Guys, guys! Same company, different "management era". They still like to proclaim the fact that it's a "family company", as if that actually tells us anything positive? There have been many "family owned" monarchies, few of them considered good by the people they allegedly served.
It's a close cousin to the ever-popular "going green" announcements and product releases. My current favorite for that B.S. is Johnson&Johnson, "a family [owned] company". Then there's "antibacterial" and antimicrobial products.
All of this can perhaps be filed under the heading of Deliberate Mis-Education. Big Pharma is... wait for it... LE-GEN-DARY for that, including even mis-educating general practitioners as well as consumers. Big Pharma would like the world to completely forget that virtually all of its products are DERIVATIVE of something already found in nature, and from which there was usually already a NON-PATENTABLE folk remedy that accomplishes much if not all of what their patented derivatives might do.
Ain't it amazing the vast conspiratorial evil that people can do when they assemble themselves into an upside-down tree with the biggest FUD-makers at the top and everyone else just doing what they're told no-questions-asked?
Why wasn't the legendary flatworm experiment enough to silence this debate and banish the disbelievers? Why wasn't RNA's role? Why wasn't epigenetics enough?
I wonder if there's an emotional component to this disbelief? Too many people don't want to know or believe that their own actions and choices before they "settle down" and have children might also outlive them. All too often there are bad or foolish choices made before children are born, and even if lessons are learned later the children may still be inheriting an "instinctive" wild reckless vibe from parents that could outlast the parents and their explicit efforts to counteract it. I've also heard it said that a kitten's personality is largely predetermined by the personality and behavior of its father, regardless whether the father is even present in the environment after birth. If that is even substantially true, how much different will the story be for humans or any other higher-order mammals?
I know. I wasn't really in doubt myself, rather I was pinning him down for the count. I know with reasonable certainty that he can't produce anything credible to support such an outlandish claim.
Maybe what he really meant to say was that the FLOWERING trees that we know today didn't exist in the Devonian, Cretaceous or Jurassic periods, so that most of what we see as coal now developed from the decomposition of "ferns" - spore-bearing plants the size of trees. What he actually said didn't communicate that, though.
Ummm... no. Ferns don't have seed pods. Ferns produce spores, which are far smaller than most seeds (orchid seeds perhaps being an exception).
I rather doubt your statement is true, that petroleum is comprised of nothing but decomposed fern spore. Could you please cite a reasonably authoritative source?
Lignin is actually a natural "plastic" - polymer - as I learned last year. It's a polymer with a ridiculously long molecular chain; I've wondered if that is what gives it its rigidity. If we can manage to re-purpose lignin as a replacement for synthetic hard plastics, that might ease the crash that is inevitably coming as petroleum becomes increasingly scarce.
How is it that this GENUINE troll manages to retain a mere zero, while my original comment gets aggressively modded down to -1?
So much for any shred of objectivity at Slashdot. And you idiots dare to think of yourselves as superior when you can't even rise above your diseased amygdalas and mod objectively?
I can't speak for others, but I'm not turning to any source to get another version of Windows. When I'm well and truly done with Windows 2000, that is the last version of Windows I will use. The writing was on the wall with Windows XP; I bought my copy of Windows 2000 on the day that Windows XP was released. Some of you may have no choice because of job or career; it will no doubt be useful for me to retain some knowledge for the benefit of family and friends still handcuffed to it, but for myself I have chosen not to reward Microsoft further for what I consider is a job poorly done.
I didn't know that part of ICANN's charter was providing DNA. I don't recall my ISP demanding a cheek swab from me when I signed up, so from where is ICANN getting the samples?
Your first example is not actionable, simply because it's not an objective statement; it makes no specific objective claim or accusation about a person. Your second example, however, is quite specific and objective, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if a judge declared it actionable.
I have long thought it stupid that anyone thinks they should have an absolute right to complete anonymity, whether it's online or anywhere else. You'd better be prepared to own what you say, especially if you're screaming it in the town square for hundreds to hear.
The judge has earned my respect for doing the right thing. It might have been more expedient if he had denied the motion, but he took the more involved ethical route.
