From posts above apparently the box keeps rechecking itself at later updates. Why should we have to notice that an updater is installing a new program? Just pretend that instead of installing Safari it had installed an Apple branded IE toolbar. You can see why sneaking that into the updater would really piss people off.
Now that I installed it I don't really mind though. The scrolling is much smoother than IE7 on my machine.
If you filter out all but the informative posts, you may not have much left here. The parent is one of the more informative purely for calling someone an idiot and for having a subscription to Nature (right ?).
Imagine the reverse though. She has to go through so much without even knowing the size of the hard drive. Even if she's really nice, it's awkward to return one that's too small without even putting it in her case.
There are at least two posts saying that unless you're a loser you'll have a hot babe that doesn't mind if you cheat. Well good for you Fabio! Now open up the windows cause it stinks like bullsh** in here.
Question and answer. My 'porn'...? I suppose you just rolled off of Heidi Klum in order to make that post. Why do the research when you can get a more thorough answer through a discussion board in fifteen minutes and get berated at the same time? Seriously!
The point was that running some C code on your computer and displaying the result through javascript doesn't seem different than installing an active-X control to run the same C code (if it's something the client can easily handle). The former case doesn't seem to require open sourcing the modifications, and it is a pretty big loophole. So Google never takes advantage of this. Sounds a little naive to me, but other companies surely are.
The spirit of the GPL is to give back when you make use of the code, right? Since google might use GPL'd code internally they aren't required to disclose their source code modifications to anyone outside, but do they anyway?
I'd venture a guess that there is some very advanced networking code in use at Google, and it was perhaps even built open sourced code! Will the improvements be distributed to the original authors who were nice enough to lay the foundation and give it away? The law may not require the release, but the 'spirit' of the GPL demands it.
At this point in my life I'd rather TV got raunchier. More cussing, more nudity, etc. I can't stand watching some movies on network TV. However, I have to admit that seeing the wrong things at a young age had a (slight) negative impact on me for several years.
I don't recall being traumatized by the sight of boobs, but an image of dong or a bearded oyster can sear itself into a young mind. I still have an incidental exposure to some sex scene in a movie stuck in my head from the age of 4 or 5, and it bothered me until adolescence. What was being depicted in the movie was something consensual and even joking, but my very young mind interpreted it as abusive and I found it shocking. I don't _think_ that was due to brainwashing.
My parents were responsible and didn't let us watch many things. That had little effect since most of the things I saw were at friend's houses when the parents weren't home. I really wasn't ready to see some of the things the older kids snagged from their dad's stash in the basement.
I don't watch videos of people getting murdered (rotten.com type of stuff). I have a reasonable expectation not to see a guy get his head sawed off while I'm flipping past CNN.
There must be a line drawn. If I accidentally see "Two girls, one cup" while scanning through basic cable, I'm gonna be pissed. YOU are gonna have to get in MY living room and clean the puke from MY CARPET!
If I wrote an xml-reader I wouldn't want someone selling a toolkit for xml manipulation using my code. They would be taking credit for my work. However, if someone wants to use that same code for reading their config files, I would be ok with that.
I'm not trying to speak for every author of GPL code, but I don't believe it is consistent with some intentions. If there is a license that prevents the former situation, but allows the latter that would be great. No one can resell any upgrade to my xml-reader without giving back the source, and yet it can be useful as a tool in many projects (even closed source ones).
I'm not crying about anything, and I _will_ open source my code (and it won't be an xml-reader or linear algebra package). The problem is that the two desires above are conflicting because of gray areas in between.
Suppose I write some videogame that I would like to sell for a few bucks because I'm a starving student. Hypothetically this videogame is really cool and I had a great idea.
I might need some numerical routines to handle sparse matrices and do a few other things that have been well developed for years now. All the libraries are under the GPL though, so now to have any chance of selling my videogame for $5 I have to redevelop all of this linear algebra software from scratch.
Maybe linear algebra routines actually are BSD, but that's not the point (I don't have a videogame either). There's no way for me to charge $5 for this great videogame idea unless I rewrite a whole bunch of code that hasn't been touched in ten years. What if the GPL code did something as mundane as write an xml file. Does it make sense to force every project using this to open their source to use this? It's not like we're repackaging someone's webserver--we're just writing a file.
It doesn't make sense to reinvent the wheel so it's not reasonable to re-implement this stuff...it might take weeks. So I have no chance of _selling_ my game. I would be motivated to polish up the interface if I thought I could make a couple hundred dollars though.
I often have to close slashdot because some flash banner add is persistently using 20% of my CPU. An advertisement isn't worth it to your business if it drives people away from the page for any reason. Google adwords don't have many drawbacks though.
