It wouldn't have mattered if he had been in the bathroom: one CANNOT set off C4 with a match. And had he been in the bathroom, while the idiot was trying to set off his shoes he would have set off the smoke alarm.
I was not talking about about outlawing anything; read it again. My point was that FreeNet appears to have an all-or-nothing approach [by design]: IOW, if a user has a strong objection to a particular type of content (for whatever reason), that user cannot stop that sort of content from being stored on his system. Of course, he won't actually *know* it's on there, but the possibility that it might be there could be an unpleasant thought. It's up to the individual user to decide whether the greater usefulness of FreeNet outweighs the objection.
In any case, the theme [on/.] seems to be that "everyone has to approve of everything or they oppose free speech", which is of course complete bollocks.
"Freedom of speech, but only when I agree"??? What an awful argument. In the US, there are very real penalties for trafficking in kiddie porn. IOW, KP is not protected as free speech. Not wanting it on your system has nothing to do with free speech. I'm not sure you understand what "free speech" really is.
In the same vein, try to rent a storage locker or other facility to store your large stash of $ILLEGAL_MATERIAL. Let us know how many places are willing to let you do so without placing any restrictions on what you put there.
Short Round is the Jar-Jar Binks of the Indiana Jones movies:
broken English coupled with nails-on-a-chalkboard voice
cloying attempts to appear cute
useless in most life-threatening or otherwise important situations
The major difference is that it is difficult to wish harm on Short Round because he is a little kid - not so with Jar-Jar. I had no trouble wishing Han Solo would show up and shoot first.
We really haven't progressed much since the work of Xerox Park.
If you are going to try to use a historical reference, at least get it right: it was the Xerox PARC, as in Palo Alto Research Center.
(I know, it's off-topic, but I find it annoying when people try to make references like this to show their old-school-itude. These are the same ones that use "CARRIER LOST" to show their 1337 BBS skillz. Bah.)
Fair enough. However, I believe the aside was directed toward the general [lack of] value of benchmarks, and not really at the article itself. Benchmarks are usually awful gauges of real-world performance, so I can see his point. OTOH, they can give fanboys additional bragging room because their processors are.06% faster than their friends' processors.:-)
Re:Stuff that matters.
on
P4 3.2GHz Reviews
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
If it isn't important [to you], if it doesn't matter [to you], then don't read it.
See? Easy-peasy.
I mock you with my monkey pants!
on
P4 3.2GHz Reviews
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Not only can you describe someone as having his head up his bum, you do it such a way that it sounds like a random medical condition. As a bonus, you don't sound like an insensitive clod for *saying* he has his head up his bum.:-)
Break out the food processor and some baking material; your home recognizes RFID tags in the bag of flour and offers to help. "How about focaccia?"
I wouldn't want Clippy (or any of his pals) monkeying around with anything I was going to eat: he would probably still be mad from the gazillionth time he was 'killed' and would add a bunch of habaneros or something.
The Survivable Network Technology program at the Software Engineering Institute (part of Carnegie Mellon University) describes in detail what "survivable network" actually means. The author [of the book in the/. review] seems to have missed some key points. Nutshell version: a survivable network keeps going despite disasters, etc; moving to a different network to continue business does not mean you have a survivable network.
In fact, a quick google on "survivable network" turns up several hits (on the first page) from the SEI.
(Disclaimer: I used to work at the SEI, but in a different area.)
Unprofessional??!? New around here, eh? Read the other articles: destruction of CDs, LAN party tips, and slavering gossip over SCO's probable/alleged intellectual property shenanigans... I can see how you got an IBM-esque impression of/.
Besides, you are just as likely to have naughty words leap out at you from a +5 post responding to an article. What on earth will you do then??
(Insert "won't someone think of the children?" comment here.)
Companies âoehave not yet seen a tangible return on dotcom investments.â Add in the weak economy, and âoethere is less passion and enthusiasm for technology, and greater focus on doing more for less.â
(Close up of Steve-O in his office)
Hey, it's not 1999 any more!
Uh oh. What now?
(Steve-O curls up in fetal position under his desk. And sweats.)
Slashdot Mirror
has been described as "a process, not a product". One of the more common quotes in this area is available here . (Be sure to read down a page or so.)
download it from kaz...
D'oh.
But code that sucks *should* be righted...
Wow. Apparently I have missed out on new washing machine developments in the last four years or so (since I last bought such an item).
That, and I got a chuckle out of the phrase itself. YMMV, of course.
"I for one welcome our agitating overlords..."
It wouldn't have mattered if he had been in the bathroom: one CANNOT set off C4 with a match. And had he been in the bathroom, while the idiot was trying to set off his shoes he would have set off the smoke alarm.
you can buy a Lexar 256MB USB 2.0 drive for $75. (It is normally $110.)