I have an iPAQ hx4700; it has a 624 MHz ARM-compatible XScale PXA270(?) CPU in it. There seems to be TONS of software available that runs on it, from the esoteric and highly specialized to the utterly mundane to the outright silly... pretty much a parallel of what's available for anything else. The ONLY real differences are the slower clock speed and, perhaps most significant, the limited display resolution of virtually all devices in which it's used (the hx4700 has a 640x480 display handicapped down to 320x240). The operating system is Windows Mobile, which may not be the "Windows" found on the desktop, but it certainly COULD be if there was motivation to do it. I can also install Familiar Linux and I think a couple other small distros, as well.
So there you go: throw some $$$ at developing some faster versions and install them in devices with reasonable displays, and I don't see any reason why they can't at least augment x86 CPUs if not outright replace them. At the least, they can provide further impetus to the energy-efficient segment of the industry.
I have *never* watched DWTS, as you abbreviated it, but I intend to make an exception now. Is this what the producers intend, to draw people like me out of the woodwork? Dammit, it will work. If it were That Other Steve they had conscripted for the show, I still wouldn't have considered watching. You, however, are cool because you're NOT cool, and you consciously work at keeping it that way. You get extra mod points for an absence of disingenuousness and pretentiousness.
I anticipate that having Steve Wozniak on Dancing With The Stars will make it a bit more "real" than the producers of this "reality" show will intend. Besides, seeing you become more fit might motivate me to fix up the touring bike and work myself up to double centuries again. Maybe I'll even start thinking about entering the Grumpy Old Men division of the Race Across America.
Yeah, I didn't say it was easy. Like I said another, though, do we want to let the problem control us at pejorative random, or do we want to control the problem? Unpleasant or not, I think it's time we figure out (D), OR...... (E) reinvigorate space colonization so that we once again have a new frontier in which to expand. This is really my favorite answer, but it's too science fiction-y for people to even consider.
Slashdot Mirror
Same company!
Guys, guys! Same company, different "management era". They still like to proclaim the fact that it's a "family company", as if that actually tells us anything positive? There have been many "family owned" monarchies, few of them considered good by the people they allegedly served.
It's a close cousin to the ever-popular "going green" announcements and product releases. My current favorite for that B.S. is Johnson&Johnson, "a family [owned] company". Then there's "antibacterial" and antimicrobial products.
All of this can perhaps be filed under the heading of Deliberate Mis-Education. Big Pharma is... wait for it... LE-GEN-DARY for that, including even mis-educating general practitioners as well as consumers. Big Pharma would like the world to completely forget that virtually all of its products are DERIVATIVE of something already found in nature, and from which there was usually already a NON-PATENTABLE folk remedy that accomplishes much if not all of what their patented derivatives might do.
Ain't it amazing the vast conspiratorial evil that people can do when they assemble themselves into an upside-down tree with the biggest FUD-makers at the top and everyone else just doing what they're told no-questions-asked?
Why wasn't the legendary flatworm experiment enough to silence this debate and banish the disbelievers? Why wasn't RNA's role? Why wasn't epigenetics enough?
I wonder if there's an emotional component to this disbelief? Too many people don't want to know or believe that their own actions and choices before they "settle down" and have children might also outlive them. All too often there are bad or foolish choices made before children are born, and even if lessons are learned later the children may still be inheriting an "instinctive" wild reckless vibe from parents that could outlast the parents and their explicit efforts to counteract it. I've also heard it said that a kitten's personality is largely predetermined by the personality and behavior of its father, regardless whether the father is even present in the environment after birth. If that is even substantially true, how much different will the story be for humans or any other higher-order mammals?
I know. I wasn't really in doubt myself, rather I was pinning him down for the count. I know with reasonable certainty that he can't produce anything credible to support such an outlandish claim.
Maybe what he really meant to say was that the FLOWERING trees that we know today didn't exist in the Devonian, Cretaceous or Jurassic periods, so that most of what we see as coal now developed from the decomposition of "ferns" - spore-bearing plants the size of trees. What he actually said didn't communicate that, though.
Neat... it will become a movable feast for our Martian overlords and space aliens, then?
Are all proteins officially considered plastics, then? Are all proteins polymers? Is "plastic" and "polymer" fully interchangeable?
Ummm... no. Ferns don't have seed pods. Ferns produce spores, which are far smaller than most seeds (orchid seeds perhaps being an exception).
I rather doubt your statement is true, that petroleum is comprised of nothing but decomposed fern spore. Could you please cite a reasonably authoritative source?
