True, some things are harder to find than others, but that is not an excuse for not indexing the entire Internet. It's not like the searches with 10000+ results will become any less manageable if they double in size.
I think it's good that Google has strong competition. All the beter for us, consumers.
Am I the only one who finished reading TFA? It looks like virtually everyone dropped the ball before going through section 1.
Wong is a comedian, and this is not a serious analysis. This is a very fun read. If you go past section 1, he will tell you why the growth chart matters and how MMORP will become the new reality. It actually gets better all the way until the end, when he starts comparing economies (he notes that our "real" money is largely fictional and electronic already!), he also talks about porn (he's got a great taste there), sex, relationships, and in the fvery end about philosophy of politics. As far as David Wong goes, this is one of the best things I've seen.
After years of going to Russian Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and AoG churches I can say that the kind of things being said from the pulpit depend in large on a person of the speaker. Still, some generalizations can be made.
It seems to be a common problem in Protestant churches that preachers speak for hours on virtues and vices, but offer no meaningful commentary on the current events. The notable exception to that was 9/11; I distinctly remember the pastors justifying Bush's decision to invade Iraq.
I was pleasantly surprised by the Catholic priests, who seemed to be giving shorter and at the same time much more relevant homilies. You know, like how Iraq war sucks and why, how people starve in Africa and why, etc., etc. Keep in mind that these are Californian Catholics -- i.e. they are as liberal as Catholics get.
Altogether, it is my opinion that organized religion (and organized Christianity in particular) does not comment on events. It just does not pay. I am not a hater by any means, but let us be honest: nearly all organized religions are done for either profit or power. All mainstream religions are. Most of what preachers say is supposed to be a sedative, because people are willing to pay for it. Like Nietzsche said, they preach and worship the art of having a good night's sleep.
Having always felt that way, I was always getting my share of religion from "amateur priests" -- religious people who have no vested interest in the Organization.
Shutting down unwanted communication channels is the single most reliable way of fighting dissent. Russia is a great example of how all pre-Internet channels can be controlled with great results. Today's China shows that Internet can also be effectively controlled.
You are probably right in claiming that the actual terrorists don't mind; it is the British public that is loosing its ability to hear from people who are for terror. The government is trying to prevent dissent among its own constituency.
By following these simple steps you can encapsulate any sensitive and/or offensive content in a Slashdot post, and so make it practically indistinguishable from thousands of other posts. In fact, your success rate is directly proportional to how offensive your content is.
(1) Copy and paste offensive content into the Slashdot submission form.
(2) To ensure +5 interesting, prepend the post with "I'll probably get modded down for this, but..."
(3) To ensure +5 insightful, append "...just like 1984." to the post.
Who would want to invest a lot of time and money to develop something requiring research only to have competitors strip it down, analyze how it works and build their own product to sell much cheaper?
The public would do it, and the government should do it. What kind of drugs are we talking about? Cancer? Let's talk cancer. My brother was diagnosed with a curable cancer not so long ago. He was prescribed a dozen or so $1500 shots. AFAIK, if he wasn't covered by our parents' insurance, he would be screwed. Fscked.
It is a fact that cancer is a very common kind of illness. Not many people above 30 can say that none of their friends or relations ever suffered from cancer. Because of that, there is a real possibility for funding some of the research by voluntary donations.
Also, as crazy as it may sound, US government could for a change give us our taxes back by pouring some cash into the pharmaceutical R&D! I just find it unfair on a very fundamental level that people without health insurance are unable to get the best treatment because they cannot afford non-generic drugs. Is access to the healthcare a human right or not? How can it be illegal for me to heal myself in the most efficient manner known to humankind?
A mind experiment for you: in the near future nearly all food is manufactured by corporations. All sources of food are genetically engineered and patented. I cannot afford either to buy food or to license it out. Growing my own food would be illegal and bad for economy. After all, if genetic engineering R&D is not protected by patents, who would be stupid enough to do it? Who would bring us new, better sources of food?
Since I cannot afford food, I will do a favour to the society by starving myself to death. Resorting to growing my own food illegally would be highly egoistical and would certainly destroy the society as we know it.
I just don't have the patience to spend a whole bunch of time learning Linux apps that are 'almost' there in terms of their UI.
Heh that's the reason I dislike both KDE and Gnome. They both have too many features for me, and too few for my windows-loving friends. IMHO, if you want to get the most out of your Linux, get a geeky distro like Slack and toss away that KDE/Gnome monstorocity. Regardless of your distro choice, check out lighter shells like WindowMaker and XFCE. They really encourage you to open up the hood.