Some text books mark sections as being technical and skippable for most readers. If wikipedia could mark sections of an entry according to overall importance, we wouldn't have to balance depth of information with readability. The reader could decide at what level they want to see the article.
If the article is mathematical and you would like to see an outline of the results, that shouldn't prevent someone from posting detailed proofs an examples that can be viewed by someone else who is interested.
In texts this extra technical information has to be in its own section or chapter to be easily skippable, but the electronic format doesn't have this limitation, and so we should take advantage of it.
It's a shame if Hauppauge cards are the best out there. I've been using them for the last 7 years or so. Picture quality has been horrible compared to my walmart generic TV. Although it's not relevant if you use Myth, the included software is pretty bad too, and I had to switch to MS media center handling all the recording (which does an awesome job, btw).
If you have media center on XP, I would highly recommend using it. The channel guide is downloaded for free. Handling of showtime conflicts, lack of space, and auto-recording as you watch are done very well. Fast forwarding is crap in that it's either way too fast or not fast enough, and there's no 30-sec skip ahead.
If anyone can recommend and point to a precompiled myth-for-windows binary, I would give it a shot.
At least someone is talking about the music itself rather than the same discussion about the RIAA. The fragile had some incredible instrumental tracks. The next three albums seem to be progressively worse (not that With Teeth was bad). If this wasn't NIN would people be paying $300 !!! It's insanity. Give me the Fragile on distorted casette over this on BluRay/LP/Lossless any day. It needs. a. hook.
By the time a human trip is possible we will have much more capable robots, and they're less likely to get ill during the flight there. It would be an amazing experience for that one person if they did make it though.
Could we send someone depressed or with little will to live? Suicidal people can become very distraught if they are suddenly faced with terminal cancer. It could be disasterous if weeks into the trip they realize that they want to live after all. We would have to send someone stable and yet willing to face inevitable death. How many of you would sign up for a one way trip and not have buyer's remorse?
I'm not sure if the Panopticon would be a prison. Take reality TV for example. People revert their behavior after a day or two even when they see the camera guy standing next to them.
Likewise most people say they believe in God, but will still watch animal porn on the internet while He can see them.
We're too obsessed with mathematics. We spend so much time figuring out clever ways to do integrals, and I just don't believe that humans do this sort of thing when making a decision. There has to be reasoning without probabilities.
Since you're a PhD in this field any interesting references on the topic would be appreciated (speaking sincerely).
Don't say that westerners find spitting disgusting. Many love to spit and do so whenever they/we can get away with it. It's certainly more disgusting to watch someone swallow a loogie than to spit it into a bush. Some people just don't like to watch other people spit as much as they like to spit themselves. So they could be dicks about and looch all over the place (as many do), but it's not so fun when you track someone's phlegm onto your carpet.
Maybe growing up it was OK in my family to fart at the dinner table. Don't you pass judgment on me when I cut one in McDonald's... just breath it in as you eat your McNuggets.
More expensive gas ten years ago wouldn't have resulted in cars that run on electricity or fuel cells today. The British have mass transportation, but they haven't developed more efficient cars as a result of the price of gas--just smaller cars.
This is a good point. Gasoline is about $8 per gallon in England and yet their cars still run on it. It will take more than an economic incentive to move away from gasoline powered vehicles; it will take a scientific breakthrough.
As men we should take this stuff on the chin, or better yet with a sense of humor.
We're paying for what we've done in the past. How many pointless wars have been perpetrated by men? Perhaps because women aren't given the chance to lead; only time will tell on the point.
Is it a stereotype to say that men are more violent? I can say when I fear for my safety it's not usually a violent woman that I'm worried about. In terms of callousness, dishonesty and cruelty I think things are a bit more even. I'm speaking in generalities, but who gives a sh--? They're true in general and that's the point!
We should give women credit for their good qualities, and if people want to say we're equals otherwise...well I don't care. Most the variation is per individual rather than based on the gender anyway.
I remember that in areas of high humidity, vertical lines on the gameboy's screen would go out pretty quickly. Eventually you could only see the middle 2/3 of the screen. In low humidity climates they would last a long time.
I've also seen videocards lose horizontal lines (not completely, but just darker) a few times in high humidity climates, but have never seen a similar malfunction in low humidity yet. It seems to be more rare with videocards, so maybe the connection with humid climates is just coincidental.
It may be the 456th leading cause, but cheeseburgers and highway accidents never made me feel powerless, helpless or hopeless the way the terrorist attacks did.
Slashdot Mirror
From posts above apparently the box keeps rechecking itself at later updates. Why should we have to notice that an updater is installing a new program? Just pretend that instead of installing Safari it had installed an Apple branded IE toolbar. You can see why sneaking that into the updater would really piss people off.
