...an AC post, no matter how insightful or informative, will most likely not reach the eyes of the people who would gain from reading it because it was posted by an AC. That's not entirely true. Moderators automatically view posts with a -1 threshold (unless I'm mistaken), and insightful/informative/otherwise good posts get moderated up when they deserve it. AC posts get a score of 0 by default. My posts only get a 1 by default. To be honest, I'm a bit surprised that people set their thresholds *above* 2, so they can catch "only the good posts." Er, huh? With only five moderator points given to people only who don't participate in the discussion, and with 200+ posts per article, there's no way every good comment will get pushed up above 2. It might sound stupid, but I think it's just as important to read the uninformed clueless opinions of the drooling masses as it is to read the opinions of the "slashdot elite":) It's important to hear all sides of a story, don't you think? It's a rare day (and I mean RARE day) when an AC is among them. Now isn't this just a bit harsh? While I'll admit the signal-to-noise ratio has been headed slowly but steadily in the wrong direction here, there have been plenty of good posts by ACs that deserve a point or two. Remember though that since ACs get 0 points when they post, it takes more moderation from more moderators to get an AC post up as high as some of the non-AC messages. This truly is a double-edged sword, but remember that we don't necessarily silence "weirdos" on the streets talking to people at random or trying to convert folks to the Religion-of-the-Day(tm) just for having a "different" opinion. We only stop them when they start causing real damage. Are ACs causing real damage on Slashdot? They troll, they flamebait, they post "f1r$7 p057!" crap, they post insanely long dissertations regarding Natalie Portman's genitals, and they argue without including rational arguments. They also occasionally post well reasoned, spelled, and written messages. We can all ignore the first posts, the trolls, etc., but we're hurting no-one but ourselves by ignoring ALL ACs because every once in a while, a good one pushes his way to the front of the herd and produces something profound, or at least useful. And at the very least, we'll know if the braindead masses are planning to do something really stupid, so we can get out of the way and watch from a safe distance.:)
Slashdot has no credibility, the quality of "news" that is posted here is nothing more than rabid Linux zealotry. Er, it's comments like this that don't exactly *help* ACs, y'know. Most of its apparent lack of credibility stems from this kind of crap. It's a bit like trying to convince a Catholic church congregation to listen to your explanation of and attempts to convert them to Hinduism(sp?) by beginning your spiel with the words "All of you are sheep, and your beloved 'bible' is nothing more than rabid Christian zealotry." You can't expect a group of people to listen to your opinion if it differs from theirs and you preface it by slamming something they believe in. Granted, there are those who don't like to listen if you're different at all, but they tend to get ignored after awhile.
What a childish and ignorant comment. Would you are to explain why?:) It's comments like this that help make the case in favor of ditching ACs on slashdot. Stop it.:) Don't just flame the guy. Explain yourself. The age of the clever, witty, one-liner comeback has thankfully come to an end. As anonymity on slashdot serves as a haven for the ignorant and childish, it also serves as a haven for those intelligent and mature folk who have something valid to say but don't wish to be known for it. The fact that a person doesn't want to open him/herself up to public ridicule or personal trouble for daring to have a differing view or opinion does not instantly render that opinion invalid. Revolutions have started that way, good ones and bad, and anonymity has always played a role in opening people's eyes, making changes, and shaping the future. I'm on the Anonymous Coward's side on this issue -- yes, anonymity gets abused out the wazoo on slashdot, but it is the price we must all be prepared to pay to participate in such an open, free, and safe environment like slashdot. Yes, we've the trolls, the "furst poast!" idiots, and the ramblers, but a few things come to mind whenever someone suggests being rid of the AC on slashdot:
I've seen plenty of non anonymous cowards spew inflamatory, inane, insulting, pointless, trolling, or otherwise useless banter onto slashdot's pages,
The right to make one's voice heard without making one's name known is vital to many people. If I wanted to say something bad about my employer or my family or someone else who could potentially hurt me, and I knew that person or group read slashdot, you bet I'd expect to be able to say my piece anonymously.
