To most people this is no problem, to me, it is. I try my damndest to stay out of all forms of database, with mixed results, and with these tags, I CAN'T.
So, basically, it becomes an unendurable crisis for you on the day they figure out how to put an RFID into tinfoil....
Or the debate may be unhealthy because after awhile the average person says 'those privacy nutcases are ranting again' and it ends up being a case of 'crying wolf' where valid concerns are written off if and when it becomes a real issue.
Registration with the US copyright office should be a requirement, not an option.
Nope. Copyright is deeply embedded in our culture. It's almost natural law. I have a copyright on these very words I am typing, and every writer has a copyright on any work s/he produces the moment after it's written. If everything copyrighted had to be registered with the copyright office, it would represent a huge rights-grab by whatever corporate/government interest set up a systematic method of claiming all the everything that we all produce.
Nope. The code doesn't need to be 'available for public peer review.' It only needs to be reviewed by special witnesses and the judge.
I don't get the constant harping on this 'peer review' thing- that's part of the academic community and science, not for legal matters.
Re:Frustratingly typical day in the life of Micros
on
Yet Another Windows Worm
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Here's a secret you might not know:
On Unix/Linux Desktop systems there is nothing on the system as important as the user's data in his home directory.
So the whole notion that trojans/worms etc. can't hurt the systems that 'mere users' will be using as there is more and more of a push to Linux desktop systems is just plain nonsense. If it wipes out an employee's whole writeable diskspace, it's done all the damage it could possibly do. Nobody cares that everything that rolled off the Install CD is still there and might even be pristine.
You never know, these days. Someone like Ray Noorda may come along and buy the company just for the rights to sue people, like he did with DR-DOS. Distressed properties and failed software firms can be a gold mine for the greedy, angry, and litigious.
What you're calling 'the M$ Development Model' is the model that all commerical software vendors use. And they're making the bulk of the money in the software business. You're engaging in what's called a 'big lie' in your claim that 'everyone else has figured out how to make money with free software.'
Nobody has figured out how to make money with Free Software, a few businesses are experimenting with methods, involving things like selling support, etc. which are still unproven.
Saying a bunch of stuff, like you have, here where you're preaching to the Free Software choir, is fine and well. Just don't come crying when reality smacks you in the face.
The sad thing is, it's been established that they didn't even need to fake the evidence presented in that video. What they were demonstrating worked fine, it was just laziness on the part of the production people to use an edited version rather than one continuous shot.
So much for it being 'faked evidence.' More of a tactical blunder used widely as propaganda by the opposition.
All organizations like Microsoft have to do is take a big dollop of the Uncertainty and Doubt that you're promoting, toss in a little lump of Fear, and they've got a living, breathing FUD campaign.
It's cut and dried. The code belongs to AOL. It can't be GPL'd. Let's move along, and someone start writing new code.
I'd rather have a 5.1 channel format than a higher sampling rate.
For some people 'effect' is the important thing, and all sorts of wizzy-whoo can make a 5.1 channel format sound 'better.'
For other people, high fidelity of reproduction is what's important, and by definition a 5.1 system is irrelevant and probably adds distortion, unless the original microphone placement at the recording session was set up with microphones placed in a '5.1 pattern.' Much of the world's great recordings of music was recorded and mixed for a two-speaker stereo sound system. You can't just 'mix and reformulate' for whatever new fad in speaker placement is popular, at least not without inherently reducing the fidelity of playback.
That said, it's all a compromise, since every recording is uniquely recorded and mixed. But whiz-bang trendy gear just makes the stereo salesman's boat payment. Get a good two channel integrated amplifier and a pair of speakers and place them properly in your listening room for quality stereo playback.
"44KHz is not enough to go up to even 22KHz" Nyquist dissagrees with you, i believe
I guess as long as you're just listening to 22 KHz triangle or sawtooth waves, you're fine. Don't try to listen to any instrument that produces harmonically complex high notes.
I guess it depends on your defintion of 'volume' and 'quality.'
To a high fidelity enthusiast, 'quality' isn't defined as 'it makes my rock music sound good', it's defined as a flat frequency response curve. So that all sorts of music sound real played through the system, particularly difficult things like acousic piano or orchestral music.
If you primarily listen to 'rock' music there's nothing 'real' there to matter. Electric guitar only sounds good if there's distortion harmonics in the mix.
Your reading assignments for this week are: 'On The Correct Handling Of Contridictions Among The People' by Mao Zedong and 'Combat Liberalism' by V.I. Lenin. Please come to the discussion group prepared to discuss the correct line forward expressed in these works.
