"I was a TA in a far east university in an Engineering department. Generally I consider my self a tough marker, as I expect students to arrive at answers with right logical reasoning. Having said that, I usually had a partial blind eye for students who has genuine drive towards studies -- post grad research types --, because their future shouldn't be eclipsed by a one bad grade. Also I highly control the grade distribution, such that only 5-10% of the class will get A-grade."
Huh? I'm confused... Isn't the goal of the class to make sure that the student understands the material being taught?!
If everybody has a solid understanding of the material, everybody should get an 'A.' If nobody has a solid understanding of the material, then they should get an 'F'. I don't see what benefit controlling the grade distribution offers, except penalizing or rewarding students unnecessarily.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis... it doesn't even have to agree with me.
No, what China is doing is wrong. I saw Avatar, and while I was impressed by the technical and artistic wizardry, the movie plot was meh. That said (I think you'd agree), it was a fairly basic criticism of American treatment of Native Americans. The allegation here is that the Chinese don't want comparisons being drawn to what's being done today in modern China. (I vaguely remember that more then million people were evicted to create the 3 Gorges dam. ) What they are doing here is trying to censor political speech. Censoring political speech is wrong.
Censoring media in general is also wrong. There is an inherent assumption when you choose which books or movies are okay to watch, that assumption is that you are better suited to decide what John Doe should watch then John Doe is. The assumption that other people are more qualified to handle your life then you are is a recipe for stripping people of their rights. Also, while I have not seen this specific Chow Yun Fat / Confucius movie, I have seen more then a couple Chinese films, and it's fairly likely that this one is also jingoistic crap.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis... it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Howard Dean, an essentially unknown politician with no following gained a very large amount of donations. I think reasonable people would agree that what made Dean attractive to all the donor's was that Dean was consistently against the Iraq war from day 1. While Dean did eventually fail to be nominated, his success at fund-raising had attracted the attention of other democrats. Look at Hillary's vocal defense during this election that she was not in fact voting for the war, but further action through the UN. She and other democrat's see the advantage to be anti-war, and would not make the same mistake twice. Given how a seemingly clear cut reason to war (WMD) has been undercut, I think no democrats and few republicans would fund another pre-emptive war.
Sangloth I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Although I can't pretend to explain what happened with the cables, I think it's safe to say that we aren't going to war with Iran in the immediate future. It would be political suicide for any politician who supported it, (the Iraq war is no longer popular with the electorate), and we are headed to an election. If we wanted to turn up the war machine, Iraq and Afganistan both offer locations to do it at.
Sangloth I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis... it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Bruce Sterling is a founding father of cyber-punk, next to William Gibson. Despite the role-playing world's that come to mind when cyber-punk is mentioned, Sterling's worlds are believable and his stories aren't very action oriented. One of his latest books was about politicians in the US in about 40 years. Bruce more looks at social trends then technology, that's not to say tech isn't in his books, but in general they are about society.
Connie Willis wrote the Doomsday book, a story about a time traveler stuck in Europe during the plague. There was a very heavy historical emphasis, in practice it was a historical novel. She's written other timetravel stuff. Her books aren't so much fun as interesting.
Harlan Ellison's books are fun. He is a brillant writer who should not be let out in public(The man is very easily offended, and not afraid to attack with a chair or what not when he is offended. If he's not violent, he's shouting furiously, and it really doesn't take anything intentional to set him off). He wrote I have no mouth and I must scream and Repent Harliqin said the Tick Tock Man. Harlan's books, and Harlan have a extreme cynical viewpoint that's very entertaining. Harlan started out attending sci fi conventions, and has many big sci fi writer friends. I don't know that his writings really fall in a sci fi category (To be clear, Harlan's books pay no attention to science at all, it's more experimental modern writing), but they are good reads.
I've read a ton of Sci Fi, and I've never heard of Len Wein. A quick google says he's a comics guy invovled heavily with X-men, fantastic 4, hulk, and the watchmen series. Some one else will have to give a perspective here.
All three authors are big names in Sci Fi, although none of them give more then lip service to the sci part. I can barely think of who else might belong on this list over them. (Well...Philip K. Dick, Asimov, Heinlien, Bester, Clarke, Cambell(Editor, not an author) a couple other golden oldies. Of living people under 70, Bear, Guin, Stephenson, Kress, and Gibson...Still that's a wish list... )
Still, these are the names of real Science Fiction in the last 20 years (Star Trek and such belong in fantasy or action). I'm not trying to be elitist. These are big names... If you don't know these people, you don't know science fiction...
