Now google for "reuters propaganda" and voila, propoganda, on the net. Offcourse the sites you find are also propoganda.
'Terrorist' propoganda is very easy to find, if you never come across it, well, you must have had your head in the sand. Given that you are apparently ignorant of this, why should we attach any credit to the fact that you think no terrorists have ever been recruited over the internet.
It is like you saying "I never seen porn on the internet and I don't think Y" don't matter why Y is, the first part clearly labels you as someone whose views of the world are a bit limited.
If you want to combat that this bill you are going to have to be a bit more convicing then this. "I never seen something that I could easily find by google and futher more, without doing any research whatsoever I think it doesn't happen anyway, so I am against it".
Yeah, next up, we ask newborn babies their opinion on sales tax.
The cracked effect is what you get when muds dries out, the effect is NOT visible in the trails. How can this be IF the rocks moved when the mud was still there? There is a cracked effect in the trail but it is crushed, the effect you would expect if the rocks had been moved AFTER the ripple effect had already started to form, AFTER the mud started to dry or even when it was already dry.
But if the rocks moved on ice then AFTER the ice melted there would be mud, that if dried would show the same pattern all around the newly positioned rock with just the ridges of the trail left. NOT flattened dried mud.
As for purely the wind moving them, how fast do the winds get there anyway? Wind can be extremely powerfull even in areas with lots of obstructions, in open areas, well if it can pick up/move trucks, why not rocks? Far heavier things are lifted up by air alone, how do you think aircraft work?
Games sure could use some great writers, perhaps we could talk to these Hollywood/tv writers and ask them if they know any, you never know, they might have bumped into them at some time.
I am not making this up, there really seems to a The Sims movie in the works... If hollywood can screw up game movies with single paragraph plots, what the hell will they do with a game that HAS NO PLOT?
The comment "favotire movie I never want to see again" is one I got from a review of Grave of the Fireflies that I just happened to totally agree with. Don't read the reviews, just watch it yourselve and if you are not into Anime just set that aside for the duration of the movie, then ask yourselve again, if you can understand that comment.
It is powerfull movie, like Shindlers List, but not a happy tale. I am not talking a tear jerker movie here, I am talking a "we will all burn in hell for this" movie. Tear jerkers I can take, Christmas in August is one. Sad tale, nicely told but ultimately human. It makes you sad, not sick of humanity.
Perhaps I am just too emotional about this kinda stuff, one reason might be that I grew up with halfunderstood tales of "that was were your great-uncle was picked up". When you realize just why your grandmother had 9 brothers and sisters yet you never met any. I got one aunt, my grand-parents had 3 kids, a starvation story like GotF hits a lot closer with a history like that. (The dutch hunger winter)
I enjoy all kinds of movies and would NOT have NOT watched these two, but that doesn't mean I want to see them again. There are some people who list Shindlers List as a feel good movie because it 'ends well'. I suppose you might see it that way, I don't.
I can regonize your statements that the photography is nice and the screen writing is well done, but the plot is intresting? To you it is a plot, to me it is a sickening part of history that I am far too close to.
Perhaps it is a bit like how Richard Pryor's monologue about the 200th celebration of the US was not exactly all that cheerfull.
Terry Pratchets Nanny Ogg describers at one point the difference between merry and mirth (or something like that) she describes how she was joyfull when her child was being born but she wasn't exactly chuckling at the time. Enjoying a movie and enjoying it are two different things, at least for me. I can't describe it any clearer.
They link to a review of it, so here is my own. We accept for the moment that it will ONLY work with MS software and MS approved hardware.
I put my MS approved camera on the surface, up pops a enormous windows telling me I got to agree to a eula (exactly what happens when you access MS media player for the first time), it then finally allows me to download the photo's. I then try to put them on my Zune 2.0, OOPS cannot do that, the camera is digital and zune only accepts analog (Zune 2.0 doesn't allow the uploading of movies captured with a digitial tv tuner, only analog tuners)
Starting to get the picture? ALl these things sound nice when you just see the pre-scripted demo, but when it comes to real life, well, it all just breaks down. Especially when it comes to Microsoft.
Same thing with multi-touch screens, very nice, but how much software will be written to make use of it when so few people will have such a screen? I remember that System Shock ages ago had support for 3D helmets, it was a hot topic back then and one that never happened. SS was one of the few games to support such systems, the others wisely did not bother since nobody had such helmets and because few games supported them, what was the point in getting one.
I can make a game around the logitech G15 keyboard that makes the device indispensible to play, but I would be really hurting my changes of selling the game.
All these devices are intresting enough, but destined to remain obscure simply because people won't be buying them unless their is a killer application for it, and nobody will build such an application until there is a larger installed base.
Right, look at their page, filled with words that have NOTHING to do with the actuall contents but that still get noticed by search engines.
All the big sites work like that, designed to show up at no matter what you search for. Games sites are especially bad/good at this, no matter what game you look for IGN will show up as the definitive source for info on it.
If you want the semantic web dear ZDNet stop this crap NOW. Start it yourselve and clean up your site so that your pages are only indexed for the actual article, not all the crap around it.
Oh but you don't wanna do that do you, because that ain't economical and will put you at a disadvantage.
Well, that is the same reason behind all your other points. DOn't ask Intel to give up the speed race if you are unwilling to give up the keyword race.
Semantic web? Wikipedia is my new search engine. Because wikipedia is one of the only sites to only want to return accurate results and not spam keywords like mad.
The semantic web can't happen until you get rid of people who spam keywords. You can't make smarter PC's as long as reviewers and customers obsesss about clockspeeds.
The first to change might win, but they will be taking a huge risk, none of the established players will do that. Remember, it took an upstart like google to change the search market, now that it is big, do you really think google would dare blacklist IGN from returning results because they got to many empty pages? Offcourse not, maybe the next search company will try that, but not google.
Change your own site first ZDNet, then talk about how the rest of the industry should change.
Just because something is old does NOT mean it is obsolete, more and more I see this as an absolute truth, advancing (oh okay, runaway) age has nothing to do with it.
Some things just work and don't really need to be replaced. Change for change sake is bad. NOW GET OF MY LAWN!
As far as I know in IMDB you are rating the overall quality of the movie, not I agree with it OR I want to see more like this.
One example, Shindlers list, great movie, do NOT want to see it again. Same with Grave of the fireflies. Some movies just ain't for multiple viewings. They are my "favorite movies I never want to see again".