Lignin is actually a natural "plastic" - polymer - as I learned last year. It's a polymer with a ridiculously long molecular chain; I've wondered if that is what gives it its rigidity. If we can manage to re-purpose lignin as a replacement for synthetic hard plastics, that might ease the crash that is inevitably coming as petroleum becomes increasingly scarce.
This is a rehash of an item about this, what, a week ago?
How is it that this GENUINE troll manages to retain a mere zero, while my original comment gets aggressively modded down to -1?
So much for any shred of objectivity at Slashdot. And you idiots dare to think of yourselves as superior when you can't even rise above your diseased amygdalas and mod objectively?
Eh, call me when they decide to make it a national holiday and give me the day off. Bah, humbug!
He's right, of course. The bias here is ridiculously obvious.
You're missing a zero in that ratio, I hope? That ratio is an order of magnitude off from BitTorrent sainthood.
I can't speak for others, but I'm not turning to any source to get another version of Windows. When I'm well and truly done with Windows 2000, that is the last version of Windows I will use. The writing was on the wall with Windows XP; I bought my copy of Windows 2000 on the day that Windows XP was released. Some of you may have no choice because of job or career; it will no doubt be useful for me to retain some knowledge for the benefit of family and friends still handcuffed to it, but for myself I have chosen not to reward Microsoft further for what I consider is a job poorly done.
How could I resist having a bit of fun with someone's very public typing error? It's just my way of asking, "What, never heard of proofreading?"
I didn't know that part of ICANN's charter was providing DNA. I don't recall my ISP demanding a cheek swab from me when I signed up, so from where is ICANN getting the samples?
Your first example is not actionable, simply because it's not an objective statement; it makes no specific objective claim or accusation about a person. Your second example, however, is quite specific and objective, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if a judge declared it actionable.
I have long thought it stupid that anyone thinks they should have an absolute right to complete anonymity, whether it's online or anywhere else. You'd better be prepared to own what you say, especially if you're screaming it in the town square for hundreds to hear.
The judge has earned my respect for doing the right thing. It might have been more expedient if he had denied the motion, but he took the more involved ethical route.
The OP should be asking how to argue whether ANY software is secure. I believe this qualifies as mis-framing the debate (again).
I mean who doesn't want a big-ass kiosk in their home.
Buy one and use it as a diaper changing table. That's a fitting secondary use for it, don't you think?
I have an iPAQ hx4700; it has a 624 MHz ARM-compatible XScale PXA270(?) CPU in it. There seems to be TONS of software available that runs on it, from the esoteric and highly specialized to the utterly mundane to the outright silly... pretty much a parallel of what's available for anything else. The ONLY real differences are the slower clock speed and, perhaps most significant, the limited display resolution of virtually all devices in which it's used (the hx4700 has a 640x480 display handicapped down to 320x240). The operating system is Windows Mobile, which may not be the "Windows" found on the desktop, but it certainly COULD be if there was motivation to do it. I can also install Familiar Linux and I think a couple other small distros, as well.
So there you go: throw some $$$ at developing some faster versions and install them in devices with reasonable displays, and I don't see any reason why they can't at least augment x86 CPUs if not outright replace them. At the least, they can provide further impetus to the energy-efficient segment of the industry.
It was pretty clear he was emotionally disturbed about something to do with NVidia. So much for journalistic impartiality....
I have *never* watched DWTS, as you abbreviated it, but I intend to make an exception now. Is this what the producers intend, to draw people like me out of the woodwork? Dammit, it will work. If it were That Other Steve they had conscripted for the show, I still wouldn't have considered watching. You, however, are cool because you're NOT cool, and you consciously work at keeping it that way. You get extra mod points for an absence of disingenuousness and pretentiousness.
I anticipate that having Steve Wozniak on Dancing With The Stars will make it a bit more "real" than the producers of this "reality" show will intend. Besides, seeing you become more fit might motivate me to fix up the touring bike and work myself up to double centuries again. Maybe I'll even start thinking about entering the Grumpy Old Men division of the Race Across America.
You'd better check what I actually said, and then quit what you've been snorting.
Yeah, I didn't say it was easy. Like I said another, though, do we want to let the problem control us at pejorative random, or do we want to control the problem? Unpleasant or not, I think it's time we figure out (D), OR ... ... (E) reinvigorate space colonization so that we once again have a new frontier in which to expand. This is really my favorite answer, but it's too science fiction-y for people to even consider.