And more and more places are going smoke-free, including places thought of as "liberal"
The anti-smoking crusade is almost entirely liberal. Conservatives have a principled opposition on the grounds of individual freedom and private property rights. Now if they could only apply the same reasoning to the Wars on Drugs and Porn.
Yes, but releasing this tool into the wild certainly would damage Apple's ability to claim it has an effective DRM solution when they talk to the RIAA.
Apple never claimed their DRM was especially effective. Steve Jobs: "We have Ph.D.s here who know the stuff cold, and we don't believe it's possible to protect digital content". iTunes DRM isn't meant to be anything other than a speed bump to keep honest people honest.
If I acutally wanted to USE this bot, it would be pretty trivial to hack it's resources to change the titlebar (actually, I'm sure the author has already randomized the title). We're going to see an increasing battle between 'bot programs for online gambling and those who run online gambling sites.
Yeah. Fortunately from what I've heard winholdem isn't too good (although it's likely still better than the morons who think Q7 offsuit is worth calling a raise with). And it doesn't support the site I use, yet.
Precisely why you should only play blackjack (if you know how to count cards), or some games like Texas Hold'em poker...if you learn how to figure 'pot odds' correctly. With these two games and strategies....you CAN have a positive expectation in the long run. Statistically, that is...
Indeed. I've made a decent profit in the last few months off people who think A6 offsuit is a good hand.
The article actually talks about gambling clients trusting casino servers, which is an interesting reversal on the typical applications of DRM
As usual, DRM isn't needed to achieve this; we already have existing algorithms. Here's how a casino can prove that it's shuffling a deck of cards fairly:
The casino generates 225 random bits, enough for all permutations of a 52-card deck.
For each bit, if it is a 1, the casino server generates 2 600-bit prime numbers and multiplies them together. If it's a 0, the server generates and multiplies 3 400-bit numbers.
The server sends the 225 1200-bit numbers to my client.
My client creates 225 random bits (with or without my direct input) and sends them to the server.
The server XORs its original bits with the bits from the client, and uses the resulting 225 bits to shuffle the deck, using a publicly known algorithm.
After play with the deck is concluded, the server sends the client the prime factors of the numbers that it sent in step 3. I can replicate the process that the server used in step 5 to shuffle the deck and verify that it was done correctly.
I can't cheat because there's (presumably) no way to factor the large numbers I get from the server in any reasonable time. The server can't cheat because it has to prove the bits that it started with.
Laissez Faire is exactly about worker exploitation. Because it is the most ruthless pursuit of efficiency - and if you can, through deceit or violence, convince people to work for free
Show me where Cato has advocated using force or fraud to acquire workers.
But if you really want to see Cato's theories in action, you can visit anywhere in our planet's generous 3rd world
Third world countries are generally run by despots and/or kleptocrats.
Thank you for supporting the Ban on Nipples on TeeVee, but don't you dare try to shut down wholesome things, like when two football players smack together and one of them gets a broken leg or neck.
Yeah, this week's South Park pretty much nailed it. (Oops, can I say "nailed"?)
It was a really cool dev environment, unfortunately apple price it was out of reach for too long and never got around to actually trying to market it...
No need for the past tense; it's alive and kicking. Unfortunately you're right about the lack of marketing.
Depending on your definition of "spyware", I might agree. I would think a large amount of spyware is already illegal under various laws that prohibit tampering and unauthorized access.
Otherwise, don't be surprised when, say, Google starts telling you, "Sorry, we just tried to install our 'tracking' software on your system and failed. Please take your searches elsewhere."
If I own a website, why shouldn't I be allowed to grant access to only those clients I choose?
Technically, even executing the software requires it to be loaded into memory. I seem to recall that this arguement has already been thrown out of court at least once, though, since it is the software's designed purpose to be copied into memory to be executed.
This is covered by 17 USC 117. But it may not apply if AutoZone actually did copy the shared libraries for porting purposes, since that may not be considered an "essential step". Of course, this may be irrelevent since SCO has no proof that this actually occurred.
