Thanks to you generalizing the population of a whole country, I ought to feel ashamed that you're speaking from the same country as me. Hopefully nobody else will assume (like you) that everyone in our country has the same attitude, and I won't have to give a shit what you said in the first place.
Regardless, think twice before you act like you're representing the sentiments of your countrymen.
The "American humor" you referred to is actually just *shitty* humour, and not necessarily representative of the typical humour that comes from that country -- I'd note that I've seen some really funny stuff on TV, a great deal of which was not made in Canada, written by Canadians, or acted out by a Canadian (regardless of the fact that we do have a decent amount of talent originating here as well).
If I was glad of where I was from because of the opinions and behaviour of the people that live in the same place, I'd have nothing to be proud of at this moment. That's Canada -- full of variety, including fucking morons.
I worked as a dishwasher in a kitchen once, and we had a massive cockroach problem in the restaurant. After several visits from the exterminator, he finally tracked down the nest--the boom-box just above the deep-frier!
hordes of nasty critters swarmed out of there as we all stomped and the exterminator sprayed.
I hope I never see anything like that ever again.
Seven people died in an avalanche in western Canada -- it's just not as exciting to you because they didn't burst into flames!
Big news for you: people die every day! It's just not always on such a high profile -- and regardless of their contributions to society, it's still tragic! Everyone feels bad when good people die, especially when they were doing important work, but for god's sake the world can't just stop moving! If all we did was talk about all the people that die everyday, we'd never have a chance to talk about something like cheap broadband, because people like you would whine everytime someone types out anything not related to the tragedy.
Your heart only bleeds when the media tells you it should. Check YOUR fucking priorities.
It seems that events like moving to a new house and such tend to hold on for a long time. I can remember things that happened when I was two years old, and maybe snippets of things that happened when I was younger.
I remember living in my family's old semi-detatched unit vaguely (which we moved out of when I turned three, or very shortly before or after my third birthday. We had a dog that died before we moved, and I remember it tearing up some of my toys and everyone yelling at it as it started chomping on my hand or foot or something. I remember the nasty green shag carpet in the old house, and I remember puking on it because we only had one bathroom, I was sick, my mom was in the shower, and my sister and I were standing outside the bathroom, banging on the door so I could get in. (I didn't make it, and honked all over the ugly carpet right outside the door). I'm almost positive this memory wasn't fabricated on my behalf, because I brought it up a couple of years later before anyone else did and we had a good laugh.
Our new house was being built for us, and I remember going to see it when it was little more than a wooden frame without even walls on the outside. We walked through it for a bit, and I was taken aback when my parents told me that I was standing in what was to be my new bedroom. I didn't quite get the fact that they'd be moving me into a wooden shack without even walls or a carpet. I remember what it looked like quite vividly, and also having everyone laugh at my misunderstanding of the situation. There were also a lot of scummy construction guys around.
I remember moving, and my trashy gay uncle joking about how the freezer was "taking a leak" when they were moving it and water was dripping out of it. I remember sitting in an ugly U-Haul with either my dad or one of my uncles, and getting yelled at for kicking the stick-shift.
Aside from that, the next earliest memory I have is of being out in the back yard with my sister and our cat, playing with it, and then seeing the neighbour's dog burst out from under the fence and chomp down on the cat's neck. I remember seeing the cat's limp body sitting on top of a towel and being carried away by my uncle, and being very disturbed by the look on it's face (lifeless yet agonized at the same time). Details like that are extremely clear, yet obviously not the kind of detail your parents or anyone else would likely get into when retelling the story later on.
Needing a prompt makes sense, as the earlier events I remember all seem to revolve around traumatic events or turning points -- being attacked by a dog, seeing the new house and moving to it, desperately trying not to puke then failing, and watching one of my first pets get killed. A lot of these things would, for obvious reasons, be burned into my memory, though I'm willing to entertain that I may have enhanced these memories later in life, while still basing them on true recollections. I can summon up these memories quite well, although some of them are fuzzy, but I remember them more often when I'm reminded by something I see on television or elsewhere. Dead animals never fail to bring a rush of imagery of that cat dying back to me.
