And how many other projects failed for poor workmanship or planning? I never said it impeded the overall Soviet space program; that is your own inflation of what I said. I simply noted that it was poor craftsmanship. What you've failed to grasp is that the Soviets managed their space program the same way they managed their military assets in World War II: they relied on quantity to carry the day; three T-34s for every one higher quality Panther or Tiger. For every successful mission you list above, there were quiet failures. Unlike NASA, the Soviets were prepared to take losses in stride.
I didn't mention rounded edges. Those probably DO "matter to science" - or at least the survival of the instruments to perform it - in some specific situations, but I didn't mention the lack of them.
Boy, the Soviet space program really operated on a shoestring and with limited underpaid talent, didn't it? My grandfather could have made that thing in his little machine shop at the back of their quarter-acre property. Actually, he would have produced something that looked and functioned far better than this clunky little thing (the U.S. military got a lot of WWII machined parts from him). Good grief, the cuts in the plates look jagged or uneven and I could swear some welds are visible. It looks like a hobbyist project. So I guess the Soviet space program was just a hobby for the Politburo....
I don't think I'd want a bunch of micro-rockets in my blood stream blowing hydrogen bubbles. What happens when I get cut next to someone smoking or a stove with all that hydrogen in my veins?
Why the fuck did some idiot mod my post "Offtopic"? Is he such a child that he's never heard the Grinch song and doesn't know who Thurl Ravenscroft is AND couldn't be bothered to Google the name and discover that his deep booming voice was quite famous?
This is one of those times when I really wish there was some accountability in the Slashdot moderation system. People should be held responsible for irresponsible use of the moderation system.
why on earth would anybody think that the search bar would possibly be optional?
I dunno... because these days quite often such adware actually IS "opt-in"? Though an installer might do its damnedest to presume you will "opt in" and dissuade you from opting out, it still technically presents the option. Example: CNET's latest (or recent) wrapper installer for their third-party software downloads. Historically such installers often didn't make it optional, but there's been enough bad publicity and enough litigation to make devs and vendors very hesitant to deny the choice.
Clearly this is what this fellow expected to be the case.
I have an HP laptop. It has a number of profoundly dumb design choices, like for instance putting the disk activity LED on the side where you can't see it. I managed to correct that, with some bit of personal effort.)
Perhaps those little mistakes reflect the bigger corporate ones... or the other way around? What's the sayings... what goes around comes around, or you reap what you sow?
Which "TFA", exactly? Do you mean the primary one that is nothing more than a download link? What exactly was this target of your ire supposed to read, the raw data stream of the download?
(I know you meant the third link in the summary as "TFA", but there was humor to be had from your omission.)
To me, the purpose of a patent or copyright is give the creator or agent a fair amount of time to profit off the creation. Clearly some of this is broken, i.e. copyrights that go on forever, patents that are too general. OTOH, if a firms needs 5-10 years of production to support R&D costs, then the patent system is clearly there to allow that to happen.
Agreed. Roughly the same applies to copyrights. "Piracy" of a 5- or 10-year-old movie should be an oxymoron, because by then it should already be in the public domain.
I hope you're right. If that comes to pass they should be thankful for that bit of good fortune to make up for their lack of focus and priority during the trial.
I know how the foreman is selected; I was somewhat unwillingly selected as a foreman myself when I was 21. That process in fact makes this all the more worrisome, because an "expert" manipulator might be more likely to be selected as foreman. Then by virtue of being the foreman he's even better positioned to manipulate other jurors. Politics in the jury room....
I can guess which statement you believed you refuted, even though you were playing coy and didn't say, but you didn't refute it.
I'd also like to know what you think constitutes "work" in this context of getting unethical people to behave ethically. The tip of a sword at Black Hat's carotid?
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, didn't think about that! Some nameless geek in Sacramento owes me a finder's fee for funneling him a buyer.
Russia Wants a Hypersonic Bomber
What a coincidence! I happen to be selling one on Craigslist right now.
Don't they have fat-free diet cheetos now?
And how many other projects failed for poor workmanship or planning? I never said it impeded the overall Soviet space program; that is your own inflation of what I said. I simply noted that it was poor craftsmanship. What you've failed to grasp is that the Soviets managed their space program the same way they managed their military assets in World War II: they relied on quantity to carry the day; three T-34s for every one higher quality Panther or Tiger. For every successful mission you list above, there were quiet failures. Unlike NASA, the Soviets were prepared to take losses in stride.
