I think you may be overestimating the portion which goes to the artist. Bear in mind that, in the modern entertainment industry, artists are equivalent to factory workers.
Of the price of that t-shirt you're wearing, how much do you think went to the person who did the sewing or the person who operated the machine which rendered whatever witty, misanthropic, or corporate meme graces the front of it?
> IME, most users of Opera and Firefox have IE to fall back to if their
> prefered browser doesn't work.
In my experience, most users of Opera and Firefox won't fall back to IE if the website appears broken. You've already pissed them off by not working with their preferred browser. If you're not somehow handing bars of gold through the screen, they won't stick around longer than it takes to close the tab.
That reminds me of the bug windows 95 had where it you left it running for 40 days it would crash. it only took them 6 years to reproduce the bug so they could fix it.
I remember that. Or, more accurately, I remember reading about that. I never managed to keep a Windows 9x machine alive for the requisite span of time.
there is Nothing (other than having massive redundent arrays of capacitors) that can be done about under voltaging, and even then it's just a matter of time before the undervolateges cause the capacitors to all blow...
That's not entirely true. A well-designed power supply which provides a maximum of 12 volts DC can work with an input of just a bit more than than 12 volts RMS. A power supply could actually be designed with step-up capability such that, so long as the source will provide adequate current, the required ouput voltage can be maintained with any input voltage.
This is a bit beside the point, however, as power supplies for computers are not designed with such silliness in mind. Enter the line conditioner. This handy (albeit usually expensive) device will provide a stable AC output voltage for a wide range of input voltages, and also acts as the mother of all surge suppressors. You plug it into the wall and plug your equipment into the line conditioner. I have one inline with my UPS. When power drops out altogether, my UPS covers me. When the voltage drops far too low to safely run my equipment, my conditioner protects me. The better UPSes actually have integrated line conditioning, so read the specs before dismissing that horribly expensive UPS. Me? I'm a cheap bastid, so my setup is a bit goofy.
PC power and cooling is selling a PSU that can draw 38 amps from Each 12 volt rail. Dude, my OVEN only operates on 60 amps.
Not all amps are created equal. Your 60 amp oven is drawing 14.4 kilowatts of power (Electric ovens operate on 240 volts RMS here in USAnia, times the stated 60 amps, times an assumed power factor of 1 since ovens are a resistive load). The two twelve volt, 38 amp power rails combined can supply 912 watts of power to a load. On the source side, that ammounts to only 7 amps of current (the 912 watts, divided by 120 volts RMS, divided by a power factor of 1 just to make the math easier). This is not nearly so significant.
> MS could "open up" NTFS and sell the driver, but Linux would not be
> able to use it. No software under the GPL may contain licensed
> technology that requires royalty fees.
True, the Linux kernel couldn't include Microsoft's royalty-licensed driver. However, as a Linux user, I could (without violating the GPL) pay for and use such a driver on my Linux system.
Correction: any other Linux user could. I couldn't, but for philosophical reasons rather than legal reasons.
The hidden NProtect directory at the heart of this issue has been (reasonably) common knowledge for some time. They were up-front and honest about the presence of this directory, and made frequent reference to the "hidden" and "protected" nature of said directory in documentation and marketing literature.
Also, according to Symantec's own writeup on the issue, the directory was cloaked specifically so that it would work as advertised: to keep people from deleting important shit, particularly files that can't be put in the Recycle Bin.
Also, also, you need to give them a bit of credit for the fact that they worked with Mark Russinovich of Sysinternals and F-Secure in fixing this. Nobody needed to make a huge stink about the problem like the last big rootkit issue
Scientists don't think that they know everything. That's why they keep looking. How many of us could do the same thing? How many of us keep looking once we've found our car keys?
From TFA:
"Methane could not really be created that way," says Dr. Frank Keppler. "Until now all the textbooks have said that biogenic methane can only be produced in the absence of oxygen. For that simple reason, nobody looked closely at this."