I worked at a company in Eden Prairie, MN, that used to do that 'pump up the volume at month end' game to fiddle with their numbers. One weekend day I worked at triple-time pay taping up cardboard boxes for the Ink Division. A number of us from the PC Board troubleshooting area, the highest paid 'hourly' part of the company, worked that day. I thought it was ludicrious that they were paying me $45 an hour to tape up boxes, but I wasn't going to argue. I also wasn't going to stick around to make that company a long term career choice, of course.
What the NSA runs for their public-Internet-facing Web Server is so irrelevant to NSA security that it's shocking anybody dares post it here. Believe me, there's nothing behind that server but public information. Still, it's amusing to poke fun at them, eh?
Somebody's got to pay Garrison Keillor's limousine bills, after all.
(be careful when throwing Keillor's name around, he has a gaggle of lawyers.... I have a friend who found out after a letter he wrote about Mr. Keillor's authenticity was published in a local MN newspaper....)
And when you've created this 'informed public body' will you weep in your soup if they don't vote the way you've preened them to?
Let's get real here. The public isn't 'shaped' by a bunch of J-School grads who took their ethics courses very, very seriously. It's all a bunch of propaganda. The worst offenders are said J-School grads, who appear to believe their own myths.
a Bureau of Sabotage. This Bureau is charged with ensuring that government doesn't move too fast by literally sabotaging the efforts.
That's really what the 'true' conservative movement is about. It isn't about getting Republicans elected to be just another flavor of politicians. It's to elect anti-politicians and shut-em-down. It makes bureaucrats and benchwarmers on both sides of the aisle nervous, as well it should.
Well, now you're talking about government spending. The people spending the money are borrowing the money being spent. And that's the government.
Cold turkey slashes in government programs are apparently necessary. Why are you claiming we instead need to just expropriate more money from the citizenry?
Frankly, the problem all comes back to politicians. There's this 'debt' thing that gets passed along from Administration to Administration, from Congress to Congress. The Buck (stealing) has to stop (here) somehow, sometime.
If I don't have the money to pay my debts, I don't go next door and rob my neighbor to pay for it. And if I do rob my neighbor, and he resists, it's not HE who is ripping the system off.
Slashdot Mirror
To most people this is no problem, to me, it is. I try my damndest to stay out of all forms of database, with mixed results, and with these tags, I CAN'T.
So, basically, it becomes an unendurable crisis for you on the day they figure out how to put an RFID into tinfoil....
Or the debate may be unhealthy because after awhile the average person says 'those privacy nutcases are ranting again' and it ends up being a case of 'crying wolf' where valid concerns are written off if and when it becomes a real issue.
Wow, she sure sounds unbiased. It sounds to me like she had already made up her fucking mind before she had even seen the so-called 'proof'
I would say 'pot, kettle, black' but I'd have to shout it at almost the entire 'slashdot community'
Registration with the US copyright office should be a requirement, not an option.
Nope. Copyright is deeply embedded in our culture. It's almost natural law. I have a copyright on these very words I am typing, and every writer has a copyright on any work s/he produces the moment after it's written. If everything copyrighted had to be registered with the copyright office, it would represent a huge rights-grab by whatever corporate/government interest set up a systematic method of claiming all the everything that we all produce.
Nope. The code doesn't need to be 'available for public peer review.' It only needs to be reviewed by special witnesses and the judge.
I don't get the constant harping on this 'peer review' thing- that's part of the academic community and science, not for legal matters.
Here's a secret you might not know:
On Unix/Linux Desktop systems there is nothing on the system as important as the user's data in his home directory.
So the whole notion that trojans/worms etc. can't hurt the systems that 'mere users' will be using as there is more and more of a push to Linux desktop systems is just plain nonsense. If it wipes out an employee's whole writeable diskspace, it's done all the damage it could possibly do. Nobody cares that everything that rolled off the Install CD is still there and might even be pristine.
You never know, these days. Someone like Ray Noorda may come along and buy the company just for the rights to sue people, like he did with DR-DOS. Distressed properties and failed software firms can be a gold mine for the greedy, angry, and litigious.
What you're calling 'the M$ Development Model' is the model that all commerical software vendors use. And they're making the bulk of the money in the software business. You're engaging in what's called a 'big lie' in your claim that 'everyone else has figured out how to make money with free software.'
Nobody has figured out how to make money with Free Software, a few businesses are experimenting with methods, involving things like selling support, etc. which are still unproven.
Saying a bunch of stuff, like you have, here where you're preaching to the Free Software choir, is fine and well. Just don't come crying when reality smacks you in the face.
The sad thing is, it's been established that they didn't even need to fake the evidence presented in that video. What they were demonstrating worked fine, it was just laziness on the part of the production people to use an edited version rather than one continuous shot.
So much for it being 'faked evidence.' More of a tactical blunder used widely as propaganda by the opposition.