On the other hand I got movies I can watch any day of the week, but that I would NEVER rate as highly. Cannonbal run is one such movie. It watch it far too often, but I wouldn't call it a good movie. You can always fine me ready for a Jacky Chan movie or a spagethi western.
Is the netflix rating system a "I liked this movie and want to see more like it" system or a "This movie was brilliant and I would highly recommend it too everyone else" type of rating system?
Granted some people get it confused, probably the same people that use the slashdot moderation system to silence views they don't like, but that only makes basing conclusions on user ratings even more problematic.
I can rate a movie highly even if I do not agree with it, simply because it is good. And I can rate a movie I really like to watch as crap simply because I know I like watching crap.
I don't like the godfather movies, I can see they are high quality, I just don't like them. So my rating them would be fairly high as for quality, but low for 'I want to see more like this'.
I thought that the netflix system was "I want to see more like this" based. Surely nobody is so stupid as to think a quality rating and a "i like this" rating system are the same? Or am I completly in the wrong in seeing a difference between the two? Am I insane in thinking that you can see a movie as being a great artwork and still not liking it or viceversa?
The 90 days disbarment was an 'offer' from his side, it has NOT been offered to him, so it was not HIS to take but rather the bar's(?)
The fact that he tried this, suggests he really is worried. He might have good reason.
He is making lawyers look bad, yes "they replaced rats with lawyers in lab experiments, because the scientists don't bond with them like they do with rats" lawyers and I can't help but feel that NOT finding him guilty won't make them look any better.
I think he will go down on this. Offcourse that won't stop him, just because he is no longer a lawyer doesn't mean he can't speak up.
It is not the only game to list higher MINIMUM memory requirements for Vista.
Why should a game take more memory under vista for the MINIMUM configuration then under XP unless it is because the OS is somehow using more memory?
No it isn't because DX10 can use higher res textures, this is the MINIMUM configuration, where you will be loading the most basic textures, the same as the ones under XP/DX9.
So, 500mb mores, a fairly typical figure, explain please.
Read it and weep. 100 million per mile? Most costly project was 1 billion per mile and plenty of other projects are higher as well.
Now google a bit further and you find more "reasonable" costs of 20 million per mile being quoted but it makes it bloody clear that roads are very expensive indeed.
Yes sometimes they are cheap at a 1-3 million per mile, if the highway is simple and the conditions are ideal. This is however rarely the case. If you follow these kinds of projects you will also know that there are always complicating factors. For instance the straight road sections might be cheap, but the points where they connect to the rest of the road network, that is where the money really starts to bleed away. As for when you need a bridge or a tunnel. Just forget it.
Also offcourse not all highways are the same. One going through open desert vs one going through a city has huge extra costs in the form of safety, sound reduction and landcosts.
A further thing you might want to ask, how costly is maintenance, and what is the capacity of this network? It is less hassle to replace tradiotional rails then it is too resurface a road. How long is this 100 million per mile going to last you before more millions are needed to maintain it?
Then there is the question of what you get for it, if this 100 million dollar per mile track means you don['t have to construct/upgrade 10 road systems per say 20 million dollar per mile, then you are actually saving money.
But please slashdotters, next time you feel like posting about how costly something is, do a bit of research first. Although I really wish reporters would do it as well.
I loved Deus EX, the sequel sucked, Console dumbification. DO you know the difference between a console player and a dead duck? No, you must be a console player.
Yada yada, others have said it, and I repeat it, but my main point is that while there is the slightest glimmer of hope in that they refer to the ORIGINAL as the one that sold and was reviewed well, they don't mention the sequel. This could be good, they realize it was a huge mistake but company politics prevents them from being negative of one of their own products, OR they simply don't realise that for gamers there is a huge difference between the original and the sequel.
I fear they learned nothing, that when they talk of Deus EX being great they mean BOTH games. Yes it is scary but this EA. Remember, they pulled a Deus EX 2 on us before, what is to stop them from doing it again?
TO learn from your mistakes, you first got to admit them.
Will this game be the miracle of gameplay that was the original or the console dumbness of the sequel. Considering what consolites did to the spiritual sequel to System Shock, I am not getting my hopes up.
Halo 2 AIN'T a vista only game. It has been hacked and works just as well on XP. That isn't really suprising, it is an ancient game that ran on a P3, what the hell would it need DX10 for?
Other games like the recent system cruncher, Crysis, also can be tweaked to run with "disabled, DX10 only" settings on XP.
It seems more and more that a lot of the DX10 games just ain't there, some day there may be, but so far they are not.
MS could afford to force Halo 2 to Vista only, how many game developers can afford to be Vista only? MS better be handing over a huge sum of money to make a game just for Vista.
The problem is that a LOT of hardcore gamers are people who build their own machines, and are also the ones who need the top end Vista version, so they are faced with a very expensive purchase and for what? So that all their games run slower and take more memory?
It will be intresting to see what happens, I personally have little doubt that MS will survive this easily, but their mighty fortress has shown a tiny crack.
IF linux does indeed get DX10 support as some have claimed in the past via Wine like projects, then MS might be in real trouble.
That is a HUGE if, but in theory it is possible, already companies like Blizzard have to deal with the fact that a portion of their players are on linux and that they have to accept this.
It will be intresting to see how the Vista only titles sell in the near future. MS titles don't count, MS can afford to loose money, regular developers can't.
It simply means you don't know something about a specific subject. Perhaps I am using the wrong word, but I certainly did NOT mean dumb. I meant to describe a person who doesn't know anything about computers. Just like some people know nothing about cars, construction (I once had to fix a drainage pipe that was at an UPWARDS angle), clothes etc etc.
I am clueless at quit a lot of things, doesn't make me dumb.
And think about it, what are you saying about Joe Consumer?
Think about it, little kid asks for something, parent says no. Kid logic kicks in and the kid starts whining about it, bad parenting responds and gives in, proving to the kid that whining works.
Advertisers ask us to buy X with ads, we say NO. Advertisiers logic kicks in and starts forcing us to watch the AD, do we give in? Doesn't really matter, if we don't, they just push harder and if we give in, then IT WORKS, so they push harder to sell even more!
