Make it like the Linux administration Doom port. Instead of showing running processes as enemies in Doom, make the malware appear as enemy combatants. You and the malware battle it out with either modern or futuristic weapons. Everytime you kill an enemy, that piece of malware gets destroyed. Everytime you lose a battle, the game deletes a random file on your filesystem...
This will have exactly zero effect on the litigator's career, because nobody does any research on attorney performance in court. Attorneys lose all the time (one loses in every trial), and it doesn't affect their ability to get other clients.
There's an old joke about an attorney who loses at trial, and has a big smile on his face. When asked why he was smiling, he said, "Because now my client has to pay me for the appeal."
Being a litigation attorney is the closest thing to absolute job security you can get. You get paid regardless of your job performance.
Whatever the other arguments are, this one is stupid. It's a photograph of you running a red light. What's to confront?
It doesn't matter. U.S. citizens are guaranteed by the Federal, and every state's, Constitution the right to due process. Administratively (meaning automatically by some machine, in this case) issuing fines is a violation of that due process, and is illegal on its face. I live in Missouri, and our state Supreme Court recently issued a decision to this effect. All automated ticketing in Missouri via red light cameras has ceased. The cameras are still there, but they can't be used to automate ticketing anymore.
Red light cameras are not unconstitutional if the person to whom a ticket is issued can dispute it in court BEFORE the fine is levied (just like being issued a ticket by a cop). However, municipalities use the red light cameras in place of the court system; which makes their use illegal.
This law is clearly unconstitutional, as the Supreme Court has already stated several times that even the most offensive speech is still protected speech. Unfortunately, it will take deep pockets to enforce that Constitutional right.
Frankly, I think our country should push for a Constitutional amendment that calls for drawing and quartering lawmakers that legislate in clear violation of the Constitution. Our legal system has absolutely no penalties for figures in power that abuse that power.
I don't know about Silverlight, but.NET is not going anywhere.
I totally agree. As much as I despise.NET, thinking that Microsoft is going to abandon it is just brain damaged thinking. Almost all of Microsoft's current developer base is.NET, and dropping it would cause much of Microsoft's developer base to jump ship faster than you could say, "WTF!"
There is a natural intellectual monopoly that goes with any discovery...a new piece of hardware that is a generation more advanced might take competitors years to reverse engineer and gear up for fabrication
Or a competitor can offer a higher salary to key employees of the company that makes the initial discovery, thereby reducing or eliminating the "natural intellectual monopoly". At this point, there are two choices:
1) Allow it to happen, which would invalidate the "natural law" monopoly you spoke of.
2) Forbid it from happening, which would lead to the copyright/patent/trade secret mess we have now.
There is nothing wrong with protecting the intellectual product of a person/company. There are many, many things horribly wrong with the way our governments are going about doing it.
Apparently only the statistics that show anti-Microsoft things can actually be accurate.
If Net Applications is opt-in, and the vast majority of those opt-ins come from Windows, then the vast majority of what Net Applications measures is Windows-based (obviously). So within that data set, the use of Internet Explorer decreases steadily while the use of Windows itself stays relatively unchanged.
That indicates the decline of Internet Explorer within the Net Applications survey base, and is not hypocritical at all. The only question is the size of the Net Applications survey base.
When will the American populace finally tire of the country being for the corporations, of the corporations, and by the corporations and take it for the people instead?
That won't be possible until we abolish political parties, especially the two-party bastardization that currently rules our politics. Right now, Democrat and Republican voters only vote to keep the other party's candidates out of office, and each party manages to focus its followers' vitriol on vapid inconsequentials. The party system is the linchpin that holds together our country's political corruption, and that holds voters in a drug-induced, hysterial hatred that prevents them from seeing the evil being perpetrated on their behalf. Distracted by those vapid inconsequentials, voters have allowed corporations to insinuate themselves into the lawmaking process largely unseen by the general populace -- despite operating in plain sight.
Get rid of political parties, and we will have moved one step closer to eliminating the political corruption that corporations have leveraged for their own gain.
You can clearly see the 5000ft wire. They obviously did this in the same Hollywood studio where they faked the moon landing. My aunt's best friend's sister's cab driver knows a guy who works with a girl who dated a guy who did time with another guy who once shook hands with someone who claims to have gone to the movies with someone who claims to have worked at the company that may have supplied the raw materials to make the cable, so he obviously needs to be taken seriously; and he claims the video is a fake.
Does this mean you'll be able to hack someone's toaster, like in the movies?