5% of the 2% of the computer-using public who use Linux don't really form any sort of a majority. Certainly not enough to define language standards.
All organizations like Microsoft have to do is take a big dollop of the Uncertainty and Doubt that you're promoting, toss in a little lump of Fear, and they've got a living, breathing FUD campaign.
It's cut and dried. The code belongs to AOL. It can't be GPL'd. Let's move along, and someone start writing new code.
That sounds like modern liberals, almost to a t. He also referred to them as useful idiots.
I'd rather have a 5.1 channel format than a higher sampling rate.
For some people 'effect' is the important thing, and all sorts of wizzy-whoo can make a 5.1 channel format sound 'better.'
For other people, high fidelity of reproduction is what's important, and by definition a 5.1 system is irrelevant and probably adds distortion, unless the original microphone placement at the recording session was set up with microphones placed in a '5.1 pattern.' Much of the world's great recordings of music was recorded and mixed for a two-speaker stereo sound system. You can't just 'mix and reformulate' for whatever new fad in speaker placement is popular, at least not without inherently reducing the fidelity of playback.
That said, it's all a compromise, since every recording is uniquely recorded and mixed. But whiz-bang trendy gear just makes the stereo salesman's boat payment. Get a good two channel integrated amplifier and a pair of speakers and place them properly in your listening room for quality stereo playback.
"44KHz is not enough to go up to even 22KHz"
Nyquist dissagrees with you, i believe
I guess as long as you're just listening to 22 KHz triangle or sawtooth waves, you're fine. Don't try to listen to any instrument that produces harmonically complex high notes.
bzzzt! you said 'MP3' there.
I guess it depends on your defintion of 'volume' and 'quality.'
To a high fidelity enthusiast, 'quality' isn't defined as 'it makes my rock music sound good', it's defined as a flat frequency response curve. So that all sorts of music sound real played through the system, particularly difficult things like acousic piano or orchestral music.
If you primarily listen to 'rock' music there's nothing 'real' there to matter. Electric guitar only sounds good if there's distortion harmonics in the mix.
Your reading assignments for this week are: 'On The Correct Handling Of Contridictions Among The People' by Mao Zedong and 'Combat Liberalism' by V.I. Lenin. Please come to the discussion group prepared to discuss the correct line forward expressed in these works.
I worked at a company in Eden Prairie, MN, that used to do that 'pump up the volume at month end' game to fiddle with their numbers. One weekend day I worked at triple-time pay taping up cardboard boxes for the Ink Division. A number of us from the PC Board troubleshooting area, the highest paid 'hourly' part of the company, worked that day. I thought it was ludicrious that they were paying me $45 an hour to tape up boxes, but I wasn't going to argue. I also wasn't going to stick around to make that company a long term career choice, of course.
What the NSA runs for their public-Internet-facing Web Server is so irrelevant to NSA security that it's shocking anybody dares post it here. Believe me, there's nothing behind that server but public information. Still, it's amusing to poke fun at them, eh?
Hey, is it anybody else's fault that almost none of us have ever, one single time, plugged a real microphone into our sound card and sung?
Somebody's got to pay Garrison Keillor's limousine bills, after all.
(be careful when throwing Keillor's name around, he has a gaggle of lawyers.... I have a friend who found out after a letter he wrote about Mr. Keillor's authenticity was published in a local MN newspaper....)
And when you've created this 'informed public body' will you weep in your soup if they don't vote the way you've preened them to?
Let's get real here. The public isn't 'shaped' by a bunch of J-School grads who took their ethics courses very, very seriously. It's all a bunch of propaganda. The worst offenders are said J-School grads, who appear to believe their own myths.
a Bureau of Sabotage. This Bureau is charged with ensuring that government doesn't move too fast by literally sabotaging the efforts.
That's really what the 'true' conservative movement is about. It isn't about getting Republicans elected to be just another flavor of politicians. It's to elect anti-politicians and shut-em-down. It makes bureaucrats and benchwarmers on both sides of the aisle nervous, as well it should.
Sounds to me like everybody is flogging ClearChannel for holding the market share that is popular, that people listen to.
Like, they're supposed to suffer because the other 89% of the market can't get their revenues up??
Well, now you're talking about government spending. The people spending the money are borrowing the money being spent. And that's the government.
Cold turkey slashes in government programs are apparently necessary. Why are you claiming we instead need to just expropriate more money from the citizenry?
Frankly, the problem all comes back to politicians. There's this 'debt' thing that gets passed along from Administration to Administration, from Congress to Congress. The Buck (stealing) has to stop (here) somehow, sometime.
If I don't have the money to pay my debts, I don't go next door and rob my neighbor to pay for it. And if I do rob my neighbor, and he resists, it's not HE who is ripping the system off.