like this, I point out that if you're going to talk about bad (financially speaking) business practices, you'd do better than to select as your example the most phenomenally successful corporation of all time.
I'd also use explicit variables for things like (drv != NULL) and so on. For modern compilers, you won't detect a difference in the machine code from more compact, old-style C obfuscation optimizations.
I've also removed a redundant call at the end, although explicit commenting as to what's going on there would be valuable.
By the way, how does one post a chunk of code without having to use Code mode (vs. Plain Old Text, HTML, etc.) without tripping the lameness character and compression (!) filters? Code, TT, Ecode, blockquote, nada.
This reminds me of a lightsail story in the sixth grade reader book "Galaxies" (you know, the one that started out with Tigers, Lions, and Dinosaurs in first grade, than had things like Rainbows and I forge
OMG
Google!
Bye!
OMFG, Google has failed...on locating a heavily-used reader series from the '70's.
Anyhoo, the story was about peeps setting off in a lightsail ship from Earth. It was huge news. They were being talked to on worldwide TV by radio, but in short order that wasn't fast enuf. So they used laser, but that wasn't fast enuf to keep up with them! They were off!
All I can remember is thinking how stupid that was, they could never accelerate that fast!
And what's up with that other story, about the Mexican kid in the southwestern US who wants a haircut but can't get one because the racist who runs the barber shop tells him he has a "greasy head"? All I can remember thinking is why doesn't the dope go wash his hair? It's kinda rude to want the barber to get his tools all greasy because you're such a slob.
Slashdot Mirror
> The suit is in the public record, so then it's
> libel (assuming you really are innocent).
Yes, the truly massive numbers of people who bought smart card writers and didn't use them to get free DirecTV (note, not DirectTV) will completely swamp them with libel suits.
A cricket chirps...
As a lifelong Michigander, I can safely say that if it were a cloudy day, with all our experience with it, they'd have won.
> If prize was set at 1000000$, 10000000$, or
> even more money, contest winners will likely
> build SUPER sun vehicles that can over-take
> 4-wheel ram rods and pollutant S.U.V.s.
Umm, in a free-market, free-country, capitalist world, the prize is at least five orders of magnitude larger than that.
It's not an easy problem.
Oh, and one old clunker driven by a starving environment-loving artist gives off more pollutants than any 50 modern SUVs.
> That's cool and all...but what happens if they
> have 10 days of clouds?
They go to war with Iraq. Duh!
I can only show you the door. You're the one who has to walk thru it.
(P.S. Listen to what you're saying. You're bitching at me because my philosophy of life is that one should leave other people the hell alone instead of pointing a gun at them and telling them to walk this way, talk this way.)
As Kyle or Stan might say, "Holy crap, dude!"
In spite of the way people talk around here, operating systems are not religions!
The government does not have to give equal shrift to them.
It does not say, "Congress shall make no law establishing an operating system, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of Britney MP3s, or of the Napster; or the right of the people peaceably to download, and to petition the government for a return to MP3s on Google."
> unless you're a cracker with extremely intimate
> knowledge of the OS kernel itself, it'll be
> very hard to hack into my system.
Thank goodness those who would steal an election would only hire bumbling goofballs.
Yeah, really! The Republicans are new to election fraud. The Democrats are old hands at it.
Lyndon Johnson, Daly's Chicago ("Vote early -- vote often!") and so on.
Reminds me of the time in Jr. High someone asked me the old saw, "Do you want to go to a Jimmi Hendrix concert?" People who are (I guess) "cool rocker wannabes" are supposed to say "yes!", then the questioner says, "Haha! He died years ago, you wanabee faker!"
Sadly for my questioner, I merely replied, "Who is that?" as I did not know. (Hey, my parents were teenagers in the '50's, and, contrary to popular movies, many of them did NOT follow Elvis and the new thing called "rock". Their album collection consisted of things like the sound tracks to "The Music Man", and "South Pacific".
Then when I was a small child, I asked my dad, "Whatcha eatin' under there?", who which he was supposed to respond, "Under where?", to which I would, theoretically, reply, "You're eating underwear? Hahaha!" Sadly, he was downstairs in the basement at the time and said, "Nothing, why?"
