As has been pointed out before, Mac and MS address different segments of the computer market. Do they really compete? Both MS and Mac sales have increased over the years. Globbing them together is often meaningless (like combining truck and car sales into vehicle sales and saying car sales are taking away truck sales), unless you want to make some BS stats for PR purposes. All the overhang waiting for Vista will have caused a surge in the MS part of the market and now the Apple part is in pre-Leopard lag.
You just need to get the victim to open up their unit, solder on some contacts and hook up an ethernet-enabled jtag debugger and plug that into the ethernet without a firewall. Something like: http://users.actrix.co.nz/manningc/lejos_nxt.jpg (a JTAG unit hooked up to a Lego NXT device).
You'd then be able to debug the device as much as you want without the victim noticing anything.
Bob had a very interesting attitude towards security, since tightened up a bit with XP and Vista. Type in the wrong password three times and a help message popped up "You seem to be having problems remembering your password. Would you like to pick another one?"
Bob was, however by far the most innovative UI MS ever produced. It just innovated in a direction that nobody wanted to go!
They're mostly marketing flops, not technical ones
on
The Top 21 Tech Flops
·
· Score: 1
Most of these product were OK technically (or at least not awful compared to some products out there). They did not flop necessarily due to technical flaws but due to marketing flaws (failure to read the market, or getting upstaged by some other product).
I remember this kind of thing being RSN over 20 years ago. Sure we now have good fast global networking, but otherwise it does not look like we have any real progress towards this goal.
This is exactly the same reasoning as used a while ago to say that Africans/Indians/whatever are primitive and sub-human. If chimps could vote and change the law, they'd say screw tax, schools, etc etc and make shit-flinging legal.
Rights do come with responsibilities, but that has to be set within the being's cultural framework. When those frameworks differ, the responsibilities differ too. This is a point lost by many colonials.
The most fundamental right is to allow a being (or group of beings) self determination and allowing them to have their own cultures and values.
A chimp's primary right is to be a chimp. A chimp (probably) does not want to be a white city-living American taxpayer. Nope, he just wants to tool around in the forest. Granting a chimp rights basically says that we should respect this and stop taking away his resources.
RMS's interpretation does not matter. It iis the legal interpretation of what is written that matters. The law is like a somewhat fuzzy CPU, you feed it code (the documents) and it outputs a result. It does not matter what you want it to mean, all that really matters is what is actually written. If your will says "Give all my possessions to Bub", but you tell people that you want Joe to get it, the law says stuff goes to Bub.
RMS often says what he wants GPL to mean. That is very different from what the legal document means when interpreted as a legal document. This is the source of most of the confusion around most versions of the GPL.
If you read the GPL faq (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html) you get FSF's==RMS's interpretation of the GPL, but since that faq is not actually part of the GPL it is not binding on anyone's interpretation of the GPL.
A classic case in GPL2 is the handling of soft vs hard linking which is often debated. This is not mentioned in the GPL, though it is in the LGPL and faq - niether of which are binding on the GPL.
Love them or hate them, MS has always done an exceptional job of keeping backward compatability. This has meant that people can seemlessly slide into a new OS and keep their old software. Sure not everything has worked 100%, but in general it has been an easy ride.
This has broken with Vista. Much software, even MS sofwtare, does not work with Vista. For example, I need to use the Windows CE platform builder which does not work with Vista. If I also need to use MSOffice 7 or some other Vista-only software then I need to have two computers or carry around two laptops.
But if everyone saves daylight that reduces its value. Need to tell people it is poisonous or causes cancer. People will then dump all theirs, improving the value of your stock!
Since a huge % (perhaps most) image searches are for porn, it is probably a worthwhile thing for a search server to quickly classify likely porn as a way to reduce search server loading.
Every measurement device known to man essentially works this way. It measures x and makes it available to the senses. Metal detector: detects metals and makes sound that you can hear. Volt meter/oscilloscope: Measures voltage and makes it available to the brain via eyes. Clock: Measures time and presents it to the eyes or ears...
I don't have the numbers on hand, but aircraft are hugely polluting and trains are a lot better. Worse still, planes dump their output at high altitudes where the blanketing effect is far greater.
High speed trains are definitely a better way to go on that score.