Now that I installed it I don't really mind though. The scrolling is much smoother than IE7 on my machine.
If you filter out all but the informative posts, you may not have much left here. The parent is one of the more informative purely for calling someone an idiot and for having a subscription to Nature (right ?).
Imagine the reverse though. She has to go through so much without even knowing the size of the hard drive. Even if she's really nice, it's awkward to return one that's too small without even putting it in her case.
There are at least two posts saying that unless you're a loser you'll have a hot babe that doesn't mind if you cheat. Well good for you Fabio! Now open up the windows cause it stinks like bullsh** in here.
Question and answer. My 'porn'...? I suppose you just rolled off of Heidi Klum in order to make that post. Why do the research when you can get a more thorough answer through a discussion board in fifteen minutes and get berated at the same time? Seriously!
The point was that running some C code on your computer and displaying the result through javascript doesn't seem different than installing an active-X control to run the same C code (if it's something the client can easily handle). The former case doesn't seem to require open sourcing the modifications, and it is a pretty big loophole. So Google never takes advantage of this. Sounds a little naive to me, but other companies surely are.
The spirit of the GPL is to give back when you make use of the code, right? Since google might use GPL'd code internally they aren't required to disclose their source code modifications to anyone outside, but do they anyway?
I'd venture a guess that there is some very advanced networking code in use at Google, and it was perhaps even built open sourced code! Will the improvements be distributed to the original authors who were nice enough to lay the foundation and give it away? The law may not require the release, but the 'spirit' of the GPL demands it.
At this point in my life I'd rather TV got raunchier. More cussing, more nudity, etc. I can't stand watching some movies on network TV. However, I have to admit that seeing the wrong things at a young age had a (slight) negative impact on me for several years.
I don't recall being traumatized by the sight of boobs, but an image of dong or a bearded oyster can sear itself into a young mind. I still have an incidental exposure to some sex scene in a movie stuck in my head from the age of 4 or 5, and it bothered me until adolescence. What was being depicted in the movie was something consensual and even joking, but my very young mind interpreted it as abusive and I found it shocking. I don't _think_ that was due to brainwashing.
My parents were responsible and didn't let us watch many things. That had little effect since most of the things I saw were at friend's houses when the parents weren't home. I really wasn't ready to see some of the things the older kids snagged from their dad's stash in the basement.
I don't watch videos of people getting murdered (rotten.com type of stuff). I have a reasonable expectation not to see a guy get his head sawed off while I'm flipping past CNN.
There must be a line drawn. If I accidentally see "Two girls, one cup" while scanning through basic cable, I'm gonna be pissed. YOU are gonna have to get in MY living room and clean the puke from MY CARPET!
Bonus points for the team whose robot has sympathy for other injured robots!
If I wrote an xml-reader I wouldn't want someone selling a toolkit for xml manipulation using my code. They would be taking credit for my work. However, if someone wants to use that same code for reading their config files, I would be ok with that.
I'm not trying to speak for every author of GPL code, but I don't believe it is consistent with some intentions. If there is a license that prevents the former situation, but allows the latter that would be great. No one can resell any upgrade to my xml-reader without giving back the source, and yet it can be useful as a tool in many projects (even closed source ones).
I'm not crying about anything, and I _will_ open source my code (and it won't be an xml-reader or linear algebra package). The problem is that the two desires above are conflicting because of gray areas in between.
Suppose I write some videogame that I would like to sell for a few bucks because I'm a starving student. Hypothetically this videogame is really cool and I had a great idea.
I might need some numerical routines to handle sparse matrices and do a few other things that have been well developed for years now. All the libraries are under the GPL though, so now to have any chance of selling my videogame for $5 I have to redevelop all of this linear algebra software from scratch.
Maybe linear algebra routines actually are BSD, but that's not the point (I don't have a videogame either). There's no way for me to charge $5 for this great videogame idea unless I rewrite a whole bunch of code that hasn't been touched in ten years. What if the GPL code did something as mundane as write an xml file. Does it make sense to force every project using this to open their source to use this? It's not like we're repackaging someone's webserver--we're just writing a file.
It doesn't make sense to reinvent the wheel so it's not reasonable to re-implement this stuff...it might take weeks. So I have no chance of _selling_ my game. I would be motivated to polish up the interface if I thought I could make a couple hundred dollars though.
Fox News and rednecks are always good for a jab.
I often have to close slashdot because some flash banner add is persistently using 20% of my CPU. An advertisement isn't worth it to your business if it drives people away from the page for any reason. Google adwords don't have many drawbacks though.
