The only thing we know to be true for sure is that the PS5 is to be released in 2016 and that the Ghost Of Christmas Future looks oddly like he's wearing a raincoat.
The problem is that EQ is ruining his life, the problem is that EQ is something that someone with an already addictive personality can latch onto, giving them an outlet to ruin their own lives.
There's no doubt that the game encourages people to spend 40 hours a week playing it and rewards those who spend the most time (I've played it), but even if EQ didn't exist, those types of people would just find another outlet for their deeper problems: depression, alcoholism, etc.
That's my $0.02, from someone who only took freshman psych. If anyone thinks I'm wrong, I would love to hear about it.
I, for one, know that Microsoft is the only company who can be trusted to control the future of the internet.
We should let them control it. After all, their vision is the vision of a peacful humanity, living in harmony where all the MS-Citizens have equal rights to whatever MS-TLD they choose, and the MS-DNS would happily MS-Route all the MS-IP packets to their perfect destinations.
Really, isn't that an idealing MS-World we can all be happy with?
No, zmodem was one-way, though it was the most widely used (everywhere, not just BBS or warez). It was usually slightly faster than ymodem and leaps and bounds above xmodem.
I'm fairly sure the bidirectional protocol was just called 'bimodem.'
I can think of a few uses on a mobile phone. For instance, on my Sprint PCS, applications can "expire" anywhere from 1-3 months after you pay for them, and not work until you pay again.
Thanks for taking the time to reply in an insightful manner instead of questioning my genetics/intelligence/lineage/sexuality like most slashdotters do. You're right, I didn't think about that.
And in case any moderators or other people who responded read this: The original post is not a troll. It was my real opinion. Even if you disagree with my opinion, that doesn't make it a troll. Please learn the difference.
So, the someone at the BSA made a mistake with their scripts, and when it was noticed they immediately apologized and said they would fix the problem.
What exactly should they have done if not this? If your answer is that their search engine is inherently a flawed concept to begin with, then you are arguing a different issue.
I don't see what this has to do with my rights online.
I assume from your lack of comment that you think this is self-explanatory. It isn't. The entire point of my original comment was that this article doesn't offer any answers.
"The company didn't offer a clear estimate of how many users may be affected, saying only that it believes that "some" are."
I'll ask the same question as I asked earlier, which you didn't answer: Who decides? Whose decision is binding?
I'm confused after reading this: what defines a 'developer' who has to pay license fees? From the way the word is used in the article, it seems like they are using a different definition of the word than I would.
They said people who 'added code' to the SQL server. Does this mean altering the source, or just using it from inside a program (ie, not SQL Explorer or whatever)?
The article says:
The number of SQL Server users who ultimately need a patent license from Timeline may be none, some (as Timeline assumes), or essentially all users as Microsoft led the court to believe.
Who is to decide this? Another court ruling? MS? Timeline?
I don't even understand this enough for IANAL. I need a new acronym: IHNFCATL. (I have NFC about the law)
This attitude is arrogant and does not take into account the simple fact that all those people who got into programming just for the money tend not to work on open source products.
It also doesn't take into account that many people working on open source ARE professional programmers during the day.
My favorite quote in the book is from the chapter where "d4rkl0rd", a young novice hax0r who only speaks in l33t speak, is at the dinner table : "n0 m0m, 3y3 h4t3 gr33n b34ns, dUh!"
I can't believe my mom recorded that conversation!
The creative talent in Hollywood (please don't snicker) should find that the chance to make art they think is meaningful and appreciated by others is reward enough.
Yes, truly, this applies to television as well. Acting in such productions as NBC's Friends is art for the sake of art. It is not about the money.
People said this about Douglas Adams' interview as well.
I laughed several times reading Dave's answers. What more can I ask for? He's taking time out of his well-payed day answering questions from random strangers on a website he's probably never seen before. Even so, most of the answers were at least a paragraph if not two long.
You expected an essay? A Sunday column? When someone asks him a stupid, one-sentence question, he responded with an equally stupid one-sentence answer. Cut the guy a break.
"It startled him even more when just after he was awarded the Galactic Institute's Prize for Extreme Cleverness he got lynched by a rampaging mob of
respectable physicists who had finally realized that the one thing they really couldn't stand was a smart-ass." - HHGG
Admittedly, I only read through the first 4 or 5 paragraphs of this "article", but I can hardly believe the strange combination of nonsense, myth, and rumor that it's propogating.
I'm a geek. I'll happily admit it. I have a degree in CS with a math minor, I do software development for a living, I've got a lot of karma, and I know how to view slashdot from my mobile phone.
1. Where to find geeks: "discussing the latest hardware revolution or perfecting their Bill Gates impressions" Impressions? Bzzt. Try the bookstore, the person with the laptop at the park, the mall (arcade, or elsewhere. Geeks wear clothes too).