It seems like a somewhat interesting device to have around as a toy. It'd even help kids to have something like that to use at school, and overall, it sounds like a reasonable quality machine for the price.
Unfortunately, I don't see how learning Palm OS would be a huge asset for children, and I shudder to think of how filthy/broken/stolen those things would get in any school.
When I was in elementary school, all we had were Apple IIe's and Unisys ICONs. Neither gave me any relevant experience with computers, nor were they ever actually used for anything practical. If all these computers do is give kids a fancy calculator to do things that they should learn to use their brains for, and type (or scribble graffitti shit) out things that they could otherwise write, they aren't worth it.
Computers in the classroom are good, but only if they do more than just make things a little bit easier.
you're fucking retarded, you fucking cuntbitch.
oh no, Canada's cold. Let's make fun of the retardedly obvious shit about the country!
It's not funny anymore. Chew balls.
hmm
I thought it was banned.
If it's frowned upon, that's more than enough.
I didn't ask for an explaination or a simple one at that.
Nothing to get all worked up about.
What do they say about Canadians anyway?
PS: I don't give a fuck where you're from, an asshole is an asshole.
despite our ties to the UK, I doubt we'd do anything that the USA doesn't agree with. Canada's a nice country, I like it here, but it doesn't have enough backbone.
No matter what reasons they may have cited for banning it in canada, be assured that it's all about the states having banned it, which eliminated any chance of us ever doing it either.
are you so sure that all of them are slackers wasting your money? If you don't like what some of the state employees are doing, complain. See if their union wants to listen. Probably not, so it's also probably not worth bitching about. Either way, if you don't like your country, try to change it, shut up about it, or leave.
just because you consume products doesn't mean you have to make them. Buying them helps enough. It's the money you spend that counts, not the work you do.
You are paying for a service, and you have to accept the service at the terms of the service provider. Bell Canada forced me to look at advertisements for their services on the display on my telephone, and no matter how many times I called to have the ads removed, they kept coming back within a week. I just lived with it, even though I owned the telephone in question.
The only thing that tivo is expecting people to do as a *minimum* is to put up with a line of text showing a program that's recorded that they can watch.
All of this nonsense people are spouting out about having their privacy and rights violated really bothers me sometimes. Seriously, we're at the mercy of the big companies. If we want a service, we have to take what goes along with it. What a surprise...companies want money? Companies advertise and market their products/services? Never heard of that before!
It's business, and this decision didn't hurt anyone, it just made it possible for you to watch a new show at any time you chose, or chose not to, because the BBC wanted you to. TiVo made some money, and the BBC got some more exposure for their show. The user of the TiVo still had the choice of whether or not to watch the show--and if they chose to watch it, they could do it at any time they wanted. You gain potential convenience, and lose nothing. To me this isn't nearly as bad as having to watch commercials--something we all put up with and rarely say anything about anyway.
Relax people. When your rights are really being violated, you'll know for sure, without having to make mountains out of molehills. Sure, I'm sure the next argument would be that the more of this kind of thing that we let companies do, the worse it will get. Again, you'll know when it's really time to complain. There's also laws in place to stop things from getting that bad.
It seems that they were probably planning on doing this all along, having set aside some space on the disk above and beyond the advertised capacity of the tivo thang. According to tivo the forced recording doesn't take up any of the user's storage space and if they had another recording scheduled, their tivo would record both.
This being the case, not interfering with any of their plans or enjoyment of their media, the only problem people could have with this is that they have to look at a program listed on their menu. Is that so horrible?
Who cares if it's old?
on
Review: U-571
·
· Score: 1
The reviewer clearly states that the movie was rented. I didn't watch the movie when it was in theatres, haven't rented it yet, and probably never will. At least now I know for sure that I'm no missing anything. Nobody was pretending to be reviewing a brand new movie...
besides, maybe the point is that if they review a movie that's a year old, people won't shit and piss their pants about lone-gunmen-ing it since it's old news.
as for all the "what's happening to slashdot" and otherwise complaining comments, honestly you people need a sense of humour. That review was funny, and it isn't as if there's more than one article every now and then that's "off topic" as far as nerd news goes. settle down.