Like it or not, anonymity is important. I just wish the few ACs who ruin it for the rest of them would cut it out. Like now.
Or perhaps it's to learn how to advance the human race to move beyond being "God-fearing." Ugh. You're right; they don't have to approach religious leaders, and they shouldn't. Would you prefer we had stayed in the dark ages, with those darned non-God-fearing scientists inventing such bullocks as electricity and telephones? Sorry for being so sarcastic, but sheesh. Just my humble opinion.
Well as much as it makes me sound like an anti-social freak, I really do avoid shopping in stores and malls as much as possible. The simple fact of the matter is that the so-called "social activity" is filled with rude, pushy shoppers, even more rude & pushy (oh, and disgruntled & disinterested) employees, etc. It of course gets worse around the December shopping hysteria season, and I just don't like dealing with it. You ask how my world would be if I didn't have to go running through screaming people to get my furby. It's awesome, actually. I despise shopping, and hate being surrounded by frenzied idiots who couldn't be bothered to do their gift shopping earlier in the year. I do realize there's certain things you can't order over the internet (yet), but you'd be amazed at how much you can get. We really only venture out of our cave for groceries & work now:) I agree though that this mall will probably reverse this decision from all the flack they'll be catching from this. Sadly, though, I don't think it falls under the First Amendment (RIP:). Methinks if I were a shop owner in this place I'd invite them to shove it and move the place elsewhere at the earliest convenience:)
I have to ask how this is defined as "offtopic." My words here, of course, are offtopic, but, uh, isn't the subject of the parent article something called PHP3?:) He's right. PHP *is* powerful, fast, and easy. I disagree on the almost-better-than-sex part, but how is this offtopic?
I didn't say you said it couldn't make a good root file system:) Also, the quote you mention from the ReiserFS site was written before the journalling stuff was around. My point is that I don't believe the journalling version can be "injured" under normal circumstances (including tripping over the power cord or flipping the Big Red Switch(tm) by accident), hence it doesn't *need* to be fscked on startup, even after an unclean shutdown. The only loss that could occur happens when a change has been logged, but not committed to the filesystem. Even then, the fs remains undamaged; you just lose the pending changes. I also know it has its own version of fsck, but straight from the README of the journalling version of the distribution is a warning in ALL CAPS:) not to use it on the journalling version. It doesn't even build reiserfsck when you compile the journalling version:).
At least, I think so:) There's no fsck at present for the journalling version of ReiserFS -- it apparently just replays the last log when it decides something has gone wrong. Really I don't think there's anything stopping it from being a usable root filesystem now, aside from its youthful age;)
Heh. Of course a porno costs no more than a couple hundred thousand dollars (and that's a high budget porno, too:). I don't think I've ever heard a peep out of the pornography industry about piracy. Realistically, the porn industry is more likely to grin and bear it if porno DVD piracy runs rampant than the "proper" movie industry, methinks. I mean it's people having sex. Simple, cheap, dangerously fun to watch, and did I mention cheap? What do they care if they lose a few sales to piracy? For a movie that costs a hundred thousand bucks to make, they've only got to move 5,000 copies at $20 a piece (which is what most DVD pornos go for, just like regular movies:) and they've recouped their costs. Everything after that is profit! Oy. Do I really know that much about the porn industry? Heh. Oh who cares? It's all in good fun anyways:)
I know this is dangerous to say in a mostly, er, "rabid" Star Wars(tm) fan base, but if he wants to seriously get *that* uptight about it, he can keep his precious movie to himself. I just read a comment above that DIVX taught the industry that the consumer doesn't go where s/he is told. Well, I wonder if Lucas is *reteaching* the industry that sometimes, well, yes, the consumer becomes a willing sheep. Just look at the people (adults!) who dressed up as their favorite Star Wars: The Phantom Menace(tm) characters as they waited for days in line to buy that ever-important opening-day ticket. They hadn't seen the movie yet, but dammit they already "knew" who their favorites were. We are sheep in many instances. Lucas had people lined up for days to see his latest creation. I don't mean to slam the Star Wars(tm) fans, although I do think some of them go a bit overboard (ducks). What comments like the above demonstrate, though, is that we are definitely sheep. Just imagine what would happen if Lucas does decide not to release Episode 1(tm) on DVD. Can you even fathom the droves of rabid fans who will storm the gates of anyone they think contributed to cracking DVD? I can. It's an amusing thought, actually... thousands of Darth Mauls (sp?) storming the Xing building:) Hehehehe.