F1 racing used to be broadcast by every country in europe, this was great because in olden days it meant you could choose your preffered commentator (if you live in holland you get English, Dutch, Belgian and German state TV on cable) ALL without commericial breaks. Then came some commercial channels that outbid the state tv offerings, so people stopped watching the feed from that country and just watched F1 in a foreign language. When the Dutch F1 broadcast went commericial I switch to the BBC and when that went commericial I switched to Belgian tv.
When that too went commerercial, I stopped watching F1. The commercial breaks were just too many to put up with.
So what has the F1 organisation achieved? They lost a viewer who at least saw all the regular ads on the racetrack because they wanted more money. So they wanted more and got nothing.
I may be alone, but viewing figures for F1 are down. They blaim it on the races themselves but might it just be that people are sick to death of the show being interrupted constantly for ads?
A similar story can be seen around Dutch soccer. That was broadcast by tradition by the NOS, the state part of state telivision. (I am not a soccer fan so excuse me if I get some details wrong) Years ago a commercial channel was launched (sport 7?) which would be pay-per-view like setup. People didn't subscribe. At all. It was a HUGE FLOP. They had totally miscalculated dutch willingness to pay for soccer matches. They thought they would be rich, they ended up bankrupt.
So the license went back the next year to the NOS. Recently another new station launched, this time "free" to watch, Talpa, and it too made a really big deal out of getting SOME of the rights to some of the soccer matches. Again they thought they would make it big, but people just didn't watch. The way the matches were broadcast was a constant source of irritation among soccer fans and the ads were way to heavy.
End result? Talpa went bust and soccer matches are now more or less back in the old format.
The odd thing? Holland is soccer nuts, so what could go wrong with pushing lots of ads around soccer matches? It works in the US right?
Well, in theory it might be simply a case of too much too soon, you have to remember that it is not that long ago that the only ads were BEFORE and AFTER a match NOT during NOT even during half-time. Even more shocking, on sunday there were NO ADS AT ALL.
This has changed but still, ads during the match itself may have been too much.
A clear case of being too demanding, kids KNOW this, they know when to push it and when they are about to be sent to their room. Advertisers just don't seem to be able to spot the warning signs. They keep pushing and pushing when we already kicked them out of the house to freeze to death.
The reason is offcourse simple, advertisers do NOT care about selling a product with their ads, they are selling ADS!
Every obnoxious ad campaign that drives you nuts HAS ALREADY BEEN A SUCCESS because the ad SOLD!
So us claiming that the ads for MS software on slashdot are a stupid idea are missing the real picture. The ad company that sold those ads, made a sale and that is all that matters. That is why you should never believe any research on ad effectiveness by an ad company unless you believe research on soap by soap companies.
Can we be honest here, how many of us, even the linux users, try out MS latest OS just to see the new shiny? I am guilty of it but not with Vista. Why? I found no reliable way to pirate it. I am NOT going to pay for it. I don't 'want' it, I just want to see it.
Why should MS care? Because I am also that guy who knows computers and fixes things.
I fix XP, I told people to move to XP and other upgrades before simply because I was tired of dealing with ancient versions of windows that were even harder to maintain then recent releases.
The same ain't happening with Vista because I don't have any experience with it. ALl those 'regular' people who complain about Vista being too different, are they not REALLY complaining that the tech guy they know doesn't know how to fix it because they are still on XP?
All the techies I know stayed on XP, partly because they don't like Vista, but mostly because they build their own machines and so don't get their hands on a "free" Vista key with their new machines. Also many of them would sooner die then run a Vista Crippled Edition. Faced with the dilema of having to lay down enough money to buy a top of the line CPU or stay with XP, I stayed with XP.
This has removed from my circle of friends a lot of free tech support.
The UAC thingy (Cancel/Allow) sounds not that dis-similar to other Windows crap that everyone had disabled by their tech friend in previous windows releases, except this time, some of us techies just don't know how to do it because we haven't done it ourselves.
How many of you would have Vista installed IF it could be pirated easily? From my own small sampling I think MS has damaged its own locomotion appendage. How serious, that I don't know but it is something to consider.
IF we got the same crime rate (in areas you can compare) as other countries, that have different legal systems, does it actually MATTER what legal system you have or does crime ALWAYS fill up to a certain point regardless of the consequences.
This argument goes both ways, if a criminal is NOT less likely to commit a crime when faced with a harsh sentence, BUT if a criminal is ALSO NOT less likely to commit a crime with a lenient sentence and lots of rehab, then what system do you pick?
The system that at least meets out a lot of punishement OR the system that gives criminals a second, third, fourth etc etc change. Both try to claim that they reduce crime but this just doesn't seem to be the case, so then you got to ask yourselve what kind of society you want.
And this isn't as clear cut as you might think, a society with lenient punishment is NOT nicer, it might be that they just don't consider the victim that important. What is different after all between the dutch slap on the wrist for rape and countries where rapist get a slap on the wrist because women just have no rights?
I still like Terry Pratchets answer on the death penalty, when questioned on its use to prevent crime an executioner answers, "well I never get them up here twice".
It shows that a 'random' person couldn't get the system/OS to work according to his wishes. To be really fair, you really should ask yourselve wether a 'random' person could get other system/OS combo's to work. This includes asking yourselve how well the average random person would deal with installing windows. If you ever had to deal with tech support you would know that most users stumble just as hard with MS software as with OSX and other unixes. Hell, people stumble with their toasters.
To be specific, the SUDO bit had me wondering too, but as I am neither familiar with Ubuntu or sudo (don't use either on my own linux systems) I really can't comment. If Ubuntu does use sudo a lot then it is odd, but does the box say you need to be an experienced Linux user? Couldn't they have provided a help function? Please type in your password?
As for flash, it would have been better if it had worked out of the box, but yes, recently installing it from your browser when prompted has been known to work. This however was not always the case, especially for Opera users.
Enlightenment is a WM that does things a bit differently and the screenshots make it clear it is NOT a straight windows layout copy like KDE and Gnome use (By default). Perhaps he really just didn't know how to get it. Under E17 (The sequel) it is left mouse click on the desktop -> system Might be confusing to a person who normally would NEVER left-click anywhere on the desktop.
He didn't think it would fix a network problem, he just couldn't get the tool too work. That is different. If you know how to setup your network in Windows XP and not in Vista then installing XP again 'fixes' your problem. Granted it does sound like "oh they are not doing everything 100% like I am used too, it sucks" but that is how most users are.