In theory this is interesting, but would be practially useless in real life. What if someone was sitting in front of the computer, and there was no convenient white wall a metre away? Where would you hide your "special light sensing device"?
Again, an interesting piece of theory, but I can't see many situations where this could be applied in real life. On the other hand, the concept of "Van Eck Phreaking" (using a tv, antenna, & tuner to pick up electromagnetic radiation from a monitor and duplicate the picture from a distance) is quite old now. It's a much more realistic approach, but even still, it hasn't been explored very well.
if this inneffective light-and-reflection approach interests you, perhaps you'd like to check out some information on a more likely way to watch someone's monitor remotely like tempest, or the original paper on electromagnetic radiation as a security risk, by Wim Van Eck, the paper being written about tests he conducted in 1983.
it's not about wanting to be on a list or not. If people had a choice, they wouldn't be on any telemarketing/junkmailing lists. If given a choice, people wouldn't even want to have to watch TV commercials. I'm sorry, but too bad, we're stuck with this crap for as long as we want to live in a capitalist society. For our services to keep running, they need to keep making money somehow. If you give someone the option to opt out of something they don't really want, they'll do it. The option *is* yours to be removed from these lists, but you are left on them by default because we all know that nobody would choose to be on them and they need to advertise/sell to someone if asked upfront. If everyone starts off on them and only removes themselves when they're so pissed off with it that they have to call or email or whatever to be removed, at least the company has gotten their message across to them.
"If you'd like to opt-out of Yahoo's database, press 1 now."
We're right back to what I said before: yahoo gave the option. Why should they have to give it again? Why should they let you press 1? They already gave you the chance, and if you want to do something about it now, go and use the normal channels like everyone else.
I don't like marketing and advertising any more than the next guy, but seriously, people shoot off at the mouth about why this stuff is evil without realizing how unfortunately necessary it is.
Tell me: why is it that you deserve something for nothing, from a company that owes you nothing?
Yahoo sent an email to every account I have through them, telling me that changes/additions had been made to my marketing preferences. I followed their instructions on how to change my marketing settings so that I wouldn't receive unwanted mail/calls. They made it very clear that this had happened, and told me what I could do to keep my privacy.
Quietly?
Your argument now might be "What about those people who don't check their email, or don't bother to read spammy looking mail that comes from Yahoo?"
This is my problem with the average consumer, people sign up for accounts, services that they don't need, but don't care since they're getting it for free. Then they get mail, calls, whatever, and bitch about it. It's clearly stated in TOS agreements what will happen in the future. Beyond that, if you're too lazy to check your email to read what yahoo sent you, or too negligent to think that a letter from them might contain something important, it's your problem when telemarketers start annoying you.
They gave the public plenty of notice. If the public is too lazy to respond, it's their fault. Yes, Yahoo could've changed the marketing preferences and given you a chance to opt *in* for the new spam/mail/telemarketing--but think about it--they're a *business* they need to make money. Why would people bitch about a company that gives them something for free? They need to keep it running *and* make a profit. Would the people who complain about this be happy if one day their Yahoo accounts and services suddenly vanished without prior notice, only to find out that the company was so generous and noble that they refused to sell information and subject their freeloaders to the evils of marketing, that they went out of business, because they also decided to cut out those annoying ads? Would you say "Well, I lost a good, free service, but at least I didn't have to put in that extra tiny bit of effort that it would've taken to keep it...".
I know this is about privacy. The point is, they gave us the option. They also need to make money, that's why it was a negative option. Nothing is free, but if the price you have to pay for a service *and* keeping your privacy is just clicking a few more buttons, isn't it worth it?
There are laws that prohibit yahoo from doing this. That's why you agree to the terms of service. That's why they sent those emails.
Slashdot Mirror
dd if=my_balls of=your_mouth
That's probably partially because slot-loading optical drives fuck up like mad.
Also, just on the off chance that you get a CD of nonstandard size / shape, a slot-loading drive won't be able to handle that, either.
You made a generalized statement about Americans and then made another general statement implying that Canada was simply better. That's it.
Thanks to you generalizing the population of a whole country, I ought to feel ashamed that you're speaking from the same country as me. Hopefully nobody else will assume (like you) that everyone in our country has the same attitude, and I won't have to give a shit what you said in the first place.