> [Strip Poker was] not my favourite game, but it
> can be for hacking the girls in strip poker i
> found i loved hacking!
Hackin' and jackin', eh?
Here's a better way to infuriate them.
Pay for the god damned music you're stealing! Then they'll have to lay off their lawyers.
ETR until pedant emphasizes legal definition of "stealing" over common meaning: 43 seconds
ETR until infuriated college student who doesn't want to face up to their life of crime mods this down: 12.5 seconds
> I spent many hours on a C64 when I was in
> elementary school, and this brings back a lot
> of memories.
Sounds like a solid business model for Tulip!
What did Clinton do?
He created an even bigger tax increase than George senior (after whining about how big George's tax increase was.)
And we all know tax increases help the economy! They must! I mean, all the Democrats are talking about how George, Jr.'s tax decrease will hurt the economy!
If it weren't for the Internet boom, Clinton possibly (probably?) would have been a 1-termer like Bush.
Clinton whined about Bush's giant tax increase (which he was an idiot to do, buying votes for GWI) then proceeded to create an even bigger one, along with further proposed asinine leftist taxes like a BTU tax and full nationalization (same effect as taxation) of health care (actually, since it would be nominally still private, it was technically a facist plan. Privately owned, but government-run to the nth degree, government "permission" required for entry into the field, etc.)
Anyhoo, had that not all been stomped, and had Clinton's BTU and other tax plans gone thru, we'd have had a Republican in '96 (who wouldn't have been throwaway Dole since Republicans would have smelled blood, i.e. victory, much like the Dukakis/Ferraro was a throwaway. Had Duke had a chance in Holy Hell, his running mate would have been another white dude.)
This is, of course, not a defense of the current GW. But let's just say I doubt the first carrier of the new class will be named the USS William Jefferson Blythe Clinton.
As someone who unashamedly defends freedom, and capitalism as derivative of freedom, I've had my share of unfair flamebait mods for posts that disagree with a generally "flaming" liberal attitude by some around places like this, so yes, it is unfair to do the same to those who flamebait mod liberal posts, too.
As for the issue raised, part of the point is that a freedom-based capitalist country is so damned economically powerful (that is the true fear of many, not that it's "inferior" to communim or socialism or whatever, but that it's too powerful) that we could easily afford the debt in ratchetting up the conventional arms race. As big as our debt was, it was still just a fraction, per capita, of many western European countries, none of which had a productivity anywhere near ours. (And the shabby secret is that many liberals, while denouncing our debt, actually subscribed to the philosophy that we should, i.e. could, match those Europeans, running the debt up much, much further, buying social programs for the purpose of buying votes. A sickening, evolution-like philosophy.)
And had that happened, we wouldn't be talking about a next generation carrier in 10 years sporting directed energy weapons. (And, as a similar economic reality, we wouldn't be whining about high drug costs because we'd be mired in mid '80's level drug technology, maybe 1990. Woo Hoo. Free 1987 drugs!)
Greed combined with the freedom to not have your stuff taken, literally, by thugs, powers things along much more rapidly. That, alone, allows technological advancement so fast that to do anything else would be immoral and reprehensible.
Political "science" -- the only science that thinks it moral to force experiments on the test subjects. Murderous experiments. How about just leaving people the hell alone? There's a damned novel idea!
> After the next carrier, the George H.W. Bush,
> the Navy intends to unveil a new design; it
> will be roughly the size of a Nimitz-class ship
> but with automated systems that could cut the
> ship's company of 3,200 by one-third or more
> and a new reactor able to power electromagnetic
> catapults and directed-energy weapons.
OMG, In Death Ground, here we come!
As to the parent's observation of the use of long-range bombers, it's been pointed out by GWII observers that there's nothing like having a massive and ready strike force of fighters you can ship somewhere without a local base to serve them.
I mean think about it. How many people across the world, and through time, would give everything they had just to be left alone from thugs and gangs of thugs with weapons?
99%?
99.9%?
99.999999999%?
Probably more than that, friends.
Yet how many in free countries sit there, pining for a dictator -- of the type I like! (and one you'll have, whether you like it or not!)
> The Soviet Union collapsed only because it had
> been corrupt from the start...