I don't argue at all that you accurately sum up people's thoughts about cars. While we continue to think like this, cars will continue to get bigger, more powerful and more wasteful and energy efficiency etc will continue to decline.
As per my original posting, the obstacles to 100mpg cars are not technical, they are about perception of cars being for purposes other than transport.
Essentially we're getting 100mph for the transport, but the wanger extension is what is giving us 20mpg. People talk about safety etc, but really these are hedges against speaking the real reason; the perception that Real Men drive Hummers with gunracks, only faggots drive 1100cc Noddy cars.
Light cars are not necessarily dangerous. They get to be dangerous if smug dickheads in Hummers think they are safe so they don't pay attention and squish smaller cars or people driving them are silly. Get the Hummers off the road.
Why do you need huge acceleration and top speed? You're using your car for transport, not racing. There's no need for a car that goes more than 70mph. There's no need for a car that burns rubber.
I use a very old technology 1300cc car (probably equivalent in power to a more modern 1000 cc engine car). It has sufficient guts for my purposes, even when carrying 4 people + a load.
There are a few things that probably need to change to make this work. First off, there's a macho intertwining of cars with manhood, power etc. Many cars can easily beat a Prius hybrid on fuel economy, but not high performance cars.
To get good fuel economy probably needs a mindshift away from SUVs and Hummers towards smaller 1300cc or smaller cars.
The "look" of cars is pretty much fashion driven, dictated by the car manufacturers to promote consumption. This year it's round headlights, next year square; boxy Hummer look one year, curved Porche look the next; big grill, then small.
Car manufacturers keep advertising more power, size etc (10% more power than last year's model, 5% more space...). How is it that they never advertise reduced consumption (well they might, but only if it does not compromise power, size etc)..
People really need to see cars as transport. Perhaps then they will start to think in terms of efficiency etc.
Very few people are as wasteful as the US. This extends through energy use/waste and food use/waste. The whole system is propped up by agricultural subsidies which keep the system inefficient and unsustainable.
The typical US diet uses a hell of a lot more arable land than the average diet. The resulting land use is a major land destructor and uses a lot more water, oil land input than it should. One of the biggest problems is high meat consumption.
If people ate the grain fed to beef, instead of the beef, they'd only need to consume one tenth of the grain (ie grain to beef is only approx 10% efficient).
Each pound of beef requires about 3-4 pounds of oil.
Thus, switching to significantly reduced meat intake would use vastly less oil and free up a lot of land that could be put to other uses (eg. biofuels).
Of course, the farming and oil industries don't really want you to change the current high consumption and are happy for you to keep funding this insane system through subsidy handouts.
Slashdot Mirror
Home and Entertainment division lost $1.2billion dollars in 2006. If that is "worked", then I have a bridge to sell you.
As has been pointed out before, Mac and MS address different segments of the computer market. Do they really compete? Both MS and Mac sales have increased over the years. Globbing them together is often meaningless (like combining truck and car sales into vehicle sales and saying car sales are taking away truck sales), unless you want to make some BS stats for PR purposes. All the overhang waiting for Vista will have caused a surge in the MS part of the market and now the Apple part is in pre-Leopard lag.
On some devices you can disable the JTAG making this attack impossible.
You just need to get the victim to open up their unit, solder on some contacts and hook up an ethernet-enabled jtag debugger and plug that into the ethernet without a firewall. Something like: http://users.actrix.co.nz/manningc/lejos_nxt.jpg (a JTAG unit hooked up to a Lego NXT device).
You'd then be able to debug the device as much as you want without the victim noticing anything.
Bob was, however by far the most innovative UI MS ever produced. It just innovated in a direction that nobody wanted to go!
Most of these product were OK technically (or at least not awful compared to some products out there). They did not flop necessarily due to technical flaws but due to marketing flaws (failure to read the market, or getting upstaged by some other product).
I remember this kind of thing being RSN over 20 years ago. Sure we now have good fast global networking, but otherwise it does not look like we have any real progress towards this goal.
Rights do come with responsibilities, but that has to be set within the being's cultural framework. When those frameworks differ, the responsibilities differ too. This is a point lost by many colonials.
The most fundamental right is to allow a being (or group of beings) self determination and allowing them to have their own cultures and values.