Could plants be producing that much methane? It seems to me that if they needed to look that closely to prove that plant were producing methane at all, than the levels in question would not be that significant.
I don't mean to undervalue their research; it's actually quite fascinating that plants do this. However, I don't necessarily agree with the conclusion that plants cause global warming.
> If Bill was tuely philanthropic, then he'd be making anonymous
> contributions. Nope, they're nice and public.
Philanthropy does not imply humility. I can't really blame him for wanting a bit of the spotlight to fall on his generous side, especially as we go out of our way to put that spotlight on him every time we catch him tripping the other actors.
Linux distributions built and configured for modern hardware run with difficulty or not at all on archaic hardware!
Also: it's really hard to turn a screw with a hammer!
The Linux world is (somewhat obsessively) focused on choice, so choose an appropriate distro. Damn Small Linux and ttylinux come to mind. Has anybody ported Windows XP to the wrt54g yet? Has anybody ported Windows XP to the X-box?
> Everyone with a few brain cells to rub together knows about the
> VHS/Betamax struggle and know that the best technology doesn't
> always win.
Don't forget about the DVD/DivX struggle. That was a little different though. DivX lost out because people didn't like the idea of their DivX box refusing to play a disk for arbitrary reasons (like "this disk is too old; go buy another of the same flick").
Now, we have a choice between two DRMed evils. My decision: they can both pack sand until somebody deCSSes one of them and I can actually do what I want with my own damn equipment.
> I'd like to see how "excellent" you think it is after someone beats the
> crap out of you, or rapes your daughter, your wife or bashes your son
> and they can't identify the criminal using the video that captured
> the entire incident because hackers have covered their identity.
Since you mentioned it, somebody did beat the crap out of me (you insensitive clod), but instead of arresting the guy who dunnit, they arrested me. See, I had the wrong color skin. I don't trust that the people running those cameras have my best interest in mind.
"...before the radiation was able to eat its way free." That's choice. Sounds like the tagline from some poorly-researched sci-fi or action flick. Besides, the radiation was already present outside the canister; otherwise, there would have been no danger to personnel and no radiation alarms sounding.
As for the comment about the container being filled with radiation, I could excuse that as simply a mistake of terminology. You can fill the container with active or contaminated material, but you can't fill it with radiation itself. Contamination is the shit. Radiation is just the stink.
A more practical analogy would be light as an example of radiation. You can fill a box with flashlights, and you can shine light inside a box, but you can't fill the box with light.
The article makes reference to the radiation eating away at the robot's circuits. This is pure speculation, but I think this may have been a reference to the effect that high energy gamma radiation can have on digital circuits such as memory. That would be a bit of a metaphor, not a literal corrosion of the circuitry. Certainly, it does not imply that the canister was in danger of impending failure.
Careful with that. wget is only a "robot" when you are downloading recursively; otherwise, it's a simple, dumb client which can be incorporated into other user-agents.
It matters not whether the summary is wrong or simply badly written. TFA is also wrong (or badly written). AIT isn't suing Google for "clicks from the same IP addresses" as TFA suggests, but over "multiple clicks from the same IP block" (Clarence Briggs, AIT's Chief Executive Officer). He's complaining that people to whom he's not really interested in advertising are finding his ads interesting. "Our campaign was for North America only; so, how can someone tell me that clicks from Russia, China, and Vietnam are legitimate?" some other FA
> Nah the only way to be sure is to turn google into an affiliate
> program. No money for google until someone makes a purchase from
> the site in question
Unfortunately, there is no effective, portable way to track which clicks result in purchaces. There are methods, but they tend to be subject to all sorts of underreporting. If somebody doesn't trust Google to accurately report the recorded clicks, then that somebody can abstain from doing business with Google.
> Fraud is a criminal offence, having a crap site is not.
Perhaps, but most purchaces result from the quality of the site. It's google's job to send over customers. If the destination is a "crap site" and the potential customer closes that window, google has still filled their side of the bargain.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you may be overestimating the portion which goes to the artist. Bear in mind that, in the modern entertainment industry, artists are equivalent to factory workers.