2. "If you're not up on your Star Trek, you can forget about getting or keeping a geek dude." At this point, they are just propogating stereotypes. I've watched Star Trek in my day, but not to extremes, and most of my geek friends aren't extremely into it either. Regardless, we aren't so closed-minded that being a ST:TNG fanatic is on our list of requirements of a women.
3. "Geeks tend towards packaged, junk foods since they prefer to work and think and aren't all that into cooking for themselves." This is probably the first true thing for the most part, but remember, cooking is a whole other kind of geekiness and some of us love it as well. See: Alton Brown, and fascination therewith.
The rest of the article doesn't get much better. Honestly, after reading this kind of manure, why would a women be interested in a geek at all?
Slashdot Mirror
The only thing we know to be true for sure is that the PS5 is to be released in 2016 and that the Ghost Of Christmas Future looks oddly like he's wearing a raincoat.
There's no doubt that the game encourages people to spend 40 hours a week playing it and rewards those who spend the most time (I've played it), but even if EQ didn't exist, those types of people would just find another outlet for their deeper problems: depression, alcoholism, etc.
That's my $0.02, from someone who only took freshman psych. If anyone thinks I'm wrong, I would love to hear about it.
idealic! (and I know DNS doesn't route, please don't flame me)
We should let them control it. After all, their vision is the vision of a peacful humanity, living in harmony where all the MS-Citizens have equal rights to whatever MS-TLD they choose, and the MS-DNS would happily MS-Route all the MS-IP packets to their perfect destinations.
Really, isn't that an idealing MS-World we can all be happy with?
No, zmodem was one-way, though it was the most widely used (everywhere, not just BBS or warez). It was usually slightly faster than ymodem and leaps and bounds above xmodem. I'm fairly sure the bidirectional protocol was just called 'bimodem.'
This gives a whole new meaning to "man in the middle attack."
Isn't it a beautiful world we live in?
And in case any moderators or other people who responded read this: The original post is not a troll. It was my real opinion. Even if you disagree with my opinion, that doesn't make it a troll. Please learn the difference.
What exactly should they have done if not this? If your answer is that their search engine is inherently a flawed concept to begin with, then you are arguing a different issue.
I don't see what this has to do with my rights online.
I swear this is a duplicate from today but I can't find the original post. Am I going crazy?
I'll ask the same question as I asked earlier, which you didn't answer: Who decides? Whose decision is binding?
They said people who 'added code' to the SQL server. Does this mean altering the source, or just using it from inside a program (ie, not SQL Explorer or whatever)?
The article says:
Who is to decide this? Another court ruling? MS? Timeline?
I don't even understand this enough for IANAL. I need a new acronym: IHNFCATL. (I have NFC about the law)
+5 Insightful
I can't believe my mom recorded that conversation!
This is so embarassing...
I don't know about you, but I've never dated Jennifer Aniston.
I laughed several times reading Dave's answers. What more can I ask for? He's taking time out of his well-payed day answering questions from random strangers on a website he's probably never seen before. Even so, most of the answers were at least a paragraph if not two long.
You expected an essay? A Sunday column? When someone asks him a stupid, one-sentence question, he responded with an equally stupid one-sentence answer. Cut the guy a break.
I think we all know who not to trust in this situation -- the people who want you to switch/upgrade your OS to run a glorified instant messanger.
I, for one, welcome our new pathogenic overlords.
"It startled him even more when just after he was awarded the Galactic Institute's Prize for Extreme Cleverness he got lynched by a rampaging mob of respectable physicists who had finally realized that the one thing they really couldn't stand was a smart-ass." - HHGG
Admittedly, I only read through the first 4 or 5 paragraphs of this "article", but I can hardly believe the strange combination of nonsense, myth, and rumor that it's propogating.
I'm a geek. I'll happily admit it. I have a degree in CS with a math minor, I do software development for a living, I've got a lot of karma, and I know how to view slashdot from my mobile phone.
1. Where to find geeks: "discussing the latest hardware revolution or perfecting their Bill Gates impressions" Impressions? Bzzt. Try the bookstore, the person with the laptop at the park, the mall (arcade, or elsewhere. Geeks wear clothes too).
2. "If you're not up on your Star Trek, you can forget about getting or keeping a geek dude." At this point, they are just propogating stereotypes. I've watched Star Trek in my day, but not to extremes, and most of my geek friends aren't extremely into it either. Regardless, we aren't so closed-minded that being a ST:TNG fanatic is on our list of requirements of a women.
3. "Geeks tend towards packaged, junk foods since they prefer to work and think and aren't all that into cooking for themselves." This is probably the first true thing for the most part, but remember, cooking is a whole other kind of geekiness and some of us love it as well. See: Alton Brown, and fascination therewith.
The rest of the article doesn't get much better. Honestly, after reading this kind of manure, why would a women be interested in a geek at all?
I have so much more respect for Opera right now.