So is it a good review? No, but it does tell us something and that is that Joe Average is a moron who doesn't like change and that it is very hard to develop an OS for that guy. See it not as a review but one of those usability reports usability experts so love to go one about. It might help you to develop an OS for average user.
And no windows ain't that OS either and NEITHER is OSX (before the Apple fanboys pipe up), if ANY OS out there was the perfect OS for the clueless I wouldn't constantly be asked by the clueless to help with their machine.
Recently I had to help people setup their network under Vista and OSX, and none of the users seemed to know how to do it. None of them make it very clear or easy. (Why does Vista break with DHCP run on linux anyway?)
I do agree with your end conclusion, give me a clueless user who knows he/she is clueless anyday, they ask, you answer, they listen, problem fixed. The ones who think they know a little ARGUE with you over the solution. ARGH! If you know it better, why ask? But the horrors of support is another rant.
Do you know what the word ALMOST means? Tasers are ALMOST never deadly. The police ALMOST never uses tasers. The police ALMOST never acts wrong.
So what is all the fuss about, about something that ALMOST never happens.
Really, ALMOST is a weasel word.
I want to hear numbers and I think that you will find that you then find that your definition of ALMOST is very different from that guy who runs the local loony bin. I would also very much like to see how many times it goes deadly wrong or how many patients he has released that were not cured at all.
In holland we have something called TBS (Ter beschikking stelling) which is a sentence given to people who are insane and basically forced them to undergo mental treatment. The problem? Well, for reasons of idiocy the mental wards have been made private so that now they get payed according to the number of cures, cue endless stories about people released who commit the same crimes or even being let out on leave (with a guard who is not allowed to use force or restraints) and commit crimes and go right back in. Oh and in holland, escaping is not a crime.
Frankly a lot of these crazies the police have to deal with are the result of incompetent doctors. If the shrinks did their job better the police wouldn't have to deal with that many crazed out idiots.
I am from holland and we got the SAME crime rate as the US when you stop and think. You got to look at the crimes that are crimes in BOTH countries, murder rate, same. Petty crimes, same. No we don't have the same number of drug cases or prostitution cases as the US. Our crime rate has shot up. The idea that Holland is some kinda safe haven is based on stats from the seventies and everyone in goverment is very carefull in launching any real probes into how a low crime country has things like Holleerder.
This country has really gone downhill. Ask yourselve, if this country is such a nice place, why were two people killed for speaking their mind and just who fired those grenades at the bunker in Osdorp?
That is one of the problems, there is only so much space on a cops belt, even a US cop. Those net guns (I know them from a girlfriend who works for an animal shelter) are not exactly small or that cheap. To big to carry around and to expensive to put in every squad car.
As for getting a pair. Okay, lets. You and me, YOU have to follow the rules, I don't and can carry a knife and if you happen to die... well though, but if I get the slightest bruise, you loose your current career.
Tell me, what is your current job. Have you EVER been in such a situation? Or is the biggest problem you got to deal with that deadly risk of a papercut when you sort out the printer?
Grow a pair, become a cop. I posted my own experiences somewhere else and frankly those who claims cops should just fight the criminal one on one are full of it.
Ages ago I tempted for a cleaning company, except I didn't do windows, we cleared out houses where people had died and other disgusting stuff like that. It was intresting work, although pretty shocking the first time when you realize that this kinda job is not a one off but that you are actually facing overtime to deal with all the incidents.
We usually worked on the order of the local health department or the police although we also did things like cleaning out meatlockers that had broken down during a holiday (you think the myth busters had it bad with the pig?) so basically disgusting work that didn't pay that well but you had a lot of freedom. The boss wasn't likely to show up until it was cleared. And the health workers and cops didn't really care if you took long breaks, if you didn't do the job, they had too.
One of the jobs was clearing out houses of people who were still alive, mental/drug cases who were going to be taken to a mental ward. These weren't evictions, just forced cleanings so that their neighbours didn't have to life next to a rubbish dump while the owner was away.
Occasionally we also helped out with other jobs like clearing the staircases in apartment blocks.
The point is that we were doing a dirty job for not that much pay and sometimes we encountered people that didn't want to cooperate. We had methods for that. We often needed tools, like brooms and shovels and sometimes a crowbar. On a new job, were we knew we had a live occupant, we carried the crowbars in first. You never know if a person is coming out swinging. We were just the cleaners so 99% of the time there was either a health care worker, a cop, or fireman or something similar there to do the talking, but our clear orders were to be visibly there to provide backup. These jobs NEVER went wrong oddly enough, everyone was PREPARED and READY so we knew what to do. We were just there as backup, in sight but not in a threathening way.
The entire trick was that NONE of us was willing to take a risk. IF a person was to attack, hit them, hit hard and don't stop until you are certain they are down. If that means beating them across the head with a crowbar, well, we will understand. Because YOU will NOT want to die for a salary.
A lot of people who never have to deal with anything more dangerous then a papercut will say,"well that is what you are payed for", no it isn't. My salary, a cops salary is/was NOT nearly enough to risk my life for thank you very much and some of these nutters don't care if they loose their lifes, they will do stuff that is insane because they are insane.
People loose it and until you have had to deal with such a thing you are in no position to critize. It only went wrong once, we were asked to clear an apartment but found some stuff in the hallway and didn't know who it belonged too. So we asked the neighbours and at one doorbell it went wrong. A woman opened the door and we heard someone started cussing and screaming and all of sudden a young male rushed out and started attacking us. I and another guy were on the landing, the other guy was extremly large and I am reasonably build and this guy was skinny, the rest (three more) were busy in the apartment. It was all we could do to restrain him. In a normal fight between two agressors ANYONE of us could have beaten this kid senseless BUT we weren't there for that. We just wanted to do our job (it is illegal to keep stuff in apartment hallways, fire regulations) but were nice enough not just to junk the crap and we get attacked for it? It took all five of us to restrain him. What if he had attacked with a knife or had some muscle? I am not going to walk even the slightest risk. You attack me, you die. I am no hero. If we had a taser on us, he would have had so much juice pumped into him they could hook him up to the grid.
As it was I just delivered a few very hard punches to his stomach until he stopped struggling and we could turn him over to the police. He was puking on the ground but if he had tried to get up he
Slashdot Mirror
Now google for "reuters propaganda" and voila, propoganda, on the net. Offcourse the sites you find are also propoganda.
