DNS != Superior - DO YOU KNOW HOW OFTEN DNS GETS "REDIRECTED"?
These two I'm going to use to display that you don't know WTF you're talking about.
3) "Random Access" is what you call reading data without going through the file line-by-line. If you can't figure out what that's for, then you're as incompetent as you are inane.
4) I said internally run DNS. If your network is so full of holes that you have to worry about 192.168.0.150 being "redirected", then you're as incompetent as you are inane.
The fact that you connect "socialism" and "fascism" in that fashion suggests that you either don't know what either word means, or you don't know what "/" means.
Running more than one computer? You have to manually edit the hosts file on every one.
Concerned with futureproofing? Google has completely bypassed the hosts file on Android 4.4. I expect the same "feature" to appear on Windows either in the next SP, or the next version.
Hosts files are sequential lists of entries: completely unsuited for random access.
Obviously, the superior solution is a local DNS configured to return localhost/your favorite cat video site/your favorite porn site/whatever for all of those scumbag domains.
I've always wondered what it is that prevents us from creating a fully accredited* Computer Science Degree (bachelor's) completely online, for cheap.
The "For Cheap" part is the only thing.
Florida State University has (had?) an actual online Computer Science degree (AA had to be completed offline). It was actually Computer Science, too.
Algebra through Calc + Discrete and Calc-based Statistics for the math;
Operating Systems and Programming Languages (design and concepts of, not just usage)
Programming Instruction in OO (C++, not Java - gets them points in my book, may reduce them in yours) and Functional (LISP). Even some assembly for the OS course (MIPS).
It wasn't particularly cheap: same tuition cost as taking the courses in meatspace, but I came out of it feeling like I'd learned quite a lot, which is no mean feat.
While you're not wrong about the US (we're rather barbaric in that regard), I can't help but notice that you completely missed the point and context of GPs post.
Either that, or you ignored it for the chance at an off-topic US bash...
Well yeah. The night owl was up on guard duty while Gronk The Mammoth-Chaser was doing his lumber mill impression in the back of the cave, and Gronk's wife, kept up by the snoring, wanted "someone to talk to."
How do you think we can get through to the anti-vaxxers
Let their kids start dying of these things again, it'll get through. You can't convince stupid people, especially when they have a vacuous celebrity spokesperson.
The second half of GP is more telling, though, as I've had them pull that crap on me, too, a few times.
They've decided to stop doing what made them go-to in my book. Ironically, now I use them the way lots of people use newegg (get the tech specs from newegg, order it cheaper on amazon)
And it's kind of refreshing, when I'm looking at these other places, is that you actually *can* find sites that aren't borderline fraudulent in their "sale pricing" descriptions.
How do you figure that? Where does the $10 come from? It can't be from the cost of the book, because you don't get to keep it, as you said. So the better value estimate for that feature would be $book_price / (1/$avg_book_life)
I've had the same thing as your screen protectors happen with a travel charger. "You might lose this one, so you should buy another one, and then we can recommend them to you twice as often!"
Bought a copy of "Vandal Hearts" (PSX rpg) half a decade ago, and they were still using it to suggest XBox360 games until last year when I got tired of it and set everything to "don't use for recommendations."
If that's true and it's not a pwned router like the link below suggests, that's fucked up.
FWIW, I have plenty of experience -- enough to use dialup before I'd sign up with comcast -- but I underestimated their scummyness and did not, in fact, know that their routers used MITM attacks on their customers.
How so? Just about every modern OS (can't speak for OSX from experience, but I'll call it an educated guess) lets you set the computer's DNS instead of having it assigned via DHCP from the router.
You said it yourself: that was in the middle of the dot-com boom. There was also a different kind of inflation going on then, and expecting that money to start (or it's equivalent in today-dollars) is ridiculous.
If you're going to stretch definitions like that, then breaking into a bitcoin exchange and stealing its entire content is "constructive" because "that's building a retirement fund" or something.
IOW, we're right back to "one word for something we approve of, another one for something we don't."
Suddenly (well, over the past 20 years), hacking has become something evil, and all those old meanings are forgotten.
And you're just as bad. "Constructive" was never a pre-requisite -- deconstructive operations were just as common, if not more so, because of "taking it apart to see how it works," and there's no viable clause anywhere that precludes a destructive operation from having a legitimate use, other than this naive re-branding idiocy.