Sangloth I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment witb a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
The Solution is MP3 Gain
on
Normalizing Music?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Geez...I'm surprised nobody brought this up yet. MP3gain normalizes MP3's, but it NOT based on an average of the entire song. Read the site for more info. This is exactly the solution you are looking for.
Common sense should tell you that humans aren't born to run. It seems like any large predator I can think off can easily outrun a human in a sprint, which makes long distance running worthless.
For catching herbivores, running is about as handy. Running is highly inefficient, and takes up alot of energy. You are jumping repeatedly, lifting your own weight every step. Think about it, how far can you run?
Walking however...that's where it's at. Humans can walk for as long as they want. Walking is just the art of falling forward and catching yourself. Walking requires almost no energy or effort for two legged humans. That's not the case with four legged animals. Four legged animals can't fall forward, they have to expend energy to walk, meaning that walking is actually exausting for them. Humans have other mechanisms to help them in in long distance travel. We have no fur, and we can sweat. Our body frame helps us release heat. Other animals don't have these traits. They do overheat. Anybody who owns a dog knows the scenario. Their dog(even the small ones) can easily out sprint them. Take the dog for a walk however, and after an amount of the time, the dog will get exausted. You can't walk a dog for hours. They just can't release the accumlated heat. Humans didn't out-run their prey, they outwalked their prey. It may have taken several hours, but any animal would eventually succumb to heat stroke, and that is when the human could strike.
As for the assumption that running is what brought us down from the trees...get real. Bi-pedality gives one amazing advantage 4 legged animals don't have...ARMS!!! Now you can carry your young, your stick, your stone, your food. If you had to choose between giving up your ability to run, or your arms, which would you give up? Sure, to a man in the wild, running might be more important to him then it is to you, but even he would be absolutely worthless without his arms.
This isn't all to say we don't have some adaptations which help us run. It is to say that the idea humans were born to run is inane.
Sangloth I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
In the Cryptonomicon, sometimes you use titles like Electric Till Corporation (IBM) or Finux(Linux), other times you just used the real world name like Microsoft or Mitsubishi. Were there a legal reason for using ETC instead of IBM, or was it a whim? What was the rational?
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Electric Till Corporation vs. Microsoft
on
Ask Neal Stephenson
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
In the Cryptonomicon, sometimes you use titles like Electric Till Corporation (IBM) or Finux(Linux), other times you just used the real world name like Microsoft or Mitsubishi. Were there a legal reason for using ETC instead of IBM, or was it a whim? What was the rational?
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry, I'm sure you both have plans to influence Iran not to pursue nuclear weapons... but that is not what I'm asking. I want to know what the US's reaction will be under your administration if Iran ignores outside pressure and continues to pursue nuclear weapons anyway.
(If this is actually submitted, please knock off the sig...) Sangloth I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis... it doesn't even have to agree with me.
"the ability to read different programming languages is the same as being able to read different human languages. It's a matter of differing grammar, syntax and character notations. Not everyone can grasp chinese or russian or hebrew, but does that make them valueless languages? I didn't think so. You'll especially run into problems if you try and read/write chinese as if it were english, or perl as if it were C."
It's a little tough to say this without seeming dismissive of other cultures, but I'm going to try. Imagine for a second that I could say the Inuit language(I've never even heard it) is crap without implying anything about Eskimos.
Some spoken languages are crap, specifically I'm thinking about English. If you take a quick look here you can see a consistent theme is how English speakers are constantly adopting elements from other languages. This has created an inconsistent language with an extremely large and unnecessary vocabulary, which often give multiple ways to say the same thing.
While spoken Japanese is consistent and easy to learn, old written Japanese (Kanji) is sheer crap.
"Although tens of thousands of kanji have been used in the past, currently only 2000 or so are used in everyday language. Nevertheless, mastering the use of kanji is extremely difficult. Besides the necessity of memorizing large numbers of kanji, individual kanji adopt different meanings and pronunciations depending on their juxtaposition within a sentence or word. In Japan, the number of kanji a person knows and uses reflects his or her education."