Oh yes, I always judge the respectability of an operating system (or a distribution of it) solely on its version number scheme. </sarcasm> I don't suppose people have anything to say about, oh, how the new release compares to other distros, do they?:)
Heh. I was just going to say something like that. Astounding that they've managed to miss something this basic. Why do they let people like this write? Dolts. They're total dolts.
Re:"THEY ARE spelling absolutely sucks"??
on
Microsoft Cracked
·
· Score: 1
Moderators, *this* one needs to go *up* a few notches:) Well said, AC:)
This just wouldn't surprise me in the least. I mean, the very *thought* of a 17 year, 364 day-old human being seeing a *barely*clothed*woman* is just too frightening to contemplate. The "magic age" concept in America has always pissed me off. At sixteen years old, I could volunteer to go fight for and potentially die for my country, but I still couldn't smoke, vote, or drink. So I could take a bullet for Uncle Sam, but he won't let me drink a beer or light up a cigarette?!?! And don't get me started on the absolutely maniacal age-of-consent laws that make even less sense. I still haven't worked them out... they're different in every state, and they're not uniform either! In Colorado for example you if you're 17 and 364 days old, you can have sex with anyone over the age of either 15 or 16 (I forget which:), but once you turn 18, suddenly anyone under 18 becomes illegal. "Sorry, my love, but it's illegal for us to have sex anymore until you turn 18!" And there's *another* range of ages for 14 to 16 (or 15, whichever it was)! Oy. The funniest bit is how "child pornography" is defined when compared to age-of-consent laws. "So, um, we fifteen-year-olds can have sex with each other, but not film it? We can make/have *children* but not film the conception? Um, help?" Utter lunacy. It is so disgusting and revolting to think people as uptight as my parents (hehehehe:) decided they had the power to control people's lives in such stupid ways. It'd be nice if such "privileges" (although how continuing the species could possibly be considered a privilege is beyond me:) were awarded based on merit, instead of age. Some people are more mature than others.
Oh, and no-one actually knows what 'love' is. It seems to be an excuse these days, or a word used in place of an apology. I doubt, somehow, that the concept even exists anymore. Egad, I hope not! I probably don't "know" what love is either, but I've a pretty damned good idea. I'm 21 years old, and have been married to a lovely young woman (20) for 1.5 years now. Like another poster said, where a "jock"-type guy with the nasty wife-beating habit won't care for a woman in the slightest, a "geek" will cherish such a rare find. You can count me into the latter category -- I value my wife higher than myself or any of my gadgets or computers. That sounds corny, but it's true -- stuff can be replaced, but she can't. She might not be married to the hottest looking guy on Earth, but she'll absolutely *never* have to be afraid of not having a place to live, food to eat, things to do, or of being left alone to fend for herself so long as I'm alive. And since I've got the brains to put away some of my earnings into investment plans, I'll leave behind a good pile of money for her if I happen to die before she does. You're completely correct though in saying "intelligence and personality is bottom on the list." It is, and it's pathetic. Utterly pathetic. How many of you folks out there have had the displeasure of watching female friends make horrible mistakes because even though they know/like you, they somehow always forget that there's more to humans than physical appearance when they're out "picking their mate" for the night? I've got quite a few friends who are women, and it really hurts sometimes to watch them get screwed over by poor choices. One has a baby by a man who, while he was "attractive" and good looking to her, chose to bail out on her and abandon both her and the baby. Fortunately she's got quite a few geek friends (myself included) and caring parents who've all pitched in to help, but it still hurts us all to know she's going to be in this position for life now. Another has gotten involved with a fine young man with only a "slight" over-protectiveness problem. You know, just minor things like calling her every 1/2 hour to check up on her, checking the caller ID every night when he gets home, and being very suspicious of any other men who dare to speak to her. And he certainly doesn't like any of us:). The sad part is, we barely ever get to see her anymore -- he's absorbed her almost completely and doesn't let her out to play very often:(. I don't think I'll ever figure out how women choose their mates. If you try to argue that it's all biological, and that women pick the best-looking guys because their instincts say they're the best bet for healthy offspring, it almost makes sense except that those are the men least likely to really be able to provide for and take of any offspring. They're the kind you find in trailer parks in their mid-thirties with cars up on blocks. Most other species don't "pair up" like that -- the father impregnates and bails, leaving the mother to care for offspring. Of course, most other species don't need to *buy* food, shelter, and supplies for their children, either. And I think we all know most women don't look to hard at the intellect part. It's just really sad, and I'm not entirely sure there's a good solution to it.:(
Aside from the overblown *value* of the fines, the suggestion is still valid. I have to agree with the suggestion -- hell yes, people should take some responsibility for what they print as fact.