'Terrorist' propoganda is very easy to find, if you never come across it, well, you must have had your head in the sand. Given that you are apparently ignorant of this, why should we attach any credit to the fact that you think no terrorists have ever been recruited over the internet.
It is like you saying "I never seen porn on the internet and I don't think Y" don't matter why Y is, the first part clearly labels you as someone whose views of the world are a bit limited.
If you want to combat that this bill you are going to have to be a bit more convicing then this. "I never seen something that I could easily find by google and futher more, without doing any research whatsoever I think it doesn't happen anyway, so I am against it".
Yeah, next up, we ask newborn babies their opinion on sales tax.
The cracked effect is what you get when muds dries out, the effect is NOT visible in the trails. How can this be IF the rocks moved when the mud was still there? There is a cracked effect in the trail but it is crushed, the effect you would expect if the rocks had been moved AFTER the ripple effect had already started to form, AFTER the mud started to dry or even when it was already dry.
But if the rocks moved on ice then AFTER the ice melted there would be mud, that if dried would show the same pattern all around the newly positioned rock with just the ridges of the trail left. NOT flattened dried mud.
As for purely the wind moving them, how fast do the winds get there anyway? Wind can be extremely powerfull even in areas with lots of obstructions, in open areas, well if it can pick up/move trucks, why not rocks? Far heavier things are lifted up by air alone, how do you think aircraft work?
Games sure could use some great writers, perhaps we could talk to these Hollywood/tv writers and ask them if they know any, you never know, they might have bumped into them at some time.
I am not making this up, there really seems to a The Sims movie in the works... If hollywood can screw up game movies with single paragraph plots, what the hell will they do with a game that HAS NO PLOT?
The comment "favotire movie I never want to see again" is one I got from a review of Grave of the Fireflies that I just happened to totally agree with. Don't read the reviews, just watch it yourselve and if you are not into Anime just set that aside for the duration of the movie, then ask yourselve again, if you can understand that comment.
It is powerfull movie, like Shindlers List, but not a happy tale. I am not talking a tear jerker movie here, I am talking a "we will all burn in hell for this" movie. Tear jerkers I can take, Christmas in August is one. Sad tale, nicely told but ultimately human. It makes you sad, not sick of humanity.
Perhaps I am just too emotional about this kinda stuff, one reason might be that I grew up with halfunderstood tales of "that was were your great-uncle was picked up". When you realize just why your grandmother had 9 brothers and sisters yet you never met any. I got one aunt, my grand-parents had 3 kids, a starvation story like GotF hits a lot closer with a history like that. (The dutch hunger winter)
I enjoy all kinds of movies and would NOT have NOT watched these two, but that doesn't mean I want to see them again. There are some people who list Shindlers List as a feel good movie because it 'ends well'. I suppose you might see it that way, I don't.
I can regonize your statements that the photography is nice and the screen writing is well done, but the plot is intresting? To you it is a plot, to me it is a sickening part of history that I am far too close to.
Perhaps it is a bit like how Richard Pryor's monologue about the 200th celebration of the US was not exactly all that cheerfull.
Terry Pratchets Nanny Ogg describers at one point the difference between merry and mirth (or something like that) she describes how she was joyfull when her child was being born but she wasn't exactly chuckling at the time. Enjoying a movie and enjoying it are two different things, at least for me. I can't describe it any clearer.
They link to a review of it, so here is my own. We accept for the moment that it will ONLY work with MS software and MS approved hardware.
I put my MS approved camera on the surface, up pops a enormous windows telling me I got to agree to a eula (exactly what happens when you access MS media player for the first time), it then finally allows me to download the photo's. I then try to put them on my Zune 2.0, OOPS cannot do that, the camera is digital and zune only accepts analog (Zune 2.0 doesn't allow the uploading of movies captured with a digitial tv tuner, only analog tuners)
Starting to get the picture? ALl these things sound nice when you just see the pre-scripted demo, but when it comes to real life, well, it all just breaks down. Especially when it comes to Microsoft.
Same thing with multi-touch screens, very nice, but how much software will be written to make use of it when so few people will have such a screen? I remember that System Shock ages ago had support for 3D helmets, it was a hot topic back then and one that never happened. SS was one of the few games to support such systems, the others wisely did not bother since nobody had such helmets and because few games supported them, what was the point in getting one.
I can make a game around the logitech G15 keyboard that makes the device indispensible to play, but I would be really hurting my changes of selling the game.
All these devices are intresting enough, but destined to remain obscure simply because people won't be buying them unless their is a killer application for it, and nobody will build such an application until there is a larger installed base.
Right, look at their page, filled with words that have NOTHING to do with the actuall contents but that still get noticed by search engines.
All the big sites work like that, designed to show up at no matter what you search for. Games sites are especially bad/good at this, no matter what game you look for IGN will show up as the definitive source for info on it.
If you want the semantic web dear ZDNet stop this crap NOW. Start it yourselve and clean up your site so that your pages are only indexed for the actual article, not all the crap around it.
Oh but you don't wanna do that do you, because that ain't economical and will put you at a disadvantage.
Well, that is the same reason behind all your other points. DOn't ask Intel to give up the speed race if you are unwilling to give up the keyword race.
Semantic web? Wikipedia is my new search engine. Because wikipedia is one of the only sites to only want to return accurate results and not spam keywords like mad.
The semantic web can't happen until you get rid of people who spam keywords. You can't make smarter PC's as long as reviewers and customers obsesss about clockspeeds.
The first to change might win, but they will be taking a huge risk, none of the established players will do that. Remember, it took an upstart like google to change the search market, now that it is big, do you really think google would dare blacklist IGN from returning results because they got to many empty pages? Offcourse not, maybe the next search company will try that, but not google.
Change your own site first ZDNet, then talk about how the rest of the industry should change.
Just because something is old does NOT mean it is obsolete, more and more I see this as an absolute truth, advancing (oh okay, runaway) age has nothing to do with it.
Some things just work and don't really need to be replaced. Change for change sake is bad. NOW GET OF MY LAWN!
As far as I know in IMDB you are rating the overall quality of the movie, not I agree with it OR I want to see more like this.
One example, Shindlers list, great movie, do NOT want to see it again. Same with Grave of the fireflies. Some movies just ain't for multiple viewings. They are my "favorite movies I never want to see again".