Since programming is often expressing mathematical concepts, another example would be Roman Numerals versus Arabic Numerals. It should be obvious that Roman Numerals are valueless in comparisson.
Anyway, choosing a software language isn't like choosing a spoken language, on several levels.
One level is that you can work with a software language in a vacuum. If you like an obscure language, you can use it to write your project successfully. If you use an obscure spoken language, (Latin), you won't be able to function in modern society.
We tend to huddle around the good languages, which makes this topic alittle tougher. Also, I'm sure you've heard to the tool-kit analogy, about how you don't use a screw driver to knock down a nail, and you don't use Ruby for 3d modern video games or FORTRAN for text processing.
That said, some languages are more suited to more tasks, and other languages are not.
Not too long ago, I think 2002, we signed the SORT treaty with Russia, where we limited ourselves to 2,200 nuclear warheads.
I find this type of alarmism annoying...nuclear weapons have only been used as weapons twice in all of human history. If we survived the Cold War, I find it highly unlikely that we'd blow ourselves up now. Nuclear terrorism may be a valid threat, but nuclear war is a thing of the past.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
==
Operating Systems Used to Access Google
February 2004
Windows 98 23%
Windows XP 46%
Windows 2000 18%
Windows NT 3%
Mac 4%
Windows 95 1%
Linux 1%
Other 4%
==
That's Windows 91% vs Mac 4%
I'm not saying Mac's are more or less secure then Windows, because I have touched a Mac in 12 years.
I am saying that "Security experts say this state of affairs primarily reflects the Mac's very small share of the personal computer market, which makes it an unattractive target for virus writers looking to spread mayhem." is hardly a lazy analysis. When there are 22.75 Windows Boxen for every Mac, you can assume that:
Virtually all hackers are familiar with Windows.
As a Windows guy, I haven't had to touch a Mac for years.
That's not the case with Macintosh guys.
A Windows attack would reach 22.75 times the audience as a Macintosh attack.
Further more, Macintosh and Linux users are experienced enough with computers to know what an Operating System is.
These people are experienced enough to download patches, and not open all attachments.
I meet people who don't know what version of Windows they are running. These people cheerfully sign up for Gator(Grrrrrr....), double click attachments, and haven't updated virus definitions since the day they got their computer.
Again, I'm not saying that Windows is more secure, I am saying that it's ubiquity has made it the target to attack.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
I used to work with touchscreen videogames at my old job. While touchscreens do have some advantages for an arcade machine...
1. Simple to understand 2. Difficult to vandalize.
those advantages don't mean anything for portable machines, and they have some fairly severe disadvantages...
1. While using a touchscreen, your fingers will obscure what you are seeing on the screen, especially for the small portable screen. 2. Touchscreen's are weaker then a macintosh mouse. You can only click, it's difficult to drag an object, or anything other then just click on the screen. Your hands could accomplish more on the controller. That way you could hit multiple buttons, instead of just clicking.
Besides, imagine playing an action game, and moving your hand from the buttons to the screen, and back to the buttons. It wouldn't work in an action game, and you can do menu selection faster using the buttons. I'm all for innovation, but this is going to be a gimmick.
Sangloth I appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
To paraphrase, the bill defines spyware as programs that send "Identifying personal information" without user knowledge or consent. It has a list of obvious exceptions, what's left is spyware.
a. "Identifying personal information" means... the following: (1) Name. (2) Address, including the street name or name of city or town. (5) Social security number. (8) Any other information identifying an individual. (I cut some stuff out, but you get the idea.)
Do we hate spyware because it sends out this kind of information, or do we hate it because it runs in the background, shows pop-ups, and makes the computer unstable? I don't have a problem with the bill, but I don't think it target's the underlying problem of nearly self-installing crap-ware.
btw, my computer's always 100% spyware free, it's my parents' computer that's beyond redemption.
Sangloth I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
If I post as an AC, you know that I'm an AC, nothing more, nothing less.
When you read a review on Amazon.com, you are expecting an unbiased review. The person making a self-interested post is actively decieving you.
There is a difference between wishing to preserve your anonimity, and trying to pretend that you are something that you are not.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Suppose some terrorists took innocent hostages in order to exchance them for known terrorists in prison, and demanded an exchance. If we actually went though with the exchance, it would be a short term good at a severe long term cost when more groups of innocent people are taken hostage by other groups.