Only if your toaster is running Microsoft Toast (commonly known as just, "Toast" in keeping with the Microsoft's need to usurp common words as trademarks), which has the nasty side effect of burning down parts of your house twice a day. But don't worry, because the antivirus you'll need to pretend you're secure will make your toaster so slow that you won't have time to actually make toast. It won't actually keep out the hackers, but it will save your house.
What would the Fact Agency have concluded when Mr. Clinton stated that he did not have "sexual relations with that woman." Was he factually correct?
If they were doing their job, they would have concluded that drawing a conclusion as to the truthfulness of that statement is beyond the scope of their mission. All they would provide is the fact that Bill Clinton said, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." That's it. That would be their function.
As another example, they would not say, "The Japanese instigated the war with the U.S. by bombing Pearl Harbor." Instead, they would say, "The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor." The former is a conclusion, while the latter is a fact.
It would be up to the fact gatherer to draw conclusions based on the raw facts. There would still be disagreements as to what those facts mean, but that would be (should be) beyond the scope of the agency's mandate.
I've lost my patience with all the forced firmware upgrades, so I'm just not signing back on to the Playstation Network. All of my PS3 games are single player, which I've been able to play during the outage, so I'm just fine with never signing on to the PSN again. Aside from single player games, the only other use I have for a console nowadays is Netflix.
Essentially, the Playstation Network has nothing of value to me.
That reminded me of why I'm not worried about the break-in. I have two PSN accounts, but all the information I submitted was 100% fictitious. I did that as passive resistance, but now I'm even more happy that I faked it all.
U.S. Intelligence really sucks for not being able to find this place. Google Maps clearly labels it, "Osama bin Laden's Compound", yet the U.S. still couldn't find it?
I've been writing software for over 25 years, with the last 20 of them being mostly GUI based.
The visual components of any non-trivial program will compose about 10% of the final product, with the other 90% being the code that does the actual work. AppInventor addresses the least crucial aspect of writing software -- the ability to create a user interface.* The ability to think abstractly, and to implement that abstraction, is far, far more important; and it is the thing that relatively few people can do well.
So no, AppInventor is not going to let just anyone write good software. Without the skills needed for other other 90% of software development, AppInventor will do nothing more than address a trivially insignificant aspect of writing software.
* Do not construe this statement to mean that designing good, clean user interfaces is easy. It is an art form all to itself, but constitutes a relatively small portion of creating software.
Don't Supreme Court justices know the law anymore? This decision is so out in right field that it doesn't even pretend to be supported by law passed by Congress. Contracts used to be invalid if:
1) They are so one-side as to be entirely unfair. 2) They force one party into a position because there is no alternative (the offer you can't refuse).
Carrier-forced arbitration meets both these points. Carriers, by the nature of their enormous power relative to consumers, will always win arbitration because the arbitrators are, for all practical purposes, on the carriers' payrolls. This is because carriers are repeat customers, whereas carrier customers are not. This severely biases the arbitrator in favor of the carriers. There is no easy way to make this even remotely fair to carrier customers. This, by itself, would be enough to nullify arbitration clauses in any sane country.
Carrier customers have no choice but to have a phone of some sort. You just can't exist in most modern markets without the ability to communicate with other people. And all carriers have the same arbitration clause in their contract, so customers have no alternative. This should also, all by itself, be enough to nullify arbitration clauses in contracts in any sane country.
Put these two things together, and it's clear that the Surpeme Court has no intention of applying the law. It seems that they don't even bother reading it anymore. They just want to apply their own sense of right and wrong as it aligns with their political philosophies. If we had a Constitutional Supreme Court, meaning a Supreme Court defined and authorized by our Constitution, prior to this ruling, it just evaporated.
I ditched cable TV a little over a year ago, and I don't miss it one bit. My family uses Netflix streaming ($10/month) for the few TV shows that we want to watch. The only thing left on broadcast TV that I watch is the local news, and I do that mostly out of habit. The only thing on the news worthwhile nowadays is severe weather monitoring and forecasting, and I can get that on the Web (unless the severe weather has knocked out my Internet connection).
And watching someone else play sports is right up there with watching paint dry....
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone with common sense can see Samsung was imitating the iPhone was recent releases.
Even if that's the case, it shouldn't matter. These are very, very trivial design issues that should not be patentable to begin with.
It will be replaced when our ISP monopolies makes it so difficult to use bittorrent, another way must be created. Destruction brings creation.
We're getting there very quickly. ISP data caps will greatly degenerate the usefulness of Bittorrent for many, many people.
It isn't the size of your chords that matters; it's what you do with them.
When I read:
...that result in shells which are homogeneous, broadband, and compact...
I thought, "Fast, quiet Internet?"