A printing or spelling error is quite different than an error in fact-finding (or failure to do any fact-finding at all) or an attempt to sway public opinion with "creative skewing of the facts." Wouldn't you agree?
Then again, if we *did* punish folks for spelling errors and such, we wouldn't have to read your posts either. Hehehehe:)
BTW, isn't it a bit sad that we as a nation would be in horrid trouble if we enacted penalties for spelling and grammar errors? Even I agree that we'd lose 99% of our voice -- not a whole lot of people seem to practice the seemingly ancient art of proper grammar and spelling these days:(
(Patiently waiting for someone to spot a spelling or grammar error in my post:)
32-bit DOS extenders. If I recall correctly (it's been *years*, so hop in if I'm wrong -- I'm sure someone will;) DJGPP ships with one. DOOM and its successors all the way through Quake used some other DOS extender, too. Neat stuff, but a bit weird at the same time:)
A whole IS department? What does that mean? It could be 2 people.
Where I work, it means dozens.
And the pagers go off at 2 in the morning because the users forgot their password or some other such nonsense.
Bzzzt! Nope:) Again, at my workplace, that's what the 24/7 phone monkeys are for (password resets, etc.). It's a pathetic place -- people get paged to come in at 2:30am when parts of the network go down. One NT box must be rebooted *nightly* to keep it running, and it keeps all the garbage helpdesk software going.
The servers die on a consistent basis. It brings a bit of stability to my day knowing I don't have to deal with them (my dumb little P120 notebook running Linux keeps on chugging (yes, it's attached to the network and using it) while all the 'doze boxes around it panic and die because suddenly they can't spot their precious domain controller:)
(a) zealous linux users that have never actually used NT
Count me out of this group. I'm a zealous Linux user forced to deal with NT every day of my working life lately. I hate it. It's buggy, slow, can't multitask worth a damn, *STILL* dies when explorer.exe bites it (which happens often), and that's just on the client side! Nevermind the annoyances I experience when trying to do seemingly simple things like check my mail (Outlook -- ick) or grab the latest antivirus updates (another 'doze affliction). The only thing that ever works right is our damned firewall, because *it's* running Unix (along with everything else of any importance at the company).
(b) clueless NT admins who are clueless, not through any fault of their own, but because NT 4 has the Win95 interface, and is advertised as being supereasy to run and config.
Agreed. Although I wouldn't say this is an overemphasis. Clueless NT admins abound, and anyone with enough experience with NT to make it even *pretend* to behave like an OS instead of a toddler is either busy earning M$ certifications or learning about that funky Unix thing their friends use to make double their income.
Not quite. Mosix *is* a kernel patch. It does require a specific version of the kernel (2.2.9 last time I checked), although so do most patches:)
Also, Mosix will transparently migrate processes from busy machines to others in the cluster with more idle cycles available. The processes in question aren't even aware of the change, and they most certainly don't need to be designed to be parallel-processing.
Run two rc5des clients on the same box, for example, and it'll move one of them to another machine on the cluster with a lower loadavg.