This is exactly what I would expect from Windows, and what I don't want in Linux. Because eventually a) something will be greyed out when I know it shouldn't be, or b) something will be greyed out when I think it shouldn't be, or c) I know something SHOULD be impossible, but I want to select it anyway for troubleshooting or experimentation.
Then make it so that when you hold down control (or whatever) and click the menu, the normally disabled choices are available. There's no need to confuse 99% of the users every time because of what 1% might want to do 1% of the time.
Strange indeed. I was creating the files in the shell, but moving them in the Finder. But I'm on 10.2.8, so maybe the behavior was changed again in Panther. At any rate, I'll continue using symlinks for everything and avoid this confusion.
An alias points to a specific file. If you move an alias's target and put another file there, the alias still points to the old file.
IIRC this was true in earlier verions of OS X, but not in Jaguar or later. The pathname now has priority over the file id when resolving aliases. To test: create a "foo.txt" file, create an alias to it, move the original file, create a new foo.txt file in its place. The alias will point to the new file, not the original.
Remember - it's not the actual callers who are the scumbags, but the companies who employ them.
It's not an either-or situation. Both parties are deliberately harrassing us and invading our privacy for their own benefit. Neither deserve any sympathy.
Type myType = Type.new();//invokes Type's static new() method
And of course you should feel free to override the implementation of new(), just like you would do it in any constructor. No more need for messy super()... Oh but static methods in Java can't inherit behavior? Because classes aren't considered as objects? Doh! How very object-oriented... (end of sarcasm)
Agreed 110%. And if the "constructor" takes arguments, not only could you give it a better name ("type=Type.newWithFoo(foo)"), but subclasses wouldn't need to pointlessly re-implement the constructors to do nothing but call super.
Objective-C does exactly this (along with almost, but not quite, treating classes as true objects), and it's very nice.
Slashdot Mirror
And more and more places are going smoke-free, including places thought of as "liberal"
The anti-smoking crusade is almost entirely liberal. Conservatives have a principled opposition on the grounds of individual freedom and private property rights. Now if they could only apply the same reasoning to the Wars on Drugs and Porn.
Yes, but releasing this tool into the wild certainly would damage Apple's ability to claim it has an effective DRM solution when they talk to the RIAA.
Apple never claimed their DRM was especially effective. Steve Jobs: "We have Ph.D.s here who know the stuff cold, and we don't
believe it's possible to protect digital content". iTunes DRM isn't meant to be anything other than a speed bump to keep honest people honest.
Big businesses like regulation. It costs them, but it costs their smaller competitors more in relative terms.
For example? I find the OS X directory layout far more organized than sprinkling files around
1) find a girlfriend
2) have lots of fun in bed
3) goto 2
Along similar lines, here's my guaranteed plan for financial security:
1. Get $5 million.
2. Deposit in tax-exempt bond fund.
3. Collect interest.
If I acutally wanted to USE this bot, it would be pretty trivial to hack it's resources to change the titlebar (actually, I'm sure the author has already randomized the title). We're going to see an increasing battle between 'bot programs for online gambling and those who run online gambling sites.
Yeah. Fortunately from what I've heard winholdem isn't too good (although it's likely still better than the morons who think Q7 offsuit is worth calling a raise with). And it doesn't support the site I use, yet.
Almost all of our basic laws are based on the Ten Commandments
The 1st Amendment directly contradicts several Commandments.
Precisely why you should only play blackjack (if you know how to count cards), or some games like Texas Hold'em poker...if you learn how to figure 'pot odds' correctly. With these two games and strategies....you CAN have a positive expectation in the long run. Statistically, that is...
Indeed. I've made a decent profit in the last few months off people who think A6 offsuit is a good hand.
The bottom line is this was an un-declared war directed by a puppet president and never approved by Congress.
Gosh, I wonder what this is then.
Which is why 95% of the population want them the hell out.
Bull.
As usual, DRM isn't needed to achieve this; we already have existing algorithms. Here's how a casino can prove that it's shuffling a deck of cards fairly:
I can't cheat because there's (presumably) no way to factor the large numbers I get from the server in any reasonable time. The server can't cheat because it has to prove the bits that it started with.
