Good question. I'd guess no. Part of the allure for the gov't in contracting out to private firms is that the gov't can delegate accountability to the contractor. "It wasn't our fault the terrorists/indentity thieves/Germans got the personal details of every registered voter/sex offender/childcare provider in Idaho, it's the fault of ACME Inc. They told us they were secure! It's right here in their sales pitch document! Let's lynch 'em!"
After IE 7 introduced tabs, anti-aliased text and PNG transparency, it looks like MS is again bringing up the rear.
For a company who got to where it was through innovation (yes, MS got to the dominant market position through innovation. The anti-competitve stuff came later), this constant stream of "Hey, yeah Google/Mozilla/ Apache/etc... That IS a good idea!" does not bode well for MS.
Well it's either leave AOL users at risk, or have them at risk of having their session rejected in an unpredictable fashion, causing the users to get pissed off, complain, and possible leave the comapny in favour of a less secure but with a better UE competitor. If you bring that choice foward to the guy who makes business deicsions where you work, which do you think they'll go for?
One should ensure that a given session ID is not used across multiple c-class ip addresses (e.g. it should always come from x.x.x.* where * can change throughout the session). The reason why I say c-class and not full ip address is that the ip address of AOL users can sometimes rotate mid-session (more info).
For example: you get an HTTP request from 66.35.250.150 (using/.'s ip for example purposes). You assign it a session ID and service the request.
Now you get a second HTTP request, with the same session ID, from 212.58.228.155 (BBC's ip, used for example purposes). This request must be blocked, and the session killed, since the session has potentially been comprimised.
Seriously, this sounds like features that were mature in Half Life.
Way to go! What will they come up with next? Perhaps a revolutionary notion of connecting computers together into a "network", or a device emitting a cohesive beam of parallel light called a "laser", or a protective layer around the Earth called the "ozone".
The company hopes to gather a whopping total budget of $75 million
(from the linked article)
They hope to gather $75 mil? Based on what? A kiss and a promise to deliver a smoking hot MMO?
While there is a sucker born every minute, are there enough to generate $75M for Interplay? After the whole Titus fiasco, do these guys actually have any credibility at all?
I love Fallout. Fallout 2 is one of the best games ever made. I would love to see more fallout games. But I'm not going to hold my breath. This looks too much like a VC grab.
I think he cares about destroying the competition as a means to make money. MS's business strategy can be summed up as "Establish a monopoly, and the money will follow!"
What about pretending to be you? That's how must of this works.
"Hello, yes this is Mr. Stapleton, I need the complete logs of all my internet traffic for the last 4 years. You're pulling it up now? Great, I'll hold... Hello? Yes, great. Yes I do indeed love the gay porn, but can you tell me about my bittorrent traffic though?"
Boycott corporate music. Support your local (or another location's for that matter) indie music scene. Go to open mic nights at clubs, if you like something you hear buy their burned-on-a-pc cd's with fuzzy photocopied covers with third rate photoshop work(lense flares are teh awesome!!). There's more great music out there than what the idiots at BMG float.
A lot of people are missing the point. This isn't about choice, or scientific debate, or agreeing to disagree.
The NTSA have themselves stated that they turned this down because they were concerned about their funding, instead showing a movie that is at least if not more bent in the opposite direction.
They said they're afraid of losing money. They never said they thought Inconvenient Truth is a crock of shit or that Gore is a snake oil salesman. They simply said if they do this, they may lose money.
This isn't about principles, this isn't about debate, and it isn't about educating kids. They've been bought and they admit it plain as day.
Agreed. It's much easier for browsing habit monitoring software to search for (_Y_) than the bitmap equivalent, thereby making/. more dangerous than actual pr0n!!
It always seems to me that when scientists 'debunk' global warming naysayers, they result to attacks on methology(sp?) then their facts. To me it screams Gallileo and Darwin when scientists were attacked because they went against the tide
That's a bit of a leap there, comparing the there-is-no-global-warming "scientists" (with degress in journalism no less) to Gallileo and Darwin.