Regardless, think twice before you act like you're representing the sentiments of your countrymen.
The "American humor" you referred to is actually just *shitty* humour, and not necessarily representative of the typical humour that comes from that country -- I'd note that I've seen some really funny stuff on TV, a great deal of which was not made in Canada, written by Canadians, or acted out by a Canadian (regardless of the fact that we do have a decent amount of talent originating here as well).
If I was glad of where I was from because of the opinions and behaviour of the people that live in the same place, I'd have nothing to be proud of at this moment. That's Canada -- full of variety, including fucking morons.
-kwikmart
I worked as a dishwasher in a kitchen once, and we had a massive cockroach problem in the restaurant. After several visits from the exterminator, he finally tracked down the nest--the boom-box just above the deep-frier! hordes of nasty critters swarmed out of there as we all stomped and the exterminator sprayed. I hope I never see anything like that ever again.
I understand that there are projects underway on a new concept known only as "Hard Disk Storage".
Reports are promising, though the technology has a long way to go.
Seven people died in an avalanche in western Canada -- it's just not as exciting to you because they didn't burst into flames! Big news for you: people die every day! It's just not always on such a high profile -- and regardless of their contributions to society, it's still tragic! Everyone feels bad when good people die, especially when they were doing important work, but for god's sake the world can't just stop moving! If all we did was talk about all the people that die everyday, we'd never have a chance to talk about something like cheap broadband, because people like you would whine everytime someone types out anything not related to the tragedy. Your heart only bleeds when the media tells you it should. Check YOUR fucking priorities.
It seems that events like moving to a new house and such tend to hold on for a long time. I can remember things that happened when I was two years old, and maybe snippets of things that happened when I was younger.
I remember living in my family's old semi-detatched unit vaguely (which we moved out of when I turned three, or very shortly before or after my third birthday. We had a dog that died before we moved, and I remember it tearing up some of my toys and everyone yelling at it as it started chomping on my hand or foot or something. I remember the nasty green shag carpet in the old house, and I remember puking on it because we only had one bathroom, I was sick, my mom was in the shower, and my sister and I were standing outside the bathroom, banging on the door so I could get in. (I didn't make it, and honked all over the ugly carpet right outside the door). I'm almost positive this memory wasn't fabricated on my behalf, because I brought it up a couple of years later before anyone else did and we had a good laugh.
Our new house was being built for us, and I remember going to see it when it was little more than a wooden frame without even walls on the outside. We walked through it for a bit, and I was taken aback when my parents told me that I was standing in what was to be my new bedroom. I didn't quite get the fact that they'd be moving me into a wooden shack without even walls or a carpet. I remember what it looked like quite vividly, and also having everyone laugh at my misunderstanding of the situation. There were also a lot of scummy construction guys around.
I remember moving, and my trashy gay uncle joking about how the freezer was "taking a leak" when they were moving it and water was dripping out of it. I remember sitting in an ugly U-Haul with either my dad or one of my uncles, and getting yelled at for kicking the stick-shift.
Aside from that, the next earliest memory I have is of being out in the back yard with my sister and our cat, playing with it, and then seeing the neighbour's dog burst out from under the fence and chomp down on the cat's neck. I remember seeing the cat's limp body sitting on top of a towel and being carried away by my uncle, and being very disturbed by the look on it's face (lifeless yet agonized at the same time). Details like that are extremely clear, yet obviously not the kind of detail your parents or anyone else would likely get into when retelling the story later on.
Needing a prompt makes sense, as the earlier events I remember all seem to revolve around traumatic events or turning points -- being attacked by a dog, seeing the new house and moving to it, desperately trying not to puke then failing, and watching one of my first pets get killed. A lot of these things would, for obvious reasons, be burned into my memory, though I'm willing to entertain that I may have enhanced these memories later in life, while still basing them on true recollections. I can summon up these memories quite well, although some of them are fuzzy, but I remember them more often when I'm reminded by something I see on television or elsewhere. Dead animals never fail to bring a rush of imagery of that cat dying back to me.
I hope they gave this guy some credit for the idea!