That doesn't work when entire classrooms of students are either participating or watching the "festivities." I would have loved to pound my attackers senseless in high school, but you know it's only going to cause more trouble than it's worth when your instructor is watching and isn't lifting a finger to help.
Slashdot Mirror
...an AC post, no matter how insightful or informative, will most likely not reach the eyes of the people who would gain from reading it because it was posted by an AC. That's not entirely true. Moderators automatically view posts with a -1 threshold (unless I'm mistaken), and insightful/informative/otherwise good posts get moderated up when they deserve it. AC posts get a score of 0 by default. My posts only get a 1 by default. To be honest, I'm a bit surprised that people set their thresholds *above* 2, so they can catch "only the good posts." Er, huh? With only five moderator points given to people only who don't participate in the discussion, and with 200+ posts per article, there's no way every good comment will get pushed up above 2. It might sound stupid, but I think it's just as important to read the uninformed clueless opinions of the drooling masses as it is to read the opinions of the "slashdot elite" :) It's important to hear all sides of a story, don't you think? It's a rare day (and I mean RARE day) when an AC is among them. Now isn't this just a bit harsh? While I'll admit the signal-to-noise ratio has been headed slowly but steadily in the wrong direction here, there have been plenty of good posts by ACs that deserve a point or two. Remember though that since ACs get 0 points when they post, it takes more moderation from more moderators to get an AC post up as high as some of the non-AC messages. This truly is a double-edged sword, but remember that we don't necessarily silence "weirdos" on the streets talking to people at random or trying to convert folks to the Religion-of-the-Day(tm) just for having a "different" opinion. We only stop them when they start causing real damage. Are ACs causing real damage on Slashdot? They troll, they flamebait, they post "f1r$7 p057!" crap, they post insanely long dissertations regarding Natalie Portman's genitals, and they argue without including rational arguments. They also occasionally post well reasoned, spelled, and written messages. We can all ignore the first posts, the trolls, etc., but we're hurting no-one but ourselves by ignoring ALL ACs because every once in a while, a good one pushes his way to the front of the herd and produces something profound, or at least useful. And at the very least, we'll know if the braindead masses are planning to do something really stupid, so we can get out of the way and watch from a safe distance. :)
Slashdot has no credibility, the quality of "news" that is posted here is nothing more than rabid Linux zealotry. Er, it's comments like this that don't exactly *help* ACs, y'know. Most of its apparent lack of credibility stems from this kind of crap. It's a bit like trying to convince a Catholic church congregation to listen to your explanation of and attempts to convert them to Hinduism(sp?) by beginning your spiel with the words "All of you are sheep, and your beloved 'bible' is nothing more than rabid Christian zealotry." You can't expect a group of people to listen to your opinion if it differs from theirs and you preface it by slamming something they believe in. Granted, there are those who don't like to listen if you're different at all, but they tend to get ignored after awhile.
- I've seen plenty of non anonymous cowards spew inflamatory, inane, insulting, pointless, trolling, or otherwise useless banter onto slashdot's pages,
- The right to make one's voice heard without making one's name known is vital to many people. If I wanted to say something bad about my employer or my family or someone else who could potentially hurt me, and I knew that person or group read slashdot, you bet I'd expect to be able to say my piece anonymously.
Like it or not, anonymity is important. I just wish the few ACs who ruin it for the rest of them would cut it out. Like now.Or perhaps it's to learn how to advance the human race to move beyond being "God-fearing." Ugh. You're right; they don't have to approach religious leaders, and they shouldn't. Would you prefer we had stayed in the dark ages, with those darned non-God-fearing scientists inventing such bullocks as electricity and telephones? Sorry for being so sarcastic, but sheesh. Just my humble opinion.