WRT attacks on methodology, consider:
We have two numbers, and they are 5 and 6. The UN says they add up to 11. I say they are wrong, observe:
5 + 6
6 + 5
HEY LOOK OVER THERE!!!
12
Sometimes the methodology is the problem.
In this case, the methodology of cherry picking (other comments have explained this well), over-simplification (using theoretical black bodies to model empirical data), and comparison of "apples to oranges", ie global temperature trends to europe temperature trends, are attack-worthy.
Your attempt to relate this debunking, even if it is a bit sensationalised (cock-a-hoop, etc...) to religious-inspired attacks upon people advocating logical thought and divorcement of science from dogma is spurious.
I'm perfectly happy to read articles, studies, etc... (light on the details though, IANACS) claiming humanity's impact on global warming is minimal provided they aren't using tricks and written "sleight of hand" to make their points. The more misinformation I read claiming global warming is not humanity's fault, the more I believe it is our fault. If there were valid reasons to doubt this, oil execs would be shouting it from the rooftops.
Actually, there are some solid pieces in the article. Unfortunately, they're almost lost admist the editorialising ("cok-a-hoop" and the like as you point out). In essence, Mr. Monbiot sinks to the level of Mr. Mickton. Unfortunate given that he derides these same techniques he uses.
The 3 scenarios of James Hansen and the black body stuff are valid.
The main thing preventing any further Firefly development is that Fox owns the rights, and Whedon refuses to work with them cause of how they bollocksed (bolloxed?) the first season.
Slashdot Mirror
More importantly, when does the "Hot Electroshock" mod come out?
Good question. I'd guess no. Part of the allure for the gov't in contracting out to private firms is that the gov't can delegate accountability to the contractor. "It wasn't our fault the terrorists/indentity thieves/Germans got the personal details of every registered voter/sex offender/childcare provider in Idaho, it's the fault of ACME Inc. They told us they were secure! It's right here in their sales pitch document! Let's lynch 'em!"
After IE 7 introduced tabs, anti-aliased text and PNG transparency, it looks like MS is again bringing up the rear.
For a company who got to where it was through innovation (yes, MS got to the dominant market position through innovation. The anti-competitve stuff came later), this constant stream of "Hey, yeah Google/Mozilla/ Apache/etc... That IS a good idea!" does not bode well for MS.
Alliterative Article Appelation Aggravates Argumentative Arbiter of Arbitrary And Academic Article Arrangement
All versions of Safari? Surely you jest...
Safari 1.0 was the biggest piece of crap ever. It was more of a pain in the arse than IE.
Well it's either leave AOL users at risk, or have them at risk of having their session rejected in an unpredictable fashion, causing the users to get pissed off, complain, and possible leave the comapny in favour of a less secure but with a better UE competitor. If you bring that choice foward to the guy who makes business deicsions where you work, which do you think they'll go for?
One should ensure that a given session ID is not used across multiple c-class ip addresses (e.g. it should always come from x.x.x.* where * can change throughout the session). The reason why I say c-class and not full ip address is that the ip address of AOL users can sometimes rotate mid-session (more info).
/.'s ip for example purposes). You assign it a session ID and service the request.
For example: you get an HTTP request from 66.35.250.150 (using
Now you get a second HTTP request, with the same session ID, from 212.58.228.155 (BBC's ip, used for example purposes). This request must be blocked, and the session killed, since the session has potentially been comprimised.
Seriously, this sounds like features that were mature in Half Life.
Way to go! What will they come up with next? Perhaps a revolutionary notion of connecting computers together into a "network", or a device emitting a cohesive beam of parallel light called a "laser", or a protective layer around the Earth called the "ozone".
They hope to gather $75 mil? Based on what? A kiss and a promise to deliver a smoking hot MMO?
While there is a sucker born every minute, are there enough to generate $75M for Interplay? After the whole Titus fiasco, do these guys actually have any credibility at all?