Of the price of that t-shirt you're wearing, how much do you think went to the person who did the sewing or the person who operated the machine which rendered whatever witty, misanthropic, or corporate meme graces the front of it?
I have a too-tired philosophy. "Nah. I'm too tired." :-P
"Internet Explorer 5.0 or better"? Sure, I've got better. Firefox.
In my experience, most users of Opera and Firefox won't fall back to IE if the website appears broken. You've already pissed them off by not working with their preferred browser. If you're not somehow handing bars of gold through the screen, they won't stick around longer than it takes to close the tab.
I remember that. Or, more accurately, I remember reading about that. I never managed to keep a Windows 9x machine alive for the requisite span of time.
That's not entirely true. A well-designed power supply which provides a maximum of 12 volts DC can work with an input of just a bit more than than 12 volts RMS. A power supply could actually be designed with step-up capability such that, so long as the source will provide adequate current, the required ouput voltage can be maintained with any input voltage.
This is a bit beside the point, however, as power supplies for computers are not designed with such silliness in mind. Enter the line conditioner. This handy (albeit usually expensive) device will provide a stable AC output voltage for a wide range of input voltages, and also acts as the mother of all surge suppressors. You plug it into the wall and plug your equipment into the line conditioner. I have one inline with my UPS. When power drops out altogether, my UPS covers me. When the voltage drops far too low to safely run my equipment, my conditioner protects me. The better UPSes actually have integrated line conditioning, so read the specs before dismissing that horribly expensive UPS. Me? I'm a cheap bastid, so my setup is a bit goofy.
Not all amps are created equal. Your 60 amp oven is drawing 14.4 kilowatts of power (Electric ovens operate on 240 volts RMS here in USAnia, times the stated 60 amps, times an assumed power factor of 1 since ovens are a resistive load). The two twelve volt, 38 amp power rails combined can supply 912 watts of power to a load. On the source side, that ammounts to only 7 amps of current (the 912 watts, divided by 120 volts RMS, divided by a power factor of 1 just to make the math easier). This is not nearly so significant.
> MS could "open up" NTFS and sell the driver, but Linux would not be
> able to use it. No software under the GPL may contain licensed
> technology that requires royalty fees.
True, the Linux kernel couldn't include Microsoft's royalty-licensed driver. However, as a Linux user, I could (without violating the GPL) pay for and use such a driver on my Linux system.
Correction: any other Linux user could. I couldn't, but for philosophical reasons rather than legal reasons.
Sparcle!
The hidden NProtect directory at the heart of this issue has been (reasonably) common knowledge for some time. They were up-front and honest about the presence of this directory, and made frequent reference to the "hidden" and "protected" nature of said directory in documentation and marketing literature.
Also, according to Symantec's own writeup on the issue, the directory was cloaked specifically so that it would work as advertised: to keep people from deleting important shit, particularly files that can't be put in the Recycle Bin.
Also, also, you need to give them a bit of credit for the fact that they worked with Mark Russinovich of Sysinternals and F-Secure in fixing this. Nobody needed to make a huge stink about the problem like the last big rootkit issue
> ...thinking you know everything.
Much as I hate to feed the trolls...
Scientists don't think that they know everything. That's why they keep looking. How many of us could do the same thing? How many of us keep looking once we've found our car keys?
From TFA:
They had an answer, but they kept looking anyway.
Could plants be producing that much methane? It seems to me that if they needed to look that closely to prove that plant were producing methane at all, than the levels in question would not be that significant.
I don't mean to undervalue their research; it's actually quite fascinating that plants do this. However, I don't necessarily agree with the conclusion that plants cause global warming.
> Why do I want it in my pants?
Perhaps this garment is targeted at people whose heads are up their asses.
> If Bill was tuely philanthropic, then he'd be making anonymous
> contributions. Nope, they're nice and public.
Philanthropy does not imply humility. I can't really blame him for wanting a bit of the spotlight to fall on his generous side, especially as we go out of our way to put that spotlight on him every time we catch him tripping the other actors.