Buying out the SCO would encourage more bad behaviour. Better to stick this through, no matter what the cost. It may be messy in the short term, but in the long term it will dissuade this sor tof behaviour.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
This could just as easily have been a Football game, it just wouldn't have garnered this attention. I remember 3 years ago they pre-emptively tear gassed students at the CU - CSU football game to prevent a riot. When the police were asked for justification, they cited the riots that had happened every year for the previous 5 years. For that matter, we tend to have some kind of riot whenever the Av's Hockey team loses.
The actions of a single individual don't define a group.
Sangloth I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Anybody remember Fighter's History?
I've never played either Crazy Taxi or Simpson's Road Rage, but Fighter's History was practically a palette shift of Street Fighter 2. Capcom took DataEast to court, and lost. The judge felt that while there were definitaly similarities, Fighter's History was a different game of the same genre.
That the P, PG, PG-13, R, NC-17 system is not endorsed or enforced by the government. It's a form of self-censorship voluntarily undertaken by movie theaters.
Here's a more in depth explanation. The explanation does not note that the ratings system can often arbitrary or illogical.
What's being proposed here is Government legeslation. It's entirely different. The article does say that stores aren't rigorously enforcing these voluntary ratings, but I think that argument's crap. Before I got a job, (age 16), there was no way I could afford a video game, or a video game system. I was completely dependant on my parents. The ratings are there for parents to see. The scenario where a child scraps together enough money for a video game is of an entirely different magnitude from where a child scraps together enough money for a video game.
The Bee article just says it's legaslation pending, but usually anti-video game legaslation has extreme fines in response to any infraction. This isn't the way it should be.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Slashdot Mirror
"I was a TA in a far east university in an Engineering department. Generally I consider my self a tough marker, as I expect students to arrive at answers with right logical reasoning. Having said that, I usually had a partial blind eye for students who has genuine drive towards studies -- post grad research types --, because their future shouldn't be eclipsed by a one bad grade. Also I highly control the grade distribution, such that only 5-10% of the class will get A-grade."
Huh? I'm confused... Isn't the goal of the class to make sure that the student understands the material being taught?!
If everybody has a solid understanding of the material, everybody should get an 'A.' If nobody has a solid understanding of the material, then they should get an 'F'. I don't see what benefit controlling the grade distribution offers, except penalizing or rewarding students unnecessarily.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis... it doesn't even have to agree with me.
No, what China is doing is wrong. I saw Avatar, and while I was impressed by the technical and artistic wizardry, the movie plot was meh. That said (I think you'd agree), it was a fairly basic criticism of American treatment of Native Americans. The allegation here is that the Chinese don't want comparisons being drawn to what's being done today in modern China. (I vaguely remember that more then million people were evicted to create the 3 Gorges dam. ) What they are doing here is trying to censor political speech. Censoring political speech is wrong.
Censoring media in general is also wrong. There is an inherent assumption when you choose which books or movies are okay to watch, that assumption is that you are better suited to decide what John Doe should watch then John Doe is. The assumption that other people are more qualified to handle your life then you are is a recipe for stripping people of their rights. Also, while I have not seen this specific Chow Yun Fat / Confucius movie, I have seen more then a couple Chinese films, and it's fairly likely that this one is also jingoistic crap.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis... it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Howard Dean, an essentially unknown politician with no following gained a very large amount of donations. I think reasonable people would agree that what made Dean attractive to all the donor's was that Dean was consistently against the Iraq war from day 1. While Dean did eventually fail to be nominated, his success at fund-raising had attracted the attention of other democrats. Look at Hillary's vocal defense during this election that she was not in fact voting for the war, but further action through the UN. She and other democrat's see the advantage to be anti-war, and would not make the same mistake twice.
Given how a seemingly clear cut reason to war (WMD) has been undercut, I think no democrats and few republicans would fund another pre-emptive war.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Although I can't pretend to explain what happened with the cables, I think it's safe to say that we aren't going to war with Iran in the immediate future. It would be political suicide for any politician who supported it, (the Iraq war is no longer popular with the electorate), and we are headed to an election. If we wanted to turn up the war machine, Iraq and Afganistan both offer locations to do it at.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis... it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Bruce Sterling is a founding father of cyber-punk, next to William Gibson. Despite the role-playing world's that come to mind when cyber-punk is mentioned, Sterling's worlds are believable and his stories aren't very action oriented. One of his latest books was about politicians in the US in about 40 years. Bruce more looks at social trends then technology, that's not to say tech isn't in his books, but in general they are about society.