On the other hand I got movies I can watch any day of the week, but that I would NEVER rate as highly. Cannonbal run is one such movie. It watch it far too often, but I wouldn't call it a good movie. You can always fine me ready for a Jacky Chan movie or a spagethi western.
Is the netflix rating system a "I liked this movie and want to see more like it" system or a "This movie was brilliant and I would highly recommend it too everyone else" type of rating system?
Granted some people get it confused, probably the same people that use the slashdot moderation system to silence views they don't like, but that only makes basing conclusions on user ratings even more problematic.
I can rate a movie highly even if I do not agree with it, simply because it is good. And I can rate a movie I really like to watch as crap simply because I know I like watching crap.
I don't like the godfather movies, I can see they are high quality, I just don't like them. So my rating them would be fairly high as for quality, but low for 'I want to see more like this'.
I thought that the netflix system was "I want to see more like this" based. Surely nobody is so stupid as to think a quality rating and a "i like this" rating system are the same? Or am I completly in the wrong in seeing a difference between the two? Am I insane in thinking that you can see a movie as being a great artwork and still not liking it or viceversa?
The 90 days disbarment was an 'offer' from his side, it has NOT been offered to him, so it was not HIS to take but rather the bar's(?)
The fact that he tried this, suggests he really is worried. He might have good reason.
He is making lawyers look bad, yes "they replaced rats with lawyers in lab experiments, because the scientists don't bond with them like they do with rats" lawyers and I can't help but feel that NOT finding him guilty won't make them look any better.
I think he will go down on this. Offcourse that won't stop him, just because he is no longer a lawyer doesn't mean he can't speak up.
Fine, explain this then http://www.crysis-online.com/Information/System%20Requirements/
It is not the only game to list higher MINIMUM memory requirements for Vista.
Why should a game take more memory under vista for the MINIMUM configuration then under XP unless it is because the OS is somehow using more memory?
No it isn't because DX10 can use higher res textures, this is the MINIMUM configuration, where you will be loading the most basic textures, the same as the ones under XP/DX9.
So, 500mb mores, a fairly typical figure, explain please.
Plain old paper, in triplicate. I will be here all day, try the veil.
Google for the cost of highway construction and one of the gems you find is this http://www-pam.usc.edu/volume2/v2i1a3s2.html link.
Read it and weep. 100 million per mile? Most costly project was 1 billion per mile and plenty of other projects are higher as well.
Now google a bit further and you find more "reasonable" costs of 20 million per mile being quoted but it makes it bloody clear that roads are very expensive indeed.
Yes sometimes they are cheap at a 1-3 million per mile, if the highway is simple and the conditions are ideal. This is however rarely the case. If you follow these kinds of projects you will also know that there are always complicating factors. For instance the straight road sections might be cheap, but the points where they connect to the rest of the road network, that is where the money really starts to bleed away. As for when you need a bridge or a tunnel. Just forget it.
Also offcourse not all highways are the same. One going through open desert vs one going through a city has huge extra costs in the form of safety, sound reduction and landcosts.
A further thing you might want to ask, how costly is maintenance, and what is the capacity of this network? It is less hassle to replace tradiotional rails then it is too resurface a road. How long is this 100 million per mile going to last you before more millions are needed to maintain it?
Then there is the question of what you get for it, if this 100 million dollar per mile track means you don['t have to construct/upgrade 10 road systems per say 20 million dollar per mile, then you are actually saving money.
But please slashdotters, next time you feel like posting about how costly something is, do a bit of research first. Although I really wish reporters would do it as well.
I also doubt wether it will stand up in court.
Someone stop me!
I loved Deus EX, the sequel sucked, Console dumbification. DO you know the difference between a console player and a dead duck? No, you must be a console player.
Yada yada, others have said it, and I repeat it, but my main point is that while there is the slightest glimmer of hope in that they refer to the ORIGINAL as the one that sold and was reviewed well, they don't mention the sequel. This could be good, they realize it was a huge mistake but company politics prevents them from being negative of one of their own products, OR they simply don't realise that for gamers there is a huge difference between the original and the sequel.
I fear they learned nothing, that when they talk of Deus EX being great they mean BOTH games. Yes it is scary but this EA. Remember, they pulled a Deus EX 2 on us before, what is to stop them from doing it again?
TO learn from your mistakes, you first got to admit them.
Will this game be the miracle of gameplay that was the original or the console dumbness of the sequel. Considering what consolites did to the spiritual sequel to System Shock, I am not getting my hopes up.
Halo 2 AIN'T a vista only game. It has been hacked and works just as well on XP. That isn't really suprising, it is an ancient game that ran on a P3, what the hell would it need DX10 for?
Other games like the recent system cruncher, Crysis, also can be tweaked to run with "disabled, DX10 only" settings on XP.
It seems more and more that a lot of the DX10 games just ain't there, some day there may be, but so far they are not.
MS could afford to force Halo 2 to Vista only, how many game developers can afford to be Vista only? MS better be handing over a huge sum of money to make a game just for Vista.
The problem is that a LOT of hardcore gamers are people who build their own machines, and are also the ones who need the top end Vista version, so they are faced with a very expensive purchase and for what? So that all their games run slower and take more memory?
It will be intresting to see what happens, I personally have little doubt that MS will survive this easily, but their mighty fortress has shown a tiny crack.
IF linux does indeed get DX10 support as some have claimed in the past via Wine like projects, then MS might be in real trouble.
That is a HUGE if, but in theory it is possible, already companies like Blizzard have to deal with the fact that a portion of their players are on linux and that they have to accept this.
It will be intresting to see how the Vista only titles sell in the near future. MS titles don't count, MS can afford to loose money, regular developers can't.
It simply means you don't know something about a specific subject. Perhaps I am using the wrong word, but I certainly did NOT mean dumb. I meant to describe a person who doesn't know anything about computers. Just like some people know nothing about cars, construction (I once had to fix a drainage pipe that was at an UPWARDS angle), clothes etc etc.
I am clueless at quit a lot of things, doesn't make me dumb.
And think about it, what are you saying about Joe Consumer?
Think about it, little kid asks for something, parent says no. Kid logic kicks in and the kid starts whining about it, bad parenting responds and gives in, proving to the kid that whining works.
Advertisers ask us to buy X with ads, we say NO. Advertisiers logic kicks in and starts forcing us to watch the AD, do we give in? Doesn't really matter, if we don't, they just push harder and if we give in, then IT WORKS, so they push harder to sell even more!