And yes, it is both naive and idiotic. The latter in appropriating another term that already meant something else, instead of abandoning the original and taking on a new one. Now the only people who ever even bother to note any "hacker" vs "cracker" differentiation are here. The media that spawned the whole non-problem in the first place? Never once seen them keep to the "proper branding."
The former in thinking that the actual word has fuckall to do with anything: hackers were a counterculture that valued merit and intelligence, and as society started embracing anti-intellectuallism and mediocrity, of course they were made out to be the bad guys. It doesn't matter if you called them "Puppies" vs "Nazis" instead of "hackers" vs "crackers"; if you don't play by the arbitrary and one-sided rules, you're going to be the bad guy, and guess which one the media is going to call you?
Oh, jesus, is that old saw *still* going around? It was silly as hell when it started, not to mention more than a little ironic: to say we need a different term based on the "alignment" of the actor and call it term overloading, and the solution is apparently to pick a word that already had its own meaning, leading to *actually* overloading it.
I'm sure it's actually still illegal. What it's not, according to the actual case, is on the wrong side of the "anti-peeping tom" law. I'm guessing the prosecutor fucked up, tried to go for a charge with a bigger sentence, and couldn't make it stick.
Although I don't really agree with paying women less on the chance that they might get pregnant and take 6-12 months off work
I don't think that actually happens. What does happen is that they stop getting paid once they DO take the time off (and burn their sick leave).
I'm the last one to jump on the "businesses have to make money, so whatever they have to do to that end is OK" bandwagon, but honestly, this one just boggles my mind. Moreso because the intersection of people who consider it a problem (apparently a business is supposed to pay someone who stops working for a year, so they can make life decisions) has such a large intersection with the set that is devoutly opposed to the concept of paternity leave.
Slashdot Mirror
3.) Random access? WTF would you NEED IT FOR??
4.) HERE IS THE BIG ONE:
DNS != Superior - DO YOU KNOW HOW OFTEN DNS GETS "REDIRECTED"?
These two I'm going to use to display that you don't know WTF you're talking about.
3) "Random Access" is what you call reading data without going through the file line-by-line. If you can't figure out what that's for, then you're as incompetent as you are inane.
4) I said internally run DNS. If your network is so full of holes that you have to worry about 192.168.0.150 being "redirected", then you're as incompetent as you are inane.
. I suppose it's closer to socialism/fascism.
The fact that you connect "socialism" and "fascism" in that fashion suggests that you either don't know what either word means, or you don't know what "/" means.
Actually, it's trivial to do so.
Running more than one computer? You have to manually edit the hosts file on every one.
Concerned with futureproofing? Google has completely bypassed the hosts file on Android 4.4. I expect the same "feature" to appear on Windows either in the next SP, or the next version.
Hosts files are sequential lists of entries: completely unsuited for random access.
Obviously, the superior solution is a local DNS configured to return localhost/your favorite cat video site/your favorite porn site/whatever for all of those scumbag domains.
APK is just caught in the 80s.
I've always wondered what it is that prevents us from creating a fully accredited* Computer Science Degree (bachelor's) completely online, for cheap.
The "For Cheap" part is the only thing.
Florida State University has (had?) an actual online Computer Science degree (AA had to be completed offline). It was actually Computer Science, too.
Algebra through Calc + Discrete and Calc-based Statistics for the math;
Operating Systems and Programming Languages (design and concepts of, not just usage)
Programming Instruction in OO (C++, not Java - gets them points in my book, may reduce them in yours) and Functional (LISP). Even some assembly for the OS course (MIPS).
It wasn't particularly cheap: same tuition cost as taking the courses in meatspace, but I came out of it feeling like I'd learned quite a lot, which is no mean feat.
A comment which shows you understand the realities of neither capitalism, nor starting an ISP.
While you're not wrong about the US (we're rather barbaric in that regard), I can't help but notice that you completely missed the point and context of GPs post.
Either that, or you ignored it for the chance at an off-topic US bash...
Same bible, different chapters. The OT is full of psycho garbage like this.
Come on, man. For Star Trek stuff, there's a better wiki with higher geek cred. ;)
Well yeah. The night owl was up on guard duty while Gronk The Mammoth-Chaser was doing his lumber mill impression in the back of the cave, and Gronk's wife, kept up by the snoring, wanted "someone to talk to."
How do you think we can get through to the anti-vaxxers
Let their kids start dying of these things again, it'll get through. You can't convince stupid people, especially when they have a vacuous celebrity spokesperson.