Let's see:
1) Go into a grocery store and steal a $2 candy bar: 30 days shock time in jail.
2) Steal 90 million dollars, and pay a 13% tax on the stolen money.
I know which kind of criminal I want to become.
The only one who created something from nothing was God.
The the inventions are adequately protected by trade secret, not patents. If trade secret is good enough for God, then it's good enough for us.
Make it like the Linux administration Doom port. Instead of showing running processes as enemies in Doom, make the malware appear as enemy combatants. You and the malware battle it out with either modern or futuristic weapons. Everytime you kill an enemy, that piece of malware gets destroyed. Everytime you lose a battle, the game deletes a random file on your filesystem...
This will have exactly zero effect on the litigator's career, because nobody does any research on attorney performance in court. Attorneys lose all the time (one loses in every trial), and it doesn't affect their ability to get other clients.
There's an old joke about an attorney who loses at trial, and has a big smile on his face. When asked why he was smiling, he said, "Because now my client has to pay me for the appeal."
Being a litigation attorney is the closest thing to absolute job security you can get. You get paid regardless of your job performance.
Whatever the other arguments are, this one is stupid. It's a photograph of you running a red light. What's to confront?
It doesn't matter. U.S. citizens are guaranteed by the Federal, and every state's, Constitution the right to due process. Administratively (meaning automatically by some machine, in this case) issuing fines is a violation of that due process, and is illegal on its face. I live in Missouri, and our state Supreme Court recently issued a decision to this effect. All automated ticketing in Missouri via red light cameras has ceased. The cameras are still there, but they can't be used to automate ticketing anymore.
Red light cameras are not unconstitutional if the person to whom a ticket is issued can dispute it in court BEFORE the fine is levied (just like being issued a ticket by a cop). However, municipalities use the red light cameras in place of the court system; which makes their use illegal.
This law is clearly unconstitutional, as the Supreme Court has already stated several times that even the most offensive speech is still protected speech. Unfortunately, it will take deep pockets to enforce that Constitutional right.
Frankly, I think our country should push for a Constitutional amendment that calls for drawing and quartering lawmakers that legislate in clear violation of the Constitution. Our legal system has absolutely no penalties for figures in power that abuse that power.
I don't know about Silverlight, but .NET is not going anywhere.
I totally agree. As much as I despise .NET, thinking that Microsoft is going to abandon it is just brain damaged thinking. Almost all of Microsoft's current developer base is .NET, and dropping it would cause much of Microsoft's developer base to jump ship faster than you could say, "WTF!"
There is a natural intellectual monopoly that goes with any discovery...a new piece of hardware that is a generation more advanced might take competitors years to reverse engineer and gear up for fabrication
Or a competitor can offer a higher salary to key employees of the company that makes the initial discovery, thereby reducing or eliminating the "natural intellectual monopoly". At this point, there are two choices:
1) Allow it to happen, which would invalidate the "natural law" monopoly you spoke of.
2) Forbid it from happening, which would lead to the copyright/patent/trade secret mess we have now.
There is nothing wrong with protecting the intellectual product of a person/company. There are many, many things horribly wrong with the way our governments are going about doing it.
Apparently only the statistics that show anti-Microsoft things can actually be accurate.
If Net Applications is opt-in, and the vast majority of those opt-ins come from Windows, then the vast majority of what Net Applications measures is Windows-based (obviously). So within that data set, the use of Internet Explorer decreases steadily while the use of Windows itself stays relatively unchanged.
That indicates the decline of Internet Explorer within the Net Applications survey base, and is not hypocritical at all. The only question is the size of the Net Applications survey base.
When will the American populace finally tire of the country being for the corporations, of the corporations, and by the corporations and take it for the people instead?
That won't be possible until we abolish political parties, especially the two-party bastardization that currently rules our politics. Right now, Democrat and Republican voters only vote to keep the other party's candidates out of office, and each party manages to focus its followers' vitriol on vapid inconsequentials. The party system is the linchpin that holds together our country's political corruption, and that holds voters in a drug-induced, hysterial hatred that prevents them from seeing the evil being perpetrated on their behalf. Distracted by those vapid inconsequentials, voters have allowed corporations to insinuate themselves into the lawmaking process largely unseen by the general populace -- despite operating in plain sight.
Get rid of political parties, and we will have moved one step closer to eliminating the political corruption that corporations have leveraged for their own gain.
I think Duke can keep his Big Package to himself, thank you very much.