F1 racing used to be broadcast by every country in europe, this was great because in olden days it meant you could choose your preffered commentator (if you live in holland you get English, Dutch, Belgian and German state TV on cable) ALL without commericial breaks. Then came some commercial channels that outbid the state tv offerings, so people stopped watching the feed from that country and just watched F1 in a foreign language. When the Dutch F1 broadcast went commericial I switch to the BBC and when that went commericial I switched to Belgian tv.
When that too went commerercial, I stopped watching F1. The commercial breaks were just too many to put up with.
So what has the F1 organisation achieved? They lost a viewer who at least saw all the regular ads on the racetrack because they wanted more money. So they wanted more and got nothing.
I may be alone, but viewing figures for F1 are down. They blaim it on the races themselves but might it just be that people are sick to death of the show being interrupted constantly for ads?
A similar story can be seen around Dutch soccer. That was broadcast by tradition by the NOS, the state part of state telivision. (I am not a soccer fan so excuse me if I get some details wrong) Years ago a commercial channel was launched (sport 7?) which would be pay-per-view like setup. People didn't subscribe. At all. It was a HUGE FLOP. They had totally miscalculated dutch willingness to pay for soccer matches. They thought they would be rich, they ended up bankrupt.
So the license went back the next year to the NOS. Recently another new station launched, this time "free" to watch, Talpa, and it too made a really big deal out of getting SOME of the rights to some of the soccer matches. Again they thought they would make it big, but people just didn't watch. The way the matches were broadcast was a constant source of irritation among soccer fans and the ads were way to heavy.
End result? Talpa went bust and soccer matches are now more or less back in the old format.
The odd thing? Holland is soccer nuts, so what could go wrong with pushing lots of ads around soccer matches? It works in the US right?
Well, in theory it might be simply a case of too much too soon, you have to remember that it is not that long ago that the only ads were BEFORE and AFTER a match NOT during NOT even during half-time. Even more shocking, on sunday there were NO ADS AT ALL.
This has changed but still, ads during the match itself may have been too much.
A clear case of being too demanding, kids KNOW this, they know when to push it and when they are about to be sent to their room. Advertisers just don't seem to be able to spot the warning signs. They keep pushing and pushing when we already kicked them out of the house to freeze to death.
The reason is offcourse simple, advertisers do NOT care about selling a product with their ads, they are selling ADS!
Every obnoxious ad campaign that drives you nuts HAS ALREADY BEEN A SUCCESS because the ad SOLD!
So us claiming that the ads for MS software on slashdot are a stupid idea are missing the real picture. The ad company that sold those ads, made a sale and that is all that matters. That is why you should never believe any research on ad effectiveness by an ad company unless you believe research on soap by soap companies.
Can we be honest here, how many of us, even the linux users, try out MS latest OS just to see the new shiny? I am guilty of it but not with Vista. Why? I found no reliable way to pirate it. I am NOT going to pay for it. I don't 'want' it, I just want to see it.
Why should MS care? Because I am also that guy who knows computers and fixes things.
I fix XP, I told people to move to XP and other upgrades before simply because I was tired of dealing with ancient versions of windows that were even harder to maintain then recent releases.
The same ain't happening with Vista because I don't have any experience with it. ALl those 'regular' people who complain about Vista being too different, are they not REALLY complaining that the tech guy they know doesn't know how to fix it because they are still on XP?
All the techies I know stayed on XP, partly because they don't like Vista, but mostly because they build their own machines and so don't get their hands on a "free" Vista key with their new machines. Also many of them would sooner die then run a Vista Crippled Edition. Faced with the dilema of having to lay down enough money to buy a top of the line CPU or stay with XP, I stayed with XP.
This has removed from my circle of friends a lot of free tech support.
The UAC thingy (Cancel/Allow) sounds not that dis-similar to other Windows crap that everyone had disabled by their tech friend in previous windows releases, except this time, some of us techies just don't know how to do it because we haven't done it ourselves.
How many of you would have Vista installed IF it could be pirated easily? From my own small sampling I think MS has damaged its own locomotion appendage. How serious, that I don't know but it is something to consider.
IF we got the same crime rate (in areas you can compare) as other countries, that have different legal systems, does it actually MATTER what legal system you have or does crime ALWAYS fill up to a certain point regardless of the consequences.
This argument goes both ways, if a criminal is NOT less likely to commit a crime when faced with a harsh sentence, BUT if a criminal is ALSO NOT less likely to commit a crime with a lenient sentence and lots of rehab, then what system do you pick?
The system that at least meets out a lot of punishement OR the system that gives criminals a second, third, fourth etc etc change. Both try to claim that they reduce crime but this just doesn't seem to be the case, so then you got to ask yourselve what kind of society you want.
And this isn't as clear cut as you might think, a society with lenient punishment is NOT nicer, it might be that they just don't consider the victim that important. What is different after all between the dutch slap on the wrist for rape and countries where rapist get a slap on the wrist because women just have no rights?
I still like Terry Pratchets answer on the death penalty, when questioned on its use to prevent crime an executioner answers, "well I never get them up here twice".
It shows that a 'random' person couldn't get the system/OS to work according to his wishes. To be really fair, you really should ask yourselve wether a 'random' person could get other system/OS combo's to work. This includes asking yourselve how well the average random person would deal with installing windows. If you ever had to deal with tech support you would know that most users stumble just as hard with MS software as with OSX and other unixes. Hell, people stumble with their toasters.
To be specific, the SUDO bit had me wondering too, but as I am neither familiar with Ubuntu or sudo (don't use either on my own linux systems) I really can't comment. If Ubuntu does use sudo a lot then it is odd, but does the box say you need to be an experienced Linux user? Couldn't they have provided a help function? Please type in your password?
As for flash, it would have been better if it had worked out of the box, but yes, recently installing it from your browser when prompted has been known to work. This however was not always the case, especially for Opera users.
Enlightenment is a WM that does things a bit differently and the screenshots make it clear it is NOT a straight windows layout copy like KDE and Gnome use (By default). Perhaps he really just didn't know how to get it. Under E17 (The sequel) it is left mouse click on the desktop -> system Might be confusing to a person who normally would NEVER left-click anywhere on the desktop.
He didn't think it would fix a network problem, he just couldn't get the tool too work. That is different. If you know how to setup your network in Windows XP and not in Vista then installing XP again 'fixes' your problem. Granted it does sound like "oh they are not doing everything 100% like I am used too, it sucks" but that is how most users are.
