it always asks you first (in a stern fashion), and if you're not logged on AS administrator on a windows box, it won't put it in any other user's profile... it contains the damage.
Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if the XPI contained some win32 code that attempts to install other software on the machine using Administrative rights if the user has it...
Just goes to show, don't run as a privledged account... use Run As... for stubborn things like Quicken or certain games.
He said he wasn't an expert. So of course he'd be forced to make that conclusion. He cannot scratch his itch because he cannot reach it.
This is the kind of response he was talking about that does no good. Rather, you should acknowledge that the area is weak and that more focus needs to be given there in the future.
(Incidentally, I'm interested in OSS in the GIS field. Any ideas/good pointers? Anyone?)
well, it's all well and good, but you lessen the likelyhood that you'll click-delete the wrong message when they're all in your inbox, not yet sorted. (Incidentally, statistical filters are great for sorting mail period.) I get a LOT of email, I'd be lost without it. I just check the junk mail folder less often than my inbox. And I do get false positives, but it happens infrequently enough that it's not an issue.
...this guy seriously believes the earth is a scant 10000 years old. And he dismisses all evidence to the contrary without a throuogh explanation. I can't help but wonder if he treat's other people's research with the same disregard.
(between 2.54 cm per inch as opposed to 39.37 per metre) cannot explain how you can derive 39.77 inches to a metre.
The 2.54 vs. 39.37 is close enough to work for almost everything (except possibly slingshotting mars probes... and then I would use the 2.54 definition because you want to work in SI units internally anyway)
Explain this to me. How can you supposedly derive incorrect distance conversion factors for distance? You shouldn't NEED to look anything up. Because... inches are DEFINED to be 2.54 centimeters.
So everything is just multiplication. You derive your own conversion factors (it takes too long to look stuff up). I don't understand this at all...
Can't find the strip... "Kafka is twice as funny to neoclassical existentialists. But rape is funny and I don't hear a k. The implication is you can FEEL the k."
I downloaded some open-source WDM drivers for my ATI WinTV card (forget about the AIW, never went near the thing) that worked a hundred times better, and they don't have access to ATI's docs!
WTF?
And where was I bashing AMD, by the way? I don't hate ATI, I hate their non-pro products, especially when it comes to keeping Windows from dying. Nothing can save you from a shitty driver that assumes an UP and no-APIC environment, that's NOT windows' fault.
ATI does have good support for their current RV3xx cards and Fire series, but I don't feel they are as concerned with providing stable drivers for media conversion. They don't make any of those chips, and they don't seem to try to use the driver kits that those chipmakers send, instead going their own way (and doing not a very good job). They should be outsourcing that driver work to Pinnacle or Osprey or somebody that knows what they are doing, and can integrate into Windows WDM properly for use in 3rd party media apps.
Mods, this is OVERRATED. The guy hasn't even the slightest notion of EM or RF theory.
It's just NOT feasible. I mean, this is the same thing as saying... why can't I power my laptop using the light radiated by all the lightbulbs in my room? If you think about the irridated power of each lightbulb vs. the draw of the laptop, you'd have to cover every square inch of the lit room with photocells to gather it all back up. And you'd need an extreme excess surplus of wattage from the light bulb because of efficiency losses in conversion (both into and from light), and atmospheric losses to consider too.
Why not turn off that 4000W searchlight, and just plug in the damn laptop?
We don't have a natural equivalent of the Sun in the radio range... there just isn't enough power in any (nay, all) of the shorter-length frequencies in any reasonable outdoor area to do anything constructive with, other than maybe operating the earpiece on a crystal radio, or lighting up an RFID tag.
It won't be generated fast enough to form droplets, it'll subliminate (unless the room's temperature was below it's dewpoint, but then you shouldn't be using your laptop in those conditions anyway... heh)
Take a typical FM broadcast tower. Say, DC101 in the DC-metro area. 22.5 kWatts. That power is spread out over the entire surface area of the region. Some tens of hundreds of square miles. And the inverse-square law is a bitch. Your antenna will receive the tiniest fraction of a watt. It's a good thing your radio tuner or cellphone has a filter and amplifier to do something with it. You definitely can't get usable juice from that. No, son, if you were being irridated with narrow band EM waves that were incident in such a fashion to be able to power a laptop (say, 50 watts), without a parabolic antenna, you'd be blind, or dead. This is how microwave ovens work (in the 802.11b range, no less)
I love seeing Quinn get ragged on by his guests. That's the whole damn show! And futurama got picked up by Cartoon Network. Why do you have to bump a good show for one that's already on a different channel?
It _is_ fast, so long as you don't give it anything too complicated, or try to resize the screen too much.:-) It was the best for reading straight HTML docs (like docbook-converted manpages and stuff). But my machines run Moz fast now... it's a fading memory.
I'm telling you what *I* think. Of course the Netscape developers were sure that Netscape 5 was going to fix all Netscape's problems. But nothing there in that interview indicates it would have been a significant departure from 4.x. That would have done nothing to help them, since everyone had already abandoned it for IE 5 (by that time people were already throwing around terms like "Nutscrape").
Slashdot Mirror
it always asks you first (in a stern fashion), and if you're not logged on AS administrator on a windows box, it won't put it in any other user's profile... it contains the damage.
Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if the XPI contained some win32 code that attempts to install other software on the machine using Administrative rights if the user has it...
Just goes to show, don't run as a privledged account... use Run As... for stubborn things like Quicken or certain games.
What year is this, 1995?
It was half-jokingly suggested, but also seriously considered after the whole Firebird/Phoenix shitstorm with those DB people.