Linux distributions built and configured for modern hardware run with difficulty or not at all on archaic hardware!
Also: it's really hard to turn a screw with a hammer!
The Linux world is (somewhat obsessively) focused on choice, so choose an appropriate distro. Damn Small Linux and ttylinux come to mind. Has anybody ported Windows XP to the wrt54g yet? Has anybody ported Windows XP to the X-box?
Just pick the right tool, is all.
> Everyone with a few brain cells to rub together knows about the
> VHS/Betamax struggle and know that the best technology doesn't
> always win.
Don't forget about the DVD/DivX struggle. That was a little different though. DivX lost out because people didn't like the idea of their DivX box refusing to play a disk for arbitrary reasons (like "this disk is too old; go buy another of the same flick").
Now, we have a choice between two DRMed evils. My decision: they can both pack sand until somebody deCSSes one of them and I can actually do what I want with my own damn equipment.
"I am not a crook."
"I did not inhale."
"I do not recall."
There's a pattern here. We could improve the truth of anything coming out of D.C. by piping it through sed -e 's/\<not\>//'
> I'd like to see how "excellent" you think it is after someone beats the
> crap out of you, or rapes your daughter, your wife or bashes your son
> and they can't identify the criminal using the video that captured
> the entire incident because hackers have covered their identity.
Since you mentioned it, somebody did beat the crap out of me (you insensitive clod), but instead of arresting the guy who dunnit, they arrested me. See, I had the wrong color skin. I don't trust that the people running those cameras have my best interest in mind.
"...before the radiation was able to eat its way free." That's choice. Sounds like the tagline from some poorly-researched sci-fi or action flick. Besides, the radiation was already present outside the canister; otherwise, there would have been no danger to personnel and no radiation alarms sounding.
As for the comment about the container being filled with radiation, I could excuse that as simply a mistake of terminology. You can fill the container with active or contaminated material, but you can't fill it with radiation itself. Contamination is the shit. Radiation is just the stink.
A more practical analogy would be light as an example of radiation. You can fill a box with flashlights, and you can shine light inside a box, but you can't fill the box with light.
The article makes reference to the radiation eating away at the robot's circuits. This is pure speculation, but I think this may have been a reference to the effect that high energy gamma radiation can have on digital circuits such as memory. That would be a bit of a metaphor, not a literal corrosion of the circuitry. Certainly, it does not imply that the canister was in danger of impending failure.
Careful with that. wget is only a "robot" when you are downloading recursively; otherwise, it's a simple, dumb client which can be incorporated into other user-agents.
Want some fun with that? Go to this search and visit every single advertised site, just once.
It matters not whether the summary is wrong or simply badly written. TFA is also wrong (or badly written). AIT isn't suing Google for "clicks from the same IP addresses" as TFA suggests, but over "multiple clicks from the same IP block" (Clarence Briggs, AIT's Chief Executive Officer). He's complaining that people to whom he's not really interested in advertising are finding his ads interesting. "Our campaign was for North America only; so, how can someone tell me that clicks from Russia, China, and Vietnam are legitimate?" some other FA
> Nah the only way to be sure is to turn google into an affiliate
> program. No money for google until someone makes a purchase from
> the site in question
Unfortunately, there is no effective, portable way to track which clicks result in purchaces. There are methods, but they tend to be subject to all sorts of underreporting. If somebody doesn't trust Google to accurately report the recorded clicks, then that somebody can abstain from doing business with Google. > Fraud is a criminal offence, having a crap site is not.
Perhaps, but most purchaces result from the quality of the site. It's google's job to send over customers. If the destination is a "crap site" and the potential customer closes that window, google has still filled their side of the bargain.
Did you quote the right source? I don't see where you found those numbers.
You probably should have. RTFBed, that is.
Man, would I like to know what goofy kind of file format they're using for that one. Probably some variant of DRM. Anybody know?
Of course, if you can go three pages of posts without a Hitler reference, you've also done well.
Oh, well.