(I discovered this site about a year ago, and even called him to comment on how "brilliant" all of his ideas are. Check out the rest of it here!
I think it was Compaq/HP
too lazy to look for a link, but that might give you a start.
put wind up chargers in the wheels of the carts so that the battery gets more juice whenever they push it!
It seems like a somewhat interesting device to have around as a toy. It'd even help kids to have something like that to use at school, and overall, it sounds like a reasonable quality machine for the price. Unfortunately, I don't see how learning Palm OS would be a huge asset for children, and I shudder to think of how filthy/broken/stolen those things would get in any school. When I was in elementary school, all we had were Apple IIe's and Unisys ICONs. Neither gave me any relevant experience with computers, nor were they ever actually used for anything practical. If all these computers do is give kids a fancy calculator to do things that they should learn to use their brains for, and type (or scribble graffitti shit) out things that they could otherwise write, they aren't worth it. Computers in the classroom are good, but only if they do more than just make things a little bit easier.
you're fucking retarded, you fucking cuntbitch. oh no, Canada's cold. Let's make fun of the retardedly obvious shit about the country! It's not funny anymore. Chew balls.
hmm I thought it was banned. If it's frowned upon, that's more than enough. I didn't ask for an explaination or a simple one at that. Nothing to get all worked up about. What do they say about Canadians anyway? PS: I don't give a fuck where you're from, an asshole is an asshole.
Uh oh! Terrorists are now getting into carding! Next they'll start stealing our k0d3z!!@#!
despite our ties to the UK, I doubt we'd do anything that the USA doesn't agree with. Canada's a nice country, I like it here, but it doesn't have enough backbone.
No matter what reasons they may have cited for banning it in canada, be assured that it's all about the states having banned it, which eliminated any chance of us ever doing it either.
this is the new dumbest thing I've ever seen.
are you so sure that all of them are slackers wasting your money? If you don't like what some of the state employees are doing, complain. See if their union wants to listen. Probably not, so it's also probably not worth bitching about. Either way, if you don't like your country, try to change it, shut up about it, or leave.
just because you consume products doesn't mean you have to make them. Buying them helps enough. It's the money you spend that counts, not the work you do.
people need jobs you fucking moron. if you don't like it, stop paying taxes and get put in jail. that'll learn ya.
You are paying for a service, and you have to accept the service at the terms of the service provider. Bell Canada forced me to look at advertisements for their services on the display on my telephone, and no matter how many times I called to have the ads removed, they kept coming back within a week. I just lived with it, even though I owned the telephone in question.
The only thing that tivo is expecting people to do as a *minimum* is to put up with a line of text showing a program that's recorded that they can watch.
All of this nonsense people are spouting out about having their privacy and rights violated really bothers me sometimes. Seriously, we're at the mercy of the big companies. If we want a service, we have to take what goes along with it. What a surprise...companies want money? Companies advertise and market their products/services? Never heard of that before!
It's business, and this decision didn't hurt anyone, it just made it possible for you to watch a new show at any time you chose, or chose not to, because the BBC wanted you to. TiVo made some money, and the BBC got some more exposure for their show. The user of the TiVo still had the choice of whether or not to watch the show--and if they chose to watch it, they could do it at any time they wanted. You gain potential convenience, and lose nothing. To me this isn't nearly as bad as having to watch commercials--something we all put up with and rarely say anything about anyway.
Relax people. When your rights are really being violated, you'll know for sure, without having to make mountains out of molehills. Sure, I'm sure the next argument would be that the more of this kind of thing that we let companies do, the worse it will get. Again, you'll know when it's really time to complain. There's also laws in place to stop things from getting that bad.
It seems that they were probably planning on doing this all along, having set aside some space on the disk above and beyond the advertised capacity of the tivo thang. According to tivo the forced recording doesn't take up any of the user's storage space and if they had another recording scheduled, their tivo would record both.
This being the case, not interfering with any of their plans or enjoyment of their media, the only problem people could have with this is that they have to look at a program listed on their menu. Is that so horrible?