Some text books mark sections as being technical and skippable for most readers. If wikipedia could mark sections of an entry according to overall importance, we wouldn't have to balance depth of information with readability. The reader could decide at what level they want to see the article.
If the article is mathematical and you would like to see an outline of the results, that shouldn't prevent someone from posting detailed proofs an examples that can be viewed by someone else who is interested.
In texts this extra technical information has to be in its own section or chapter to be easily skippable, but the electronic format doesn't have this limitation, and so we should take advantage of it.
It's a shame if Hauppauge cards are the best out there. I've been using them for the last 7 years or so. Picture quality has been horrible compared to my walmart generic TV. Although it's not relevant if you use Myth, the included software is pretty bad too, and I had to switch to MS media center handling all the recording (which does an awesome job, btw).
If you have media center on XP, I would highly recommend using it. The channel guide is downloaded for free. Handling of showtime conflicts, lack of space, and auto-recording as you watch are done very well. Fast forwarding is crap in that it's either way too fast or not fast enough, and there's no 30-sec skip ahead.
If anyone can recommend and point to a precompiled myth-for-windows binary, I would give it a shot.
At least someone is talking about the music itself rather than the same discussion about the RIAA. The fragile had some incredible instrumental tracks. The next three albums seem to be progressively worse (not that With Teeth was bad). If this wasn't NIN would people be paying $300 !!! It's insanity. Give me the Fragile on distorted casette over this on BluRay/LP/Lossless any day. It needs. a. hook.
By the time a human trip is possible we will have much more capable robots, and they're less likely to get ill during the flight there. It would be an amazing experience for that one person if they did make it though.
Could we send someone depressed or with little will to live? Suicidal people can become very distraught if they are suddenly faced with terminal cancer. It could be disasterous if weeks into the trip they realize that they want to live after all. We would have to send someone stable and yet willing to face inevitable death. How many of you would sign up for a one way trip and not have buyer's remorse?
I'm not sure if the Panopticon would be a prison. Take reality TV for example. People revert their behavior after a day or two even when they see the camera guy standing next to them.
Likewise most people say they believe in God, but will still watch animal porn on the internet while He can see them.
Lois
http://tv.yahoo.com/alex-borstein/contributor/198110/photos/1
or Meg
http://www.imdb.com/gallery/granitz/4529/Events/4529/MilaKunis_Grant_8069156_400.jpg.html?path=pgallery&path_key=Kunis,%20Mila
We're too obsessed with mathematics. We spend so much time figuring out clever ways to do integrals, and I just don't believe that humans do this sort of thing when making a decision. There has to be reasoning without probabilities. Since you're a PhD in this field any interesting references on the topic would be appreciated (speaking sincerely).
Don't say that westerners find spitting disgusting. Many love to spit and do so whenever they/we can get away with it. It's certainly more disgusting to watch someone swallow a loogie than to spit it into a bush. Some people just don't like to watch other people spit as much as they like to spit themselves. So they could be dicks about and looch all over the place (as many do), but it's not so fun when you track someone's phlegm onto your carpet.
Maybe growing up it was OK in my family to fart at the dinner table. Don't you pass judgment on me when I cut one in McDonald's... just breath it in as you eat your McNuggets.
That is the point.
More expensive gas ten years ago wouldn't have resulted in cars that run on electricity or fuel cells today. The British have mass transportation, but they haven't developed more efficient cars as a result of the price of gas--just smaller cars.
This is a good point. Gasoline is about $8 per gallon in England and yet their cars still run on it. It will take more than an economic incentive to move away from gasoline powered vehicles; it will take a scientific breakthrough.
As men we should take this stuff on the chin, or better yet with a sense of humor.
We're paying for what we've done in the past. How many pointless wars have been perpetrated by men? Perhaps because women aren't given the chance to lead; only time will tell on the point.
Is it a stereotype to say that men are more violent? I can say when I fear for my safety it's not usually a violent woman that I'm worried about. In terms of callousness, dishonesty and cruelty I think things are a bit more even. I'm speaking in generalities, but who gives a sh--? They're true in general and that's the point!
We should give women credit for their good qualities, and if people want to say we're equals otherwise...well I don't care. Most the variation is per individual rather than based on the gender anyway.
I remember that in areas of high humidity, vertical lines on the gameboy's screen would go out pretty quickly. Eventually you could only see the middle 2/3 of the screen. In low humidity climates they would last a long time.
I've also seen videocards lose horizontal lines (not completely, but just darker) a few times in high humidity climates, but have never seen a similar malfunction in low humidity yet. It seems to be more rare with videocards, so maybe the connection with humid climates is just coincidental.
It may be the 456th leading cause, but cheeseburgers and highway accidents never made me feel powerless, helpless or hopeless the way the terrorist attacks did.