Well as much as it makes me sound like an anti-social freak, I really do avoid shopping in stores and malls as much as possible. The simple fact of the matter is that the so-called "social activity" is filled with rude, pushy shoppers, even more rude & pushy (oh, and disgruntled & disinterested) employees, etc. It of course gets worse around the December shopping hysteria season, and I just don't like dealing with it. You ask how my world would be if I didn't have to go running through screaming people to get my furby. It's awesome, actually. I despise shopping, and hate being surrounded by frenzied idiots who couldn't be bothered to do their gift shopping earlier in the year. I do realize there's certain things you can't order over the internet (yet), but you'd be amazed at how much you can get. We really only venture out of our cave for groceries & work now :) I agree though that this mall will probably reverse this decision from all the flack they'll be catching from this. Sadly, though, I don't think it falls under the First Amendment (RIP :). Methinks if I were a shop owner in this place I'd invite them to shove it and move the place elsewhere at the earliest convenience :)
I have to ask how this is defined as "offtopic." My words here, of course, are offtopic, but, uh, isn't the subject of the parent article something called PHP3? :) He's right. PHP *is* powerful, fast, and easy. I disagree on the almost-better-than-sex part, but how is this offtopic?
I guess it's a good thing not all of us (myself included) place ourselves in front of footballs very often :)
I didn't say you said it couldn't make a good root file system :) Also, the quote you mention from the ReiserFS site was written before the journalling stuff was around. My point is that I don't believe the journalling version can be "injured" under normal circumstances (including tripping over the power cord or flipping the Big Red Switch(tm) by accident), hence it doesn't *need* to be fscked on startup, even after an unclean shutdown. The only loss that could occur happens when a change has been logged, but not committed to the filesystem. Even then, the fs remains undamaged; you just lose the pending changes. I also know it has its own version of fsck, but straight from the README of the journalling version of the distribution is a warning in ALL CAPS :) not to use it on the journalling version. It doesn't even build reiserfsck when you compile the journalling version :).
At least, I think so :) There's no fsck at present for the journalling version of ReiserFS -- it apparently just replays the last log when it decides something has gone wrong. Really I don't think there's anything stopping it from being a usable root filesystem now, aside from its youthful age ;)
Heh. Of course a porno costs no more than a couple hundred thousand dollars (and that's a high budget porno, too :). I don't think I've ever heard a peep out of the pornography industry about piracy. Realistically, the porn industry is more likely to grin and bear it if porno DVD piracy runs rampant than the "proper" movie industry, methinks. I mean it's people having sex. Simple, cheap, dangerously fun to watch, and did I mention cheap? What do they care if they lose a few sales to piracy? For a movie that costs a hundred thousand bucks to make, they've only got to move 5,000 copies at $20 a piece (which is what most DVD pornos go for, just like regular movies :) and they've recouped their costs. Everything after that is profit! Oy. Do I really know that much about the porn industry? Heh. Oh who cares? It's all in good fun anyways :)
I know this is dangerous to say in a mostly, er, "rabid" Star Wars(tm) fan base, but if he wants to seriously get *that* uptight about it, he can keep his precious movie to himself. I just read a comment above that DIVX taught the industry that the consumer doesn't go where s/he is told. Well, I wonder if Lucas is *reteaching* the industry that sometimes, well, yes, the consumer becomes a willing sheep. Just look at the people (adults!) who dressed up as their favorite Star Wars: The Phantom Menace(tm) characters as they waited for days in line to buy that ever-important opening-day ticket. They hadn't seen the movie yet, but dammit they already "knew" who their favorites were. We are sheep in many instances. Lucas had people lined up for days to see his latest creation. I don't mean to slam the Star Wars(tm) fans, although I do think some of them go a bit overboard (ducks). What comments like the above demonstrate, though, is that we are definitely sheep. Just imagine what would happen if Lucas does decide not to release Episode 1(tm) on DVD. Can you even fathom the droves of rabid fans who will storm the gates of anyone they think contributed to cracking DVD? I can. It's an amusing thought, actually ... thousands of Darth Mauls (sp?) storming the Xing building :) Hehehehe.