The reviewer clearly states that the movie was rented. I didn't watch the movie when it was in theatres, haven't rented it yet, and probably never will. At least now I know for sure that I'm no missing anything. Nobody was pretending to be reviewing a brand new movie...
besides, maybe the point is that if they review a movie that's a year old, people won't shit and piss their pants about lone-gunmen-ing it since it's old news.
as for all the "what's happening to slashdot" and otherwise complaining comments, honestly you people need a sense of humour. That review was funny, and it isn't as if there's more than one article every now and then that's "off topic" as far as nerd news goes. settle down.
In theory this is interesting, but would be practially useless in real life. What if someone was sitting in front of the computer, and there was no convenient white wall a metre away? Where would you hide your "special light sensing device"?
Again, an interesting piece of theory, but I can't see many situations where this could be applied in real life. On the other hand, the concept of "Van Eck Phreaking" (using a tv, antenna, & tuner to pick up electromagnetic radiation from a monitor and duplicate the picture from a distance) is quite old now. It's a much more realistic approach, but even still, it hasn't been explored very well.
if this inneffective light-and-reflection approach interests you, perhaps you'd like to check out some information on a more likely way to watch someone's monitor remotely like tempest, or the original paper on electromagnetic radiation as a security risk, by Wim Van Eck, the paper being written about tests he conducted in 1983.
it's not about wanting to be on a list or not. If people had a choice, they wouldn't be on any telemarketing/junkmailing lists. If given a choice, people wouldn't even want to have to watch TV commercials. I'm sorry, but too bad, we're stuck with this crap for as long as we want to live in a capitalist society. For our services to keep running, they need to keep making money somehow. If you give someone the option to opt out of something they don't really want, they'll do it. The option *is* yours to be removed from these lists, but you are left on them by default because we all know that nobody would choose to be on them and they need to advertise/sell to someone if asked upfront. If everyone starts off on them and only removes themselves when they're so pissed off with it that they have to call or email or whatever to be removed, at least the company has gotten their message across to them. "If you'd like to opt-out of Yahoo's database, press 1 now." We're right back to what I said before: yahoo gave the option. Why should they have to give it again? Why should they let you press 1? They already gave you the chance, and if you want to do something about it now, go and use the normal channels like everyone else. I don't like marketing and advertising any more than the next guy, but seriously, people shoot off at the mouth about why this stuff is evil without realizing how unfortunately necessary it is. Tell me: why is it that you deserve something for nothing, from a company that owes you nothing?
Quietly?
Yahoo sent an email to every account I have through them, telling me that changes/additions had been made to my marketing preferences. I followed their instructions on how to change my marketing settings so that I wouldn't receive unwanted mail/calls. They made it very clear that this had happened, and told me what I could do to keep my privacy.
Quietly?
Your argument now might be "What about those people who don't check their email, or don't bother to read spammy looking mail that comes from Yahoo?"
This is my problem with the average consumer, people sign up for accounts, services that they don't need, but don't care since they're getting it for free. Then they get mail, calls, whatever, and bitch about it. It's clearly stated in TOS agreements what will happen in the future. Beyond that, if you're too lazy to check your email to read what yahoo sent you, or too negligent to think that a letter from them might contain something important, it's your problem when telemarketers start annoying you.
They gave the public plenty of notice. If the public is too lazy to respond, it's their fault. Yes, Yahoo could've changed the marketing preferences and given you a chance to opt *in* for the new spam/mail/telemarketing--but think about it--they're a *business* they need to make money. Why would people bitch about a company that gives them something for free? They need to keep it running *and* make a profit. Would the people who complain about this be happy if one day their Yahoo accounts and services suddenly vanished without prior notice, only to find out that the company was so generous and noble that they refused to sell information and subject their freeloaders to the evils of marketing, that they went out of business, because they also decided to cut out those annoying ads? Would you say "Well, I lost a good, free service, but at least I didn't have to put in that extra tiny bit of effort that it would've taken to keep it...".
I know this is about privacy. The point is, they gave us the option. They also need to make money, that's why it was a negative option. Nothing is free, but if the price you have to pay for a service *and* keeping your privacy is just clicking a few more buttons, isn't it worth it?
There are laws that prohibit yahoo from doing this. That's why you agree to the terms of service. That's why they sent those emails.