Take printer setup for example. I am writing this article from a Powerbook, which has CUPS printing, just like Linux, and a custom interface for it, just like KDE. OSX interface is, arguably, more user friendly. But you know what? Every time I need to set up a printer I run into some kind of a problem, be it with a driver or with Windows authentication. On Linux, as well as on OSX, I always end up using the CUPS's native Web interface, which is actually better than anything else I've seen.
You sound like you have the proper aptitude. It is likely that after only a few months of learning you will like bash CLI more than any GUI tools.
Windows computers do too process emails. You know, those emails with funny binary attachments... I think you are right in a way. So far we very consciously suppressed the computational capabilities of the Internet. The article implies that it's gonna change. But why?
If we cover the Earth with enough quality fiber, we can probably channel sunlight 24/7 from the light to the dark side. I cannot imagine if that is ever going to become practical, but it sure sounds great for the environment.
Hmm. Are you seeing them in MPEG-compressed movies?
I actually just did some testing on Powerbook LCD and Viewsonic CRT. I tried
(1) Dragging a white window and looking for a "ghost" on the black background. No difference at all.
(2) Dragging the same white window while keeping my eyes on icons inside. Bam! On CRT I see the icons clearly for as long as I can keep up with them at all. On LCD they get blurred very notably even at a rather low speed. Of course, no one gives a damn about window's contents while dragging, so it's no wonder I first noticed it after using my lappy for a year.
As for movies, I stand by my earlier statement. I just finished watching the complete Samuray Champloo. A few episodes on CRT, but most of them on LCD. As far as picture quality goes, can't say that one is better than the other in any way.
With the CRT and movie screen, your brain is what stitches the images together, inferring the motion. With the LCD, you actually see the image change, and your brain perceives that as a smear. IIRC, what's happening is that persistence of vision is working against you and you end up seeing two frames at once.
So, it's all a mind trick? Nothing a daily meditation cannot solve...
No, seriously. Seeing like some people swear with all their gods that they've never seen ghosting, I am starting to think that this is a problem partly induced by the inner workings of the brain. I wonder if the picture quality will improve with time for a person who uses nothing but LCD.
For myself, I have a 1 year old Powerbook. I cannot recall any "ghosting", and I've watched plenty of DVDs, AVIs, and played some WoW on it.
If I was to buy a TV (like that will ever happen), and if my only concern was the picture, I would certainly go for LCD.
Hey funny you mentioned that. I cannot stand anything less than 75Hz, and strongly prefer 85Hz or higher. I can actually see the difference as I switch from 60 to 75 to 85, 60 being outright painful. And yet when I get to fix or use some friend's computer, I often see that they are running it at 60Hz. After several attempts of trying to explain what is wrong with that picture, I just adapted a rule of surreptitiously changing the refresh rate while the owner is looking away. After all, if they are able to notice it, they can only thank me later.
You are right, I fell behind on the Linux thing. That started after I got an Apple laptop, so now I am using OS X to do all my work. That, and also the fact that I never liked KDE and have been using WMaker almost exclusively since it's been added to Slack.
You have to understand me in order to see why I am so pissed that it is taking so long to make xterm transparent. I am one of those guys who spend days looking for a cell phone that does not have any features. All I need from a window manager is
(1) launch bar thing
(2) shortcuts for switching between windows (3) wallpaper
(4) minimal yet stylish decorations.
If a window manager has anything extra and I cannot disable it -- it sucks.
So as far as I am concerned, window managers already achieved perfection, thanks to WMaker, xfce, and a few others (OS X native one is pretty darn awesome in that respect). Transparent windows are the most vital feature now to be implemented, because anything else would be superfluous.
To be a devil's advocate: does KDE have that much of transparency? IMS, X11 has no transparency, and I am not aware of any work done in that direction, and yet every KDE advocate in this forum mentions it along with icon previews. WTF?
(I'm just mad because I really really want transparent terminal windows in Linux. This is by far the sexiest aspect of OS X's interface.)
True that. My flash is still enabled, because I can suffer it after nuking ads with adblock on all sites I frequent. But I could as well disable it. The only flash site I can think of visiting is homestarrunner.com.
Slashdot Mirror
True, some things are harder to find than others, but that is not an excuse for not indexing the entire Internet. It's not like the searches with 10000+ results will become any less manageable if they double in size.
I think it's good that Google has strong competition. All the beter for us, consumers.
Am I the only one who finished reading TFA? It looks like virtually everyone dropped the ball before going through section 1.