Sheesh, murderer.
Political "Science" -- the only science that forces itself on unwilling test subjects.
What's wrong with good, old-fashioned, rights-protecting freedom?
Given all the murderous history of mankind, and how it all orients around a violation of that principle, what's wrong with just leaving other people the hell alone?
Properly speaking, people do best when they are free to pursue their own affairs. Capitalism, properly, derives from freedom.
See, the dirty little secret to all these "experiments" is that reality doesn't care if you laws are "well meaning" or not -- they restrict freedom, and have an easily predictable effect. If all you braniacs who think themselves so scientific would just look at all the massive death and destruction and redarding of progress caused by non-free societies, you'd be screaming for freedom, and it's corollary, capitalism.
"Op Op Op!" you go, all apopleptic. "But if only we controlled people my way then things would be even better than freedom and capitalism!"
(Small example: who the hell wants free medical care if it's 1954 level medicine?)
> had fielded no fewer than 5 complaints from your peers
1. "He keeps looking at me."
2. Surfing too much
3. Trying to hack past surfing porn filter
4. "He keeps looking at my feet."
5. I keep having to fix his bugs.
> "Put together the quick & dirty solution, then
> fix and document afterwards when you have the
> benefit of time!"
>
> *cough* Microsoft *cough*
Every time some boothead makes a comment like this, I point out that if you're going to talk about bad (financially speaking) business practices, you'd do better than to select as your example the most phenomenally successful corporation of all time.
It just makes you look like an idiot.
I'll go you one better. Horizontal whitespace is cheap on monitors nowadays. Use it liberally.
/* Safety check, note it's technically redundant! */ /* ...because filespec1[0] would be '\0' anyway! */
/* drive and file */ /* file */
if (filespec1[0] != '\0' && filespec1[1] == ':')
drv = filespec1[0];
else
drv = 0;
if (!strrchr(filespec1, '\\'))
{
if (drv)
retv = prepare_for_rename(drv - 64, &zero, filespec1 + 2, filespec2);
else
retv = prepare_for_rename(0, &zero, filespec1, filespec2);
}
else
{
file = strrchr(filespec1, '\\') + 1;
for (travel2 = 2 * (drv != 0); (filespec1 + travel2) != (file - 1); travel2++)
path[travel2 - (2 * (drv != 0))] = filespec1[travel2];
path[travel2 - (2 * (drv != 0))] = 0;
retv = prepare_for_rename(drv, path, file, filespec2);
}
I'd also use explicit variables for things like (drv != NULL) and so on. For modern compilers, you won't detect a difference in the machine code from more compact, old-style C obfuscation optimizations.
I've also removed a redundant call at the end, although explicit commenting as to what's going on there would be valuable.
By the way, how does one post a chunk of code without having to use Code mode (vs. Plain Old Text, HTML, etc.) without tripping the lameness character and compression (!) filters? Code, TT, Ecode, blockquote, nada.
> Warthog... don't you mean the 'puma'??
Neither. His in-game name, or nom de nehrde, is Bobafettt267.
This reminds me of a lightsail story in the sixth grade reader book "Galaxies" (you know, the one that started out with Tigers, Lions, and Dinosaurs in first grade, than had things like Rainbows and I forge
OMG
Google!
Bye!
OMFG, Google has failed...on locating a heavily-used reader series from the '70's.
Anyhoo, the story was about peeps setting off in a lightsail ship from Earth. It was huge news. They were being talked to on worldwide TV by radio, but in short order that wasn't fast enuf. So they used laser, but that wasn't fast enuf to keep up with them! They were off!
All I can remember is thinking how stupid that was, they could never accelerate that fast!
And what's up with that other story, about the Mexican kid in the southwestern US who wants a haircut but can't get one because the racist who runs the barber shop tells him he has a "greasy head"? All I can remember thinking is why doesn't the dope go wash his hair? It's kinda rude to want the barber to get his tools all greasy because you're such a slob.
> So -- what's to stop people from using the
> excepted planes?
Nothing. It does, however, cut down massively on the possibilities.
> Or planes originating in a country where
> installment of such a system isn't required?
We can require all planes flying into this country to have it. (BTW, I'm not defending it.)