Balsa?
I didn't mention rounded edges. Those probably DO "matter to science" - or at least the survival of the instruments to perform it - in some specific situations, but I didn't mention the lack of them.
It DIDN'T achieve its goals, possibly because the lander that was supposed to deliver it was constructed the same roughshod way.
Read the WHOLE article, stupid.
Boy, the Soviet space program really operated on a shoestring and with limited underpaid talent, didn't it? My grandfather could have made that thing in his little machine shop at the back of their quarter-acre property. Actually, he would have produced something that looked and functioned far better than this clunky little thing (the U.S. military got a lot of WWII machined parts from him). Good grief, the cuts in the plates look jagged or uneven and I could swear some welds are visible. It looks like a hobbyist project. So I guess the Soviet space program was just a hobby for the Politburo....
So are you saying the Diaspora crowd *are* tools, or are you saying they're people willing to call a tool a tool?
If it's the latter, you might not wanna join Diaspora, unless being called a tool makes you feel useful....
I don't think I'd want a bunch of micro-rockets in my blood stream blowing hydrogen bubbles. What happens when I get cut next to someone smoking or a stove with all that hydrogen in my veins?
Why the fuck did some idiot mod my post "Offtopic"? Is he such a child that he's never heard the Grinch song and doesn't know who Thurl Ravenscroft is AND couldn't be bothered to Google the name and discover that his deep booming voice was quite famous?
This is one of those times when I really wish there was some accountability in the Slashdot moderation system. People should be held responsible for irresponsible use of the moderation system.
why on earth would anybody think that the search bar would possibly be optional?
I dunno... because these days quite often such adware actually IS "opt-in"? Though an installer might do its damnedest to presume you will "opt in" and dissuade you from opting out, it still technically presents the option. Example: CNET's latest (or recent) wrapper installer for their third-party software downloads. Historically such installers often didn't make it optional, but there's been enough bad publicity and enough litigation to make devs and vendors very hesitant to deny the choice.
Clearly this is what this fellow expected to be the case.
I have an HP laptop. It has a number of profoundly dumb design choices, like for instance putting the disk activity LED on the side where you can't see it. I managed to correct that, with some bit of personal effort.)
Perhaps those little mistakes reflect the bigger corporate ones... or the other way around? What's the sayings... what goes around comes around, or you reap what you sow?
Where's Thurl Ravenscroft when ya need him? I'm felling really Grinchy.
Which "TFA", exactly? Do you mean the primary one that is nothing more than a download link? What exactly was this target of your ire supposed to read, the raw data stream of the download?
(I know you meant the third link in the summary as "TFA", but there was humor to be had from your omission.)
I read those dozen quotes two dozen times, so that makes me an expert.
To me, the purpose of a patent or copyright is give the creator or agent a fair amount of time to profit off the creation. Clearly some of this is broken, i.e. copyrights that go on forever, patents that are too general. OTOH, if a firms needs 5-10 years of production to support R&D costs, then the patent system is clearly there to allow that to happen.
Agreed. Roughly the same applies to copyrights. "Piracy" of a 5- or 10-year-old movie should be an oxymoron, because by then it should already be in the public domain.
I hope you're right. If that comes to pass they should be thankful for that bit of good fortune to make up for their lack of focus and priority during the trial.
I know how the foreman is selected; I was somewhat unwillingly selected as a foreman myself when I was 21. That process in fact makes this all the more worrisome, because an "expert" manipulator might be more likely to be selected as foreman. Then by virtue of being the foreman he's even better positioned to manipulate other jurors. Politics in the jury room....
How does the judicial system compensate for a jury foreman aggressively promoting himself as a de facto expert witness?
... M.A.I.P.I., aka Mutually Assured Intellectual Property Infringement.
My mirror tests me every morning now. Incidentally I fail every morning. Tomorrow I'm gonna try wearing a Guy Fawkes mask to see what happens.
Don't you guys get it? Clearly it was how he stole their TSA logo and put it on an unauthorized t-shirt that got him in trouble.
I can guess which statement you believed you refuted, even though you were playing coy and didn't say, but you didn't refute it.
I'd also like to know what you think constitutes "work" in this context of getting unethical people to behave ethically. The tip of a sword at Black Hat's carotid?