So is it a good review? No, but it does tell us something and that is that Joe Average is a moron who doesn't like change and that it is very hard to develop an OS for that guy. See it not as a review but one of those usability reports usability experts so love to go one about. It might help you to develop an OS for average user.
And no windows ain't that OS either and NEITHER is OSX (before the Apple fanboys pipe up), if ANY OS out there was the perfect OS for the clueless I wouldn't constantly be asked by the clueless to help with their machine.
Recently I had to help people setup their network under Vista and OSX, and none of the users seemed to know how to do it. None of them make it very clear or easy. (Why does Vista break with DHCP run on linux anyway?)
I do agree with your end conclusion, give me a clueless user who knows he/she is clueless anyday, they ask, you answer, they listen, problem fixed. The ones who think they know a little ARGUE with you over the solution. ARGH! If you know it better, why ask? But the horrors of support is another rant.
Do you know what the word ALMOST means? Tasers are ALMOST never deadly. The police ALMOST never uses tasers. The police ALMOST never acts wrong.
So what is all the fuss about, about something that ALMOST never happens.
Really, ALMOST is a weasel word.
I want to hear numbers and I think that you will find that you then find that your definition of ALMOST is very different from that guy who runs the local loony bin. I would also very much like to see how many times it goes deadly wrong or how many patients he has released that were not cured at all.
In holland we have something called TBS (Ter beschikking stelling) which is a sentence given to people who are insane and basically forced them to undergo mental treatment. The problem? Well, for reasons of idiocy the mental wards have been made private so that now they get payed according to the number of cures, cue endless stories about people released who commit the same crimes or even being let out on leave (with a guard who is not allowed to use force or restraints) and commit crimes and go right back in. Oh and in holland, escaping is not a crime.
Frankly a lot of these crazies the police have to deal with are the result of incompetent doctors. If the shrinks did their job better the police wouldn't have to deal with that many crazed out idiots.
I am from holland and we got the SAME crime rate as the US when you stop and think. You got to look at the crimes that are crimes in BOTH countries, murder rate, same. Petty crimes, same. No we don't have the same number of drug cases or prostitution cases as the US. Our crime rate has shot up. The idea that Holland is some kinda safe haven is based on stats from the seventies and everyone in goverment is very carefull in launching any real probes into how a low crime country has things like Holleerder.
This country has really gone downhill. Ask yourselve, if this country is such a nice place, why were two people killed for speaking their mind and just who fired those grenades at the bunker in Osdorp?
That is one of the problems, there is only so much space on a cops belt, even a US cop. Those net guns (I know them from a girlfriend who works for an animal shelter) are not exactly small or that cheap. To big to carry around and to expensive to put in every squad car.
As for getting a pair. Okay, lets. You and me, YOU have to follow the rules, I don't and can carry a knife and if you happen to die... well though, but if I get the slightest bruise, you loose your current career.
Tell me, what is your current job. Have you EVER been in such a situation? Or is the biggest problem you got to deal with that deadly risk of a papercut when you sort out the printer?
Grow a pair, become a cop. I posted my own experiences somewhere else and frankly those who claims cops should just fight the criminal one on one are full of it.
Ages ago I tempted for a cleaning company, except I didn't do windows, we cleared out houses where people had died and other disgusting stuff like that. It was intresting work, although pretty shocking the first time when you realize that this kinda job is not a one off but that you are actually facing overtime to deal with all the incidents.
We usually worked on the order of the local health department or the police although we also did things like cleaning out meatlockers that had broken down during a holiday (you think the myth busters had it bad with the pig?) so basically disgusting work that didn't pay that well but you had a lot of freedom. The boss wasn't likely to show up until it was cleared. And the health workers and cops didn't really care if you took long breaks, if you didn't do the job, they had too.
One of the jobs was clearing out houses of people who were still alive, mental/drug cases who were going to be taken to a mental ward. These weren't evictions, just forced cleanings so that their neighbours didn't have to life next to a rubbish dump while the owner was away.
Occasionally we also helped out with other jobs like clearing the staircases in apartment blocks.
The point is that we were doing a dirty job for not that much pay and sometimes we encountered people that didn't want to cooperate. We had methods for that. We often needed tools, like brooms and shovels and sometimes a crowbar. On a new job, were we knew we had a live occupant, we carried the crowbars in first. You never know if a person is coming out swinging. We were just the cleaners so 99% of the time there was either a health care worker, a cop, or fireman or something similar there to do the talking, but our clear orders were to be visibly there to provide backup. These jobs NEVER went wrong oddly enough, everyone was PREPARED and READY so we knew what to do. We were just there as backup, in sight but not in a threathening way.
The entire trick was that NONE of us was willing to take a risk. IF a person was to attack, hit them, hit hard and don't stop until you are certain they are down. If that means beating them across the head with a crowbar, well, we will understand. Because YOU will NOT want to die for a salary.
A lot of people who never have to deal with anything more dangerous then a papercut will say,"well that is what you are payed for", no it isn't. My salary, a cops salary is/was NOT nearly enough to risk my life for thank you very much and some of these nutters don't care if they loose their lifes, they will do stuff that is insane because they are insane.
People loose it and until you have had to deal with such a thing you are in no position to critize. It only went wrong once, we were asked to clear an apartment but found some stuff in the hallway and didn't know who it belonged too. So we asked the neighbours and at one doorbell it went wrong. A woman opened the door and we heard someone started cussing and screaming and all of sudden a young male rushed out and started attacking us. I and another guy were on the landing, the other guy was extremly large and I am reasonably build and this guy was skinny, the rest (three more) were busy in the apartment. It was all we could do to restrain him. In a normal fight between two agressors ANYONE of us could have beaten this kid senseless BUT we weren't there for that. We just wanted to do our job (it is illegal to keep stuff in apartment hallways, fire regulations) but were nice enough not just to junk the crap and we get attacked for it? It took all five of us to restrain him. What if he had attacked with a knife or had some muscle? I am not going to walk even the slightest risk. You attack me, you die. I am no hero. If we had a taser on us, he would have had so much juice pumped into him they could hook him up to the grid.
As it was I just delivered a few very hard punches to his stomach until he stopped struggling and we could turn him over to the police. He was puking on the ground but if he had tried to get up he