He said he wasn't an expert. So of course he'd be forced to make that conclusion. He cannot scratch his itch because he cannot reach it.
This is the kind of response he was talking about that does no good. Rather, you should acknowledge that the area is weak and that more focus needs to be given there in the future.
(Incidentally, I'm interested in OSS in the GIS field. Any ideas/good pointers? Anyone?)
well, it's all well and good, but you lessen the likelyhood that you'll click-delete the wrong message when they're all in your inbox, not yet sorted. (Incidentally, statistical filters are great for sorting mail period.) I get a LOT of email, I'd be lost without it.
I just check the junk mail folder less often than my inbox. And I do get false positives, but it happens infrequently enough that it's not an issue.
You input data. You don't input input.
...this guy seriously believes the earth is a scant 10000 years old. And he dismisses all evidence to the contrary without a throuogh explanation. I can't help but wonder if he treat's other people's research with the same disregard.
(between 2.54 cm per inch as opposed to 39.37 per metre) cannot explain how you can derive 39.77 inches to a metre.
The 2.54 vs. 39.37 is close enough to work for almost everything (except possibly slingshotting mars probes... and then I would use the 2.54 definition because you want to work in SI units internally anyway)
Explain this to me.
How can you supposedly derive incorrect distance conversion factors for distance? You shouldn't NEED to look anything up. Because... inches are DEFINED to be 2.54 centimeters.
So everything is just multiplication. You derive your own conversion factors (it takes too long to look stuff up). I don't understand this at all...
Can't find the strip... "Kafka is twice as funny to neoclassical existentialists. But rape is funny and I don't hear a k. The implication is you can FEEL the k."
I downloaded some open-source WDM drivers for my ATI WinTV card (forget about the AIW, never went near the thing) that worked a hundred times better, and they don't have access to ATI's docs!
WTF?
And where was I bashing AMD, by the way? I don't hate ATI, I hate their non-pro products, especially when it comes to keeping Windows from dying. Nothing can save you from a shitty driver that assumes an UP and no-APIC environment, that's NOT windows' fault.
ATI does have good support for their current RV3xx cards and Fire series, but I don't feel they are as concerned with providing stable drivers for media conversion. They don't make any of those chips, and they don't seem to try to use the driver kits that those chipmakers send, instead going their own way (and doing not a very good job). They should be outsourcing that driver work to Pinnacle or Osprey or somebody that knows what they are doing, and can integrate into Windows WDM properly for use in 3rd party media apps.
use ddr1394 (or equivalent). Just pipe that crap into mplayer.
Every time Windows has ever crashed, it's because of an ATI product and it's shitty drivers.
It's completely unacceptable that my machine crashes because I want to watch TV.
(It's weird because in linux the same products would work fine... like I said, they can't make drivers for shit)
You can use anything with firewire that can record DV. Even a PC with linux would do.
I HAVE TO GET THAT. I'm such a moron. Thanks FCC!
...because it isn't.
Mods, this is OVERRATED. The guy hasn't even the slightest notion of EM or RF theory.
It's just NOT feasible. I mean, this is the same thing as saying... why can't I power my laptop using the light radiated by all the lightbulbs in my room? If you think about the irridated power of each lightbulb vs. the draw of the laptop, you'd have to cover every square inch of the lit room with photocells to gather it all back up. And you'd need an extreme excess surplus of wattage from the light bulb because of efficiency losses in conversion (both into and from light), and atmospheric losses to consider too.
Why not turn off that 4000W searchlight, and just plug in the damn laptop?
We don't have a natural equivalent of the Sun in the radio range... there just isn't enough power in any (nay, all) of the shorter-length frequencies in any reasonable outdoor area to do anything constructive with, other than maybe operating the earpiece on a crystal radio, or lighting up an RFID tag.
It won't be generated fast enough to form droplets, it'll subliminate (unless the room's temperature was below it's dewpoint, but then you shouldn't be using your laptop in those conditions anyway... heh)
The heat transfer would be equally negliable.
Take a typical FM broadcast tower. Say, DC101 in the DC-metro area. 22.5 kWatts. That power is spread out over the entire surface area of the region. Some tens of hundreds of square miles. And the inverse-square law is a bitch. Your antenna will receive the tiniest fraction of a watt. It's a good thing your radio tuner or cellphone has a filter and amplifier to do something with it.
You definitely can't get usable juice from that.
No, son, if you were being irridated with narrow band EM waves that were incident in such a fashion to be able to power a laptop (say, 50 watts), without a parabolic antenna, you'd be blind, or dead. This is how microwave ovens work (in the 802.11b range, no less)
you're right. They did. And they also could provide you with the source code to that kernel, per the GPL requirements.
So what's the problem here? GPL does not free code from patent/IP/trade secret violations, it says so right in the license.
SCO's angle is misappropriation of IP, not copyright violation.
You couldn't cut and paste the side of a barn!
I love seeing Quinn get ragged on by his guests. That's the whole damn show! And futurama got picked up by Cartoon Network. Why do you have to bump a good show for one that's already on a different channel?
It _is_ fast, so long as you don't give it anything too complicated, or try to resize the screen too much. :-)
It was the best for reading straight HTML docs (like docbook-converted manpages and stuff).
But my machines run Moz fast now... it's a fading memory.
<typing>
^D
(sorry)
^D
I'm telling you what *I* think. Of course the Netscape developers were sure that Netscape 5 was going to fix all Netscape's problems. But nothing there in that interview indicates it would have been a significant departure from 4.x. That would have done nothing to help them, since everyone had already abandoned it for IE 5 (by that time people were already throwing around terms like "Nutscrape").