A chimp's primary right is to be a chimp. A chimp (probably) does not want to be a white city-living American taxpayer. Nope, he just wants to tool around in the forest. Granting a chimp rights basically says that we should respect this and stop taking away his resources.
RMS often says what he wants GPL to mean. That is very different from what the legal document means when interpreted as a legal document. This is the source of most of the confusion around most versions of the GPL.
If you read the GPL faq (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html) you get FSF's==RMS's interpretation of the GPL, but since that faq is not actually part of the GPL it is not binding on anyone's interpretation of the GPL.
A classic case in GPL2 is the handling of soft vs hard linking which is often debated. This is not mentioned in the GPL, though it is in the LGPL and faq - niether of which are binding on the GPL.
Love them or hate them, MS has always done an exceptional job of keeping backward compatability. This has meant that people can seemlessly slide into a new OS and keep their old software. Sure not everything has worked 100%, but in general it has been an easy ride.
This has broken with Vista. Much software, even MS sofwtare, does not work with Vista. For example, I need to use the Windows CE platform builder which does not work with Vista. If I also need to use MSOffice 7 or some other Vista-only software then I need to have two computers or carry around two laptops.
Anyone who cheats to get good grades is being very inefficient. It is far easier to just use Photoshop/Gimp to make yourself a diploma.
and. grammer
Windows Genuine Rootkit Advantage
Roots for Sure
Clippy Boot: "You seem to be wanting to run as Admin, can I help?"
C'mon folks help me out!
The computer is really just the communications device that glues it together.
But if everyone saves daylight that reduces its value. Need to tell people it is poisonous or causes cancer. People will then dump all theirs, improving the value of your stock!
Since a huge % (perhaps most) image searches are for porn, it is probably a worthwhile thing for a search server to quickly classify likely porn as a way to reduce search server loading.
On the flip side though, all the exta sunshine makes crops grow better so it should make farmers happier!
should be enough to hurt MS!
Every measurement device known to man essentially works this way. It measures x and makes it available to the senses.
Metal detector: detects metals and makes sound that you can hear.
Volt meter/oscilloscope: Measures voltage and makes it available to the brain via eyes.
Clock: Measures time and presents it to the eyes or ears...
High speed trains are definitely a better way to go on that score.
As per my original posting, the obstacles to 100mpg cars are not technical, they are about perception of cars being for purposes other than transport.
Essentially we're getting 100mph for the transport, but the wanger extension is what is giving us 20mpg. People talk about safety etc, but really these are hedges against speaking the real reason; the perception that Real Men drive Hummers with gunracks, only faggots drive 1100cc Noddy cars.
Why do you need huge acceleration and top speed? You're using your car for transport, not racing. There's no need for a car that goes more than 70mph. There's no need for a car that burns rubber.
I use a very old technology 1300cc car (probably equivalent in power to a more modern 1000 cc engine car). It has sufficient guts for my purposes, even when carrying 4 people + a load.
To get good fuel economy probably needs a mindshift away from SUVs and Hummers towards smaller 1300cc or smaller cars.
The "look" of cars is pretty much fashion driven, dictated by the car manufacturers to promote consumption. This year it's round headlights, next year square; boxy Hummer look one year, curved Porche look the next; big grill, then small.
Car manufacturers keep advertising more power, size etc (10% more power than last year's model, 5% more space...). How is it that they never advertise reduced consumption (well they might, but only if it does not compromise power, size etc)..
People really need to see cars as transport. Perhaps then they will start to think in terms of efficiency etc.
Why don't double-click just put out a "buy double-click" ad. Then everyone can play!
Very few people are as wasteful as the US. This extends through energy use/waste and food use/waste. The whole system is propped up by agricultural subsidies which keep the system inefficient and unsustainable.
The typical US diet uses a hell of a lot more arable land than the average diet. The resulting land use is a major land destructor and uses a lot more water, oil land input than it should. One of the biggest problems is high meat consumption.
If people ate the grain fed to beef, instead of the beef, they'd only need to consume one tenth of the grain (ie grain to beef is only approx 10% efficient).
Each pound of beef requires about 3-4 pounds of oil.
Thus, switching to significantly reduced meat intake would use vastly less oil and free up a lot of land that could be put to other uses (eg. biofuels).
Of course, the farming and oil industries don't really want you to change the current high consumption and are happy for you to keep funding this insane system through subsidy handouts.