Wong is a comedian, and this is not a serious analysis. This is a very fun read. If you go past section 1, he will tell you why the growth chart matters and how MMORP will become the new reality. It actually gets better all the way until the end, when he starts comparing economies (he notes that our "real" money is largely fictional and electronic already!), he also talks about porn (he's got a great taste there), sex, relationships, and in the fvery end about philosophy of politics. As far as David Wong goes, this is one of the best things I've seen.
After years of going to Russian Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and AoG churches I can say that the kind of things being said from the pulpit depend in large on a person of the speaker. Still, some generalizations can be made.
It seems to be a common problem in Protestant churches that preachers speak for hours on virtues and vices, but offer no meaningful commentary on the current events. The notable exception to that was 9/11; I distinctly remember the pastors justifying Bush's decision to invade Iraq.
I was pleasantly surprised by the Catholic priests, who seemed to be giving shorter and at the same time much more relevant homilies. You know, like how Iraq war sucks and why, how people starve in Africa and why, etc., etc. Keep in mind that these are Californian Catholics -- i.e. they are as liberal as Catholics get.
Altogether, it is my opinion that organized religion (and organized Christianity in particular) does not comment on events. It just does not pay. I am not a hater by any means, but let us be honest: nearly all organized religions are done for either profit or power. All mainstream religions are. Most of what preachers say is supposed to be a sedative, because people are willing to pay for it. Like Nietzsche said, they preach and worship the art of having a good night's sleep.
Having always felt that way, I was always getting my share of religion from "amateur priests" -- religious people who have no vested interest in the Organization.
I am confused on two points.
(1) The list is 99 entries too long.
(2) Paratrooper is not on there.
I'm honest, but I don't like the assumption that I am not Hey, I'm not honest, but I still totally hate the assumption that I'm not. Go figure...
Shutting down unwanted communication channels is the single most reliable way of fighting dissent. Russia is a great example of how all pre-Internet channels can be controlled with great results. Today's China shows that Internet can also be effectively controlled.
You are probably right in claiming that the actual terrorists don't mind; it is the British public that is loosing its ability to hear from people who are for terror. The government is trying to prevent dissent among its own constituency.
How To Tunnel Content Through Slashdot.
By following these simple steps you can encapsulate any sensitive and/or offensive content in a Slashdot post, and so make it practically indistinguishable from thousands of other posts. In fact, your success rate is directly proportional to how offensive your content is.
(1) Copy and paste offensive content into the Slashdot submission form.
(2) To ensure +5 interesting, prepend the post with "I'll probably get modded down for this, but..."
(3) To ensure +5 insightful, append "...just like 1984." to the post.
The subway was good in Moscow 7 years ago, when I left. But the buses...
LOL comments like yours make meta-moderation worthwhile...
Who would want to invest a lot of time and money to develop something requiring research only to have competitors strip it down, analyze how it works and build their own product to sell much cheaper?
The public would do it, and the government should do it. What kind of drugs are we talking about? Cancer? Let's talk cancer. My brother was diagnosed with a curable cancer not so long ago. He was prescribed a dozen or so $1500 shots. AFAIK, if he wasn't covered by our parents' insurance, he would be screwed. Fscked.
It is a fact that cancer is a very common kind of illness. Not many people above 30 can say that none of their friends or relations ever suffered from cancer. Because of that, there is a real possibility for funding some of the research by voluntary donations.
Also, as crazy as it may sound, US government could for a change give us our taxes back by pouring some cash into the pharmaceutical R&D! I just find it unfair on a very fundamental level that people without health insurance are unable to get the best treatment because they cannot afford non-generic drugs. Is access to the healthcare a human right or not? How can it be illegal for me to heal myself in the most efficient manner known to humankind?
A mind experiment for you: in the near future nearly all food is manufactured by corporations. All sources of food are genetically engineered and patented. I cannot afford either to buy food or to license it out. Growing my own food would be illegal and bad for economy. After all, if genetic engineering R&D is not protected by patents, who would be stupid enough to do it? Who would bring us new, better sources of food?
Since I cannot afford food, I will do a favour to the society by starving myself to death. Resorting to growing my own food illegally would be highly egoistical and would certainly destroy the society as we know it.
Enter the Adblock
I just don't have the patience to spend a whole bunch of time learning Linux apps that are 'almost' there in terms of their UI.
Heh that's the reason I dislike both KDE and Gnome. They both have too many features for me, and too few for my windows-loving friends. IMHO, if you want to get the most out of your Linux, get a geeky distro like Slack and toss away that KDE/Gnome monstorocity. Regardless of your distro choice, check out lighter shells like WindowMaker and XFCE. They really encourage you to open up the hood.