I love Fallout. Fallout 2 is one of the best games ever made. I would love to see more fallout games. But I'm not going to hold my breath. This looks too much like a VC grab.
The solution is easy! We use cold fusion to buffer. Since there's no steam circuit to heat up, we can have it going very quickly.
And to those who complai about the weather, once we build the space elevator, we can put solar collector in orbit and beam power down to earth!
With all that power, we can finaly build robots to clean our homes, cook our food, even "companion" models!
Cold fusion, solar energy, space elevators, and robo wives! I think I just messed my mylar pants!
I think he cares about destroying the competition as a means to make money. MS's business strategy can be summed up as "Establish a monopoly, and the money will follow!"
What about pretending to be you? That's how must of this works.
"Hello, yes this is Mr. Stapleton, I need the complete logs of all my internet traffic for the last 4 years. You're pulling it up now? Great, I'll hold... Hello? Yes, great. Yes I do indeed love the gay porn, but can you tell me about my bittorrent traffic though?"
Boycott corporate music. Support your local (or another location's for that matter) indie music scene. Go to open mic nights at clubs, if you like something you hear buy their burned-on-a-pc cd's with fuzzy photocopied covers with third rate photoshop work(lense flares are teh awesome!!). There's more great music out there than what the idiots at BMG float.
They'd just blame piracy.
Something in there isn't right. I think this is meant to be either
OR
A lot of people are missing the point. This isn't about choice, or scientific debate, or agreeing to disagree.
The NTSA have themselves stated that they turned this down because they were concerned about their funding, instead showing a movie that is at least if not more bent in the opposite direction.
They said they're afraid of losing money. They never said they thought Inconvenient Truth is a crock of shit or that Gore is a snake oil salesman. They simply said if they do this, they may lose money.
This isn't about principles, this isn't about debate, and it isn't about educating kids. They've been bought and they admit it plain as day.
Agreed. It's much easier for browsing habit monitoring software to search for (_Y_) than the bitmap equivalent, thereby making /. more dangerous than actual pr0n!!
it wants its emerging privacy risk back.
The fact that the "proof" in my example above lacks any substance is entirely my point. Perhaps it more fitting than YOU realise...
I know you are but what am I?
As if they care if anyone enjoys it.
The real question is how long before they demand that they be the ones to control it, including full access to the user logs.
That's a bit of a leap there, comparing the there-is-no-global-warming "scientists" (with degress in journalism no less) to Gallileo and Darwin.
WRT attacks on methodology, consider:
Sometimes the methodology is the problem.
In this case, the methodology of cherry picking (other comments have explained this well), over-simplification (using theoretical black bodies to model empirical data), and comparison of "apples to oranges", ie global temperature trends to europe temperature trends, are attack-worthy.
Your attempt to relate this debunking, even if it is a bit sensationalised (cock-a-hoop, etc...) to religious-inspired attacks upon people advocating logical thought and divorcement of science from dogma is spurious.
I'm perfectly happy to read articles, studies, etc... (light on the details though, IANACS) claiming humanity's impact on global warming is minimal provided they aren't using tricks and written "sleight of hand" to make their points. The more misinformation I read claiming global warming is not humanity's fault, the more I believe it is our fault. If there were valid reasons to doubt this, oil execs would be shouting it from the rooftops.
Actually, there are some solid pieces in the article. Unfortunately, they're almost lost admist the editorialising ("cok-a-hoop" and the like as you point out). In essence, Mr. Monbiot sinks to the level of Mr. Mickton. Unfortunate given that he derides these same techniques he uses.
The 3 scenarios of James Hansen and the black body stuff are valid.
"Excuse me, Your Majesty, but 'nipflot' is over budget again..."
"Off with his head!"
The main thing preventing any further Firefly development is that Fox owns the rights, and Whedon refuses to work with them cause of how they bollocksed (bolloxed?) the first season.
No way, alligators are much more personable.