WE WANT labor prices to be high!
Speak for yourself. Actually, don't speak at all until you learn basic economics. Hint: increased productivity is *good*.
Show me where Cato has advocated using force or fraud to acquire workers.
But if you really want to see Cato's theories in action, you can visit anywhere in our planet's generous 3rd world
Third world countries are generally run by despots and/or kleptocrats.
Thank you for supporting the Ban on Nipples on TeeVee, but don't you dare try to shut down wholesome things, like when two football players smack together and one of them gets a broken leg or neck.
Yeah, this week's South Park pretty much nailed it. (Oops, can I say "nailed"?)
People should not be subjected to it or forced to listen to this stuff
Yes, I'm all for repealing the law requiring all citizens to listen to Howard Stern for 3 hours a day.
It was a really cool dev environment, unfortunately apple price it was out of reach for too long and never got around to actually trying to market it...
No need for the past tense; it's alive and kicking. Unfortunately you're right about the lack of marketing.
Spyware MUST be outlawed.
Depending on your definition of "spyware", I might agree. I would think a large amount of spyware is already illegal under various laws that prohibit tampering and unauthorized access.
Otherwise, don't be surprised when, say, Google starts telling you, "Sorry, we just tried to install our 'tracking' software on your system and failed. Please take your searches elsewhere."
If I own a website, why shouldn't I be allowed to grant access to only those clients I choose?
And I think a lot of people really would be interested in what these systems are.
Cocoa and GNUstep are very nice.
Technically, even executing the software requires it to be loaded into memory. I seem to recall that this arguement has already been thrown out of court at least once, though, since it is the software's designed purpose to be copied into memory to be executed.
This is covered by 17 USC 117. But it may not apply if AutoZone actually did copy the shared libraries for porting purposes, since that may not be considered an "essential step". Of course, this may be irrelevent since SCO has no proof that this actually occurred.
This is exactly what I would expect from Windows, and what I don't want in Linux. Because eventually a) something will be greyed out when I know it shouldn't be, or b) something will be greyed out when I think it shouldn't be, or c) I know something SHOULD be impossible, but I want to select it anyway for troubleshooting or experimentation.
Then make it so that when you hold down control (or whatever) and click the menu, the normally disabled choices are available. There's no need to confuse 99% of the users every time because of what 1% might want to do 1% of the time.
Strange indeed. I was creating the files in the shell, but moving them in the Finder. But I'm on 10.2.8, so maybe the behavior was changed again in Panther. At any rate, I'll continue using symlinks for everything and avoid this confusion.
An alias points to a specific file. If you move an alias's target and put another file there, the alias still points to the old file.
IIRC this was true in earlier verions of OS X, but not in Jaguar or later. The pathname now has priority over the file id when resolving aliases. To test: create a "foo.txt" file, create an alias to it, move the original file, create a new foo.txt file in its place. The alias will point to the new file, not the original.
Remember - it's not the actual callers who are the scumbags, but the companies who employ them.
It's not an either-or situation. Both parties are deliberately harrassing us and invading our privacy for their own benefit. Neither deserve any sympathy.
You would then have something like this in Java:
//invokes Type's static new() method
Type myType = Type.new();
And of course you should feel free to override the implementation of new(), just like you would do it in any constructor. No more need for messy super()... Oh but static methods in Java can't inherit behavior? Because classes aren't considered as objects? Doh! How very object-oriented... (end of sarcasm)
Agreed 110%. And if the "constructor" takes arguments, not only could you give it a better name ("type=Type.newWithFoo(foo)"), but subclasses wouldn't need to pointlessly re-implement the constructors to do nothing but call super.
Objective-C does exactly this (along with almost, but not quite, treating classes as true objects), and it's very nice.
Within Walmart's business practices are the hidden costs: a strong deflationary cycle that removes more value from the overall system
And I'm saying that's not the case. The money saved by consumers by shopping at Walmart doesn't just disappear; it's spent on other stuff or invested.