I dunno what's wrong with Caldera's distro, but I got Debian 2.1 to run just fine on my wife's IBM Craptiva with shared video memory... :)
Oh yes, I always judge the respectability of an operating system (or a distribution of it) solely on its version number scheme. </sarcasm> I don't suppose people have anything to say about, oh, how the new release compares to other distros, do they? :)
Heh. I was just going to say something like that. Astounding that they've managed to miss something this basic. Why do they let people like this write? Dolts. They're total dolts.
Moderators, *this* one needs to go *up* a few notches :) Well said, AC :)
This just wouldn't surprise me in the least. I mean, the very *thought* of a 17 year, 364 day-old human being seeing a *barely*clothed*woman* is just too frightening to contemplate. The "magic age" concept in America has always pissed me off. At sixteen years old, I could volunteer to go fight for and potentially die for my country, but I still couldn't smoke, vote, or drink. So I could take a bullet for Uncle Sam, but he won't let me drink a beer or light up a cigarette?!?! And don't get me started on the absolutely maniacal age-of-consent laws that make even less sense. I still haven't worked them out ... they're different in every state, and they're not uniform either! In Colorado for example you if you're 17 and 364 days old, you can have sex with anyone over the age of either 15 or 16 (I forget which :), but once you turn 18, suddenly anyone under 18 becomes illegal. "Sorry, my love, but it's illegal for us to have sex anymore until you turn 18!" And there's *another* range of ages for 14 to 16 (or 15, whichever it was)! Oy. The funniest bit is how "child pornography" is defined when compared to age-of-consent laws. "So, um, we fifteen-year-olds can have sex with each other, but not film it? We can make/have *children* but not film the conception? Um, help?" Utter lunacy. It is so disgusting and revolting to think people as uptight as my parents (hehehehe :) decided they had the power to control people's lives in such stupid ways. It'd be nice if such "privileges" (although how continuing the species could possibly be considered a privilege is beyond me :) were awarded based on merit, instead of age. Some people are more mature than others.
Oh, and no-one actually knows what 'love' is. It seems to be an excuse these days, or a word used in place of an apology. I doubt, somehow, that the concept even exists anymore. Egad, I hope not! I probably don't "know" what love is either, but I've a pretty damned good idea. I'm 21 years old, and have been married to a lovely young woman (20) for 1.5 years now. Like another poster said, where a "jock"-type guy with the nasty wife-beating habit won't care for a woman in the slightest, a "geek" will cherish such a rare find. You can count me into the latter category -- I value my wife higher than myself or any of my gadgets or computers. That sounds corny, but it's true -- stuff can be replaced, but she can't. She might not be married to the hottest looking guy on Earth, but she'll absolutely *never* have to be afraid of not having a place to live, food to eat, things to do, or of being left alone to fend for herself so long as I'm alive. And since I've got the brains to put away some of my earnings into investment plans, I'll leave behind a good pile of money for her if I happen to die before she does. You're completely correct though in saying "intelligence and personality is bottom on the list." It is, and it's pathetic. Utterly pathetic. How many of you folks out there have had the displeasure of watching female friends make horrible mistakes because even though they know/like you, they somehow always forget that there's more to humans than physical appearance when they're out "picking their mate" for the night? I've got quite a few friends who are women, and it really hurts sometimes to watch them get screwed over by poor choices. One has a baby by a man who, while he was "attractive" and good looking to her, chose to bail out on her and abandon both her and the baby. Fortunately she's got quite a few geek friends (myself included) and caring parents who've all pitched in to help, but it still hurts us all to know she's going to be in this position for life now. Another has gotten involved with a fine young man with only a "slight" over-protectiveness problem. You know, just minor things like calling her every 1/2 hour to check up on her, checking the caller ID every night when he gets home, and being very suspicious of any other men who dare to speak to her. And he certainly doesn't like any of us :). The sad part is, we barely ever get to see her anymore -- he's absorbed her almost completely and doesn't let her out to play very often :(. I don't think I'll ever figure out how women choose their mates. If you try to argue that it's all biological, and that women pick the best-looking guys because their instincts say they're the best bet for healthy offspring, it almost makes sense except that those are the men least likely to really be able to provide for and take of any offspring. They're the kind you find in trailer parks in their mid-thirties with cars up on blocks. Most other species don't "pair up" like that -- the father impregnates and bails, leaving the mother to care for offspring. Of course, most other species don't need to *buy* food, shelter, and supplies for their children, either. And I think we all know most women don't look to hard at the intellect part. It's just really sad, and I'm not entirely sure there's a good solution to it. :(
Thanks for that dose of wisdom.