You can clearly see the 5000ft wire. They obviously did this in the same Hollywood studio where they faked the moon landing. My aunt's best friend's sister's cab driver knows a guy who works with a girl who dated a guy who did time with another guy who once shook hands with someone who claims to have gone to the movies with someone who claims to have worked at the company that may have supplied the raw materials to make the cable, so he obviously needs to be taken seriously; and he claims the video is a fake.
I think Faux News is investigating.
Does this mean you'll be able to hack someone's toaster, like in the movies?
Only if your toaster is running Microsoft Toast (commonly known as just, "Toast" in keeping with the Microsoft's need to usurp common words as trademarks), which has the nasty side effect of burning down parts of your house twice a day. But don't worry, because the antivirus you'll need to pretend you're secure will make your toaster so slow that you won't have time to actually make toast. It won't actually keep out the hackers, but it will save your house.
What would the Fact Agency have concluded when Mr. Clinton stated that he did not have "sexual relations with that woman." Was he factually correct?
If they were doing their job, they would have concluded that drawing a conclusion as to the truthfulness of that statement is beyond the scope of their mission. All they would provide is the fact that Bill Clinton said, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." That's it. That would be their function.
As another example, they would not say, "The Japanese instigated the war with the U.S. by bombing Pearl Harbor." Instead, they would say, "The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor." The former is a conclusion, while the latter is a fact.
It would be up to the fact gatherer to draw conclusions based on the raw facts. There would still be disagreements as to what those facts mean, but that would be (should be) beyond the scope of the agency's mandate.
I've lost my patience with all the forced firmware upgrades, so I'm just not signing back on to the Playstation Network. All of my PS3 games are single player, which I've been able to play during the outage, so I'm just fine with never signing on to the PSN again. Aside from single player games, the only other use I have for a console nowadays is Netflix.
Essentially, the Playstation Network has nothing of value to me.
Methinks there should be a law against ridiculous and/or frivolous patents.
There is, right in the Constitution, but the patent office and courts ignore it -- just like most of the rest of the Constitution.
That reminded me of why I'm not worried about the break-in. I have two PSN accounts, but all the information I submitted was 100% fictitious. I did that as passive resistance, but now I'm even more happy that I faked it all.
U.S. Intelligence really sucks for not being able to find this place. Google Maps clearly labels it, "Osama bin Laden's Compound", yet the U.S. still couldn't find it?
I've been writing software for over 25 years, with the last 20 of them being mostly GUI based.
The visual components of any non-trivial program will compose about 10% of the final product, with the other 90% being the code that does the actual work. AppInventor addresses the least crucial aspect of writing software -- the ability to create a user interface.* The ability to think abstractly, and to implement that abstraction, is far, far more important; and it is the thing that relatively few people can do well.
So no, AppInventor is not going to let just anyone write good software. Without the skills needed for other other 90% of software development, AppInventor will do nothing more than address a trivially insignificant aspect of writing software.
* Do not construe this statement to mean that designing good, clean user interfaces is easy. It is an art form all to itself, but constitutes a relatively small portion of creating software.
Don't Supreme Court justices know the law anymore? This decision is so out in right field that it doesn't even pretend to be supported by law passed by Congress. Contracts used to be invalid if:
1) They are so one-side as to be entirely unfair.
2) They force one party into a position because there is no alternative (the offer you can't refuse).
Carrier-forced arbitration meets both these points. Carriers, by the nature of their enormous power relative to consumers, will always win arbitration because the arbitrators are, for all practical purposes, on the carriers' payrolls. This is because carriers are repeat customers, whereas carrier customers are not. This severely biases the arbitrator in favor of the carriers. There is no easy way to make this even remotely fair to carrier customers. This, by itself, would be enough to nullify arbitration clauses in any sane country.
Carrier customers have no choice but to have a phone of some sort. You just can't exist in most modern markets without the ability to communicate with other people. And all carriers have the same arbitration clause in their contract, so customers have no alternative. This should also, all by itself, be enough to nullify arbitration clauses in contracts in any sane country.
Put these two things together, and it's clear that the Surpeme Court has no intention of applying the law. It seems that they don't even bother reading it anymore. They just want to apply their own sense of right and wrong as it aligns with their political philosophies. If we had a Constitutional Supreme Court, meaning a Supreme Court defined and authorized by our Constitution, prior to this ruling, it just evaporated.
I ditched cable TV a little over a year ago, and I don't miss it one bit. My family uses Netflix streaming ($10/month) for the few TV shows that we want to watch. The only thing left on broadcast TV that I watch is the local news, and I do that mostly out of habit. The only thing on the news worthwhile nowadays is severe weather monitoring and forecasting, and I can get that on the Web (unless the severe weather has knocked out my Internet connection).
And watching someone else play sports is right up there with watching paint dry....