No, I'm not affiliated w/ CompUSA or Lexar, but I picked one up the other day and it really is quite handy. Now if my laptop had built-in USB 2.0...
(I have a USB 2.0 PC Card, but built-in would be nice.)
Re: by that logic - wrong, wrong, wrong.
I was not talking about about outlawing anything; read it again. My point was that FreeNet appears to have an all-or-nothing approach [by design]: IOW, if a user has a strong objection to a particular type of content (for whatever reason), that user cannot stop that sort of content from being stored on his system. Of course, he won't actually *know* it's on there, but the possibility that it might be there could be an unpleasant thought. It's up to the individual user to decide whether the greater usefulness of FreeNet outweighs the objection.
In any case, the theme [on
"Freedom of speech, but only when I agree"??? What an awful argument. In the US, there are very real penalties for trafficking in kiddie porn. IOW, KP is not protected as free speech. Not wanting it on your system has nothing to do with free speech. I'm not sure you understand what "free speech" really is.
In the same vein, try to rent a storage locker or other facility to store your large stash of $ILLEGAL_MATERIAL. Let us know how many places are willing to let you do so without placing any restrictions on what you put there.
Nice writeup (w/ movie) here.
Share and enjoy!
Have a look at the article on El Reg
Short Round is the Jar-Jar Binks of the Indiana Jones movies:
broken English coupled with nails-on-a-chalkboard voice
cloying attempts to appear cute
useless in most life-threatening or otherwise important situations
The major difference is that it is difficult to wish harm on Short Round because he is a little kid - not so with Jar-Jar. I had no trouble wishing Han Solo would show up and shoot first.
Nope, there are also viruses affecting Macs.
You mean like that bovine spongiform/mad cow thingie? Oh, wait - that affects *Big* Macs. Never mind.
We really haven't progressed much since the work of Xerox Park.
If you are going to try to use a historical reference, at least get it right: it was the Xerox PARC, as in Palo Alto Research Center.
(I know, it's off-topic, but I find it annoying when people try to make references like this to show their old-school-itude. These are the same ones that use "CARRIER LOST" to show their 1337 BBS skillz. Bah.)
Fair enough. However, I believe the aside was directed toward the general [lack of] value of benchmarks, and not really at the article itself. Benchmarks are usually awful gauges of real-world performance, so I can see his point. OTOH, they can give fanboys additional bragging room because their processors are
If it isn't important [to you], if it doesn't matter [to you], then don't read it.
See? Easy-peasy.
Sorry - it just seemed to fit.
I hope that doesn't throw off the rest of the dependencies.
:-)
From the review:
The book is divided into eleven chapters, unevenly distributed among three sections:
That's good news: I would hate to read a fractional chapter.
Cranio-Rectal Inversion.
Not only can you describe someone as having his head up his bum, you do it such a way that it sounds like a random medical condition. As a bonus, you don't sound like an insensitive clod for *saying* he has his head up his bum.
yeh, if your idea of a good job is working 20 hour days cracked out on meth, keeping 2 books and being on the road for months at a time, its great
Sounds like some of the road-warrior types I've met in recent years...
From the article:
Break out the food processor and some baking material; your home recognizes RFID tags in the bag of flour and offers to help. "How about focaccia?"
I wouldn't want Clippy (or any of his pals) monkeying around with anything I was going to eat: he would probably still be mad from the gazillionth time he was 'killed' and would add a bunch of habaneros or something.
The Survivable Network Technology program at the Software Engineering Institute (part of Carnegie Mellon University) describes in detail what "survivable network" actually means. The author [of the book in the
In fact, a quick google on "survivable network" turns up several hits (on the first page) from the SEI.
(Disclaimer: I used to work at the SEI, but in a different area.)
Unprofessional??!? New around here, eh? Read the other articles: destruction of CDs, LAN party tips, and slavering gossip over SCO's probable/alleged intellectual property shenanigans... I can see how you got an IBM-esque impression of
Besides, you are just as likely to have naughty words leap out at you from a +5 post responding to an article. What on earth will you do then??
(Insert "won't someone think of the children?" comment here.)
From the article [quotes are Ballmer's]:
Companies âoehave not yet seen a tangible return on dotcom investments.â Add in the weak economy, and âoethere is less passion and enthusiasm for technology, and greater focus on doing more for less.â
(Close up of Steve-O in his office)
Hey, it's not 1999 any more!
Uh oh. What now?
(Steve-O curls up in fetal position under his desk. And sweats.)
If you buy that much pr0n, I bet you have at least one arm strong enough to carry the change.