The second half of GP is more telling, though, as I've had them pull that crap on me, too, a few times.
They've decided to stop doing what made them go-to in my book. Ironically, now I use them the way lots of people use newegg (get the tech specs from newegg, order it cheaper on amazon)
And it's kind of refreshing, when I'm looking at these other places, is that you actually *can* find sites that aren't borderline fraudulent in their "sale pricing" descriptions.
That's $10/month in value right there
How do you figure that? Where does the $10 come from? It can't be from the cost of the book, because you don't get to keep it, as you said. So the better value estimate for that feature would be $book_price / (1/$avg_book_life)
but I didn't pay for it to begin with
Sure you did. To the tune of $99/yr
Gods, their recommendation engine is horrible.
I've had the same thing as your screen protectors happen with a travel charger. "You might lose this one, so you should buy another one, and then we can recommend them to you twice as often!"
Bought a copy of "Vandal Hearts" (PSX rpg) half a decade ago, and they were still using it to suggest XBox360 games until last year when I got tired of it and set everything to "don't use for recommendations."
Their suggestions are really worse than useless.
If that's true and it's not a pwned router like the link below suggests, that's fucked up.
FWIW, I have plenty of experience -- enough to use dialup before I'd sign up with comcast -- but I underestimated their scummyness and did not, in fact, know that their routers used MITM attacks on their customers.
Uh... what are you talking about? As long as it's a valid and reachable DNS server, it doesn't matter what the hell the router says the DNS server is.
How so? Just about every modern OS (can't speak for OSX from experience, but I'll call it an educated guess) lets you set the computer's DNS instead of having it assigned via DHCP from the router.
When it's your first day of your first job out of college, odds are strongly in favor of your not being a good programmer.
You said it yourself: that was in the middle of the dot-com boom. There was also a different kind of inflation going on then, and expecting that money to start (or it's equivalent in today-dollars) is ridiculous.
If you're going to stretch definitions like that, then breaking into a bitcoin exchange and stealing its entire content is "constructive" because "that's building a retirement fund" or something.
IOW, we're right back to "one word for something we approve of, another one for something we don't."
Suddenly (well, over the past 20 years), hacking has become something evil, and all those old meanings are forgotten.
And you're just as bad. "Constructive" was never a pre-requisite -- deconstructive operations were just as common, if not more so, because of "taking it apart to see how it works," and there's no viable clause anywhere that precludes a destructive operation from having a legitimate use, other than this naive re-branding idiocy.
And yes, it is both naive and idiotic. The latter in appropriating another term that already meant something else, instead of abandoning the original and taking on a new one. Now the only people who ever even bother to note any "hacker" vs "cracker" differentiation are here. The media that spawned the whole non-problem in the first place? Never once seen them keep to the "proper branding."
The former in thinking that the actual word has fuckall to do with anything: hackers were a counterculture that valued merit and intelligence, and as society started embracing anti-intellectuallism and mediocrity, of course they were made out to be the bad guys. It doesn't matter if you called them "Puppies" vs "Nazis" instead of "hackers" vs "crackers"; if you don't play by the arbitrary and one-sided rules, you're going to be the bad guy, and guess which one the media is going to call you?
Yep, still a frigging "hacker."
Oh, jesus, is that old saw *still* going around? It was silly as hell when it started, not to mention more than a little ironic: to say we need a different term based on the "alignment" of the actor and call it term overloading, and the solution is apparently to pick a word that already had its own meaning, leading to *actually* overloading it.
You'd think so, wouldn't you?
You'd be mistaken
I'm sure it's actually still illegal. What it's not, according to the actual case, is on the wrong side of the "anti-peeping tom" law. I'm guessing the prosecutor fucked up, tried to go for a charge with a bigger sentence, and couldn't make it stick.
The summary is truly fantastic. I don't think the article's writer could have put it better himself!
Although I don't really agree with paying women less on the chance that they might get pregnant and take 6-12 months off work
I don't think that actually happens. What does happen is that they stop getting paid once they DO take the time off (and burn their sick leave).
I'm the last one to jump on the "businesses have to make money, so whatever they have to do to that end is OK" bandwagon, but honestly, this one just boggles my mind. Moreso because the intersection of people who consider it a problem (apparently a business is supposed to pay someone who stops working for a year, so they can make life decisions) has such a large intersection with the set that is devoutly opposed to the concept of paternity leave.