:)
:(
:)
Aside from the overblown *value* of the fines, the suggestion is still valid. I have to agree with the suggestion -- hell yes, people should take some responsibility for what they print as fact.
A printing or spelling error is quite different than an error in fact-finding (or failure to do any fact-finding at all) or an attempt to sway public opinion with "creative skewing of the facts." Wouldn't you agree?
Then again, if we *did* punish folks for spelling errors and such, we wouldn't have to read your posts either. Hehehehe
BTW, isn't it a bit sad that we as a nation would be in horrid trouble if we enacted penalties for spelling and grammar errors? Even I agree that we'd lose 99% of our voice -- not a whole lot of people seem to practice the seemingly ancient art of proper grammar and spelling these days
(Patiently waiting for someone to spot a spelling or grammar error in my post
32-bit DOS extenders. If I recall correctly (it's been *years*, so hop in if I'm wrong -- I'm sure someone will ;) DJGPP ships with one. DOOM and its successors all the way through Quake used some other DOS extender, too. Neat stuff, but a bit weird at the same time :)
A whole IS department? What does that mean? It could be 2 people.
:) Again, at my workplace, that's what the 24/7 phone monkeys are for (password resets, etc.). It's a pathetic place -- people get paged to come in at 2:30am when parts of the network go down. One NT box must be rebooted *nightly* to keep it running, and it keeps all the garbage helpdesk software going.
:)
Where I work, it means dozens.
And the pagers go off at 2 in the morning because the users forgot their password or some other such nonsense.
Bzzzt! Nope
The servers die on a consistent basis. It brings a bit of stability to my day knowing I don't have to deal with them (my dumb little P120 notebook running Linux keeps on chugging (yes, it's attached to the network and using it) while all the 'doze boxes around it panic and die because suddenly they can't spot their precious domain controller
(a) zealous linux users that have never actually used NT
Count me out of this group. I'm a zealous Linux user forced to deal with NT every day of my working life lately. I hate it. It's buggy, slow, can't multitask worth a damn, *STILL* dies when explorer.exe bites it (which happens often), and that's just on the client side! Nevermind the annoyances I experience when trying to do seemingly simple things like check my mail (Outlook -- ick) or grab the latest antivirus updates (another 'doze affliction). The only thing that ever works right is our damned firewall, because *it's* running Unix (along with everything else of any importance at the company).
(b) clueless NT admins who are clueless, not through any fault of their own, but because NT 4 has the Win95 interface, and is advertised as being supereasy to run and config.
Agreed. Although I wouldn't say this is an overemphasis. Clueless NT admins abound, and anyone with enough experience with NT to make it even *pretend* to behave like an OS instead of a toddler is either busy earning M$ certifications or learning about that funky Unix thing their friends use to make double their income.
By not crashing the whole system because one card dies. :)
Hehehehehe. And what about your post, silly boy? Where's *your* content? :)
Is it? The monkeys, er, "politicians," in our government tend to listen to the recommendations of these idiots.
Ignorant my ass. But hey, thanks for trying!
Not quite. Mosix *is* a kernel patch. It does require a specific version of the kernel (2.2.9 last time I checked), although so do most patches :)
Also, Mosix will transparently migrate processes from busy machines to others in the cluster with more idle cycles available. The processes in question aren't even aware of the change, and they most certainly don't need to be designed to be parallel-processing.
Run two rc5des clients on the same box, for example, and it'll move one of them to another machine on the cluster with a lower loadavg.
That doesn't work when entire classrooms of students are either participating or watching the "festivities." I would have loved to pound my attackers senseless in high school, but you know it's only going to cause more trouble than it's worth when your instructor is watching and isn't lifting a finger to help.