Take printer setup for example. I am writing this article from a Powerbook, which has CUPS printing, just like Linux, and a custom interface for it, just like KDE. OSX interface is, arguably, more user friendly. But you know what? Every time I need to set up a printer I run into some kind of a problem, be it with a driver or with Windows authentication. On Linux, as well as on OSX, I always end up using the CUPS's native Web interface, which is actually better than anything else I've seen.
You sound like you have the proper aptitude. It is likely that after only a few months of learning you will like bash CLI more than any GUI tools.
This is the funniest sex/violence in media comment I read in a long time...
You mean, this awful smut? Ouch. I have to wash my eyes now...
LOL wish I had funny mod points for you, chum...
Windows computers do too process emails. You know, those emails with funny binary attachments... I think you are right in a way. So far we very consciously suppressed the computational capabilities of the Internet. The article implies that it's gonna change. But why?
If we cover the Earth with enough quality fiber, we can probably channel sunlight 24/7 from the light to the dark side. I cannot imagine if that is ever going to become practical, but it sure sounds great for the environment.
Hmm. Are you seeing them in MPEG-compressed movies?
I actually just did some testing on Powerbook LCD and Viewsonic CRT. I tried
(1) Dragging a white window and looking for a "ghost" on the black background. No difference at all.
(2) Dragging the same white window while keeping my eyes on icons inside. Bam! On CRT I see the icons clearly for as long as I can keep up with them at all. On LCD they get blurred very notably even at a rather low speed. Of course, no one gives a damn about window's contents while dragging, so it's no wonder I first noticed it after using my lappy for a year.
As for movies, I stand by my earlier statement. I just finished watching the complete Samuray Champloo. A few episodes on CRT, but most of them on LCD. As far as picture quality goes, can't say that one is better than the other in any way.
With the CRT and movie screen, your brain is what stitches the images together, inferring the motion. With the LCD, you actually see the image change, and your brain perceives that as a smear. IIRC, what's happening is that persistence of vision is working against you and you end up seeing two frames at once.
So, it's all a mind trick? Nothing a daily meditation cannot solve...
No, seriously. Seeing like some people swear with all their gods that they've never seen ghosting, I am starting to think that this is a problem partly induced by the inner workings of the brain. I wonder if the picture quality will improve with time for a person who uses nothing but LCD.
For myself, I have a 1 year old Powerbook. I cannot recall any "ghosting", and I've watched plenty of DVDs, AVIs, and played some WoW on it. If I was to buy a TV (like that will ever happen), and if my only concern was the picture, I would certainly go for LCD.
Hey funny you mentioned that. I cannot stand anything less than 75Hz, and strongly prefer 85Hz or higher. I can actually see the difference as I switch from 60 to 75 to 85, 60 being outright painful. And yet when I get to fix or use some friend's computer, I often see that they are running it at 60Hz. After several attempts of trying to explain what is wrong with that picture, I just adapted a rule of surreptitiously changing the refresh rate while the owner is looking away. After all, if they are able to notice it, they can only thank me later.
You are right, I fell behind on the Linux thing. That started after I got an Apple laptop, so now I am using OS X to do all my work. That, and also the fact that I never liked KDE and have been using WMaker almost exclusively since it's been added to Slack.
You have to understand me in order to see why I am so pissed that it is taking so long to make xterm transparent. I am one of those guys who spend days looking for a cell phone that does not have any features. All I need from a window manager is
(1) launch bar thing
(2) shortcuts for switching between windows
(3) wallpaper
(4) minimal yet stylish decorations.
If a window manager has anything extra and I cannot disable it -- it sucks.
So as far as I am concerned, window managers already achieved perfection, thanks to WMaker, xfce, and a few others (OS X native one is pretty darn awesome in that respect). Transparent windows are the most vital feature now to be implemented, because anything else would be superfluous.
I agree with your conclusion, but not with your arguments.
IMHO, "I could care less" means that the the speaker admits of caring a little bit, is sorry about caring at all, and wishes to care less.
Wow, nice! Looks like Windows is falling behind Linux in the eye candy competition. That's pretty damning, if you ask me.
To be a devil's advocate: does KDE have that much of transparency? IMS, X11 has no transparency, and I am not aware of any work done in that direction, and yet every KDE advocate in this forum mentions it along with icon previews. WTF?
(I'm just mad because I really really want transparent terminal windows in Linux. This is by far the sexiest aspect of OS X's interface.)
True that. My flash is still enabled, because I can suffer it after nuking ads with adblock on all sites I frequent. But I could as well disable it. The only flash site I can think of visiting is homestarrunner.com.