Connie Willis wrote the Doomsday book, a story about a time traveler stuck in Europe during the plague. There was a very heavy historical emphasis, in practice it was a historical novel. She's written other timetravel stuff. Her books aren't so much fun as interesting.
Harlan Ellison's books are fun. He is a brillant writer who should not be let out in public(The man is very easily offended, and not afraid to attack with a chair or what not when he is offended. If he's not violent, he's shouting furiously, and it really doesn't take anything intentional to set him off). He wrote I have no mouth and I must scream and Repent Harliqin said the Tick Tock Man. Harlan's books, and Harlan have a extreme cynical viewpoint that's very entertaining. Harlan started out attending sci fi conventions, and has many big sci fi writer friends. I don't know that his writings really fall in a sci fi category (To be clear, Harlan's books pay no attention to science at all, it's more experimental modern writing), but they are good reads.
I've read a ton of Sci Fi, and I've never heard of Len Wein. A quick google says he's a comics guy invovled heavily with X-men, fantastic 4, hulk, and the watchmen series. Some one else will have to give a perspective here.
All three authors are big names in Sci Fi, although none of them give more then lip service to the sci part. I can barely think of who else might belong on this list over them. (Well...Philip K. Dick, Asimov, Heinlien, Bester, Clarke, Cambell(Editor, not an author) a couple other golden oldies. Of living people under 70, Bear, Guin, Stephenson, Kress, and Gibson...Still that's a wish list... )
Still, these are the names of real Science Fiction in the last 20 years (Star Trek and such belong in fantasy or action). I'm not trying to be elitist. These are big names... If you don't know these people, you don't know science fiction...
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Simply put, the Pope had made statements over his life that if not complete endoresments of evolution, were hardely condemnations of it.
Although it's open to interpretation, I'd say that this is a tacit admission that evolution is correct.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment witb a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Geez...I'm surprised nobody brought this up yet. MP3gain normalizes MP3's, but it NOT based on an average of the entire song. Read the site for more info. This is exactly the solution you are looking for.
MP3 Gain at Sourceforge
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Common sense should tell you that humans aren't born to run. It seems like any large predator I can think off can easily outrun a human in a sprint, which makes long distance running worthless.
For catching herbivores, running is about as handy. Running is highly inefficient, and takes up alot of energy. You are jumping repeatedly, lifting your own weight every step. Think about it, how far can you run?
Walking however...that's where it's at. Humans can walk for as long as they want. Walking is just the art of falling forward and catching yourself. Walking requires almost no energy or effort for two legged humans. That's not the case with four legged animals. Four legged animals can't fall forward, they have to expend energy to walk, meaning that walking is actually exausting for them. Humans have other mechanisms to help them in in long distance travel. We have no fur, and we can sweat. Our body frame helps us release heat. Other animals don't have these traits. They do overheat. Anybody who owns a dog knows the scenario. Their dog(even the small ones) can easily out sprint them. Take the dog for a walk however, and after an amount of the time, the dog will get exausted. You can't walk a dog for hours. They just can't release the accumlated heat. Humans didn't out-run their prey, they outwalked their prey. It may have taken several hours, but any animal would eventually succumb to heat stroke, and that is when the human could strike.
As for the assumption that running is what brought us down from the trees...get real. Bi-pedality gives one amazing advantage 4 legged animals don't have...ARMS!!! Now you can carry your young, your stick, your stone, your food. If you had to choose between giving up your ability to run, or your arms, which would you give up? Sure, to a man in the wild, running might be more important to him then it is to you, but even he would be absolutely worthless without his arms.
This isn't all to say we don't have some adaptations which help us run. It is to say that the idea humans were born to run is inane.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
I meant to put in some break lines....
In the Cryptonomicon, sometimes you use titles like Electric Till Corporation (IBM) or Finux(Linux), other times you just used the real world name like Microsoft or Mitsubishi. Were there a legal reason for using ETC instead of IBM, or was it a whim? What was the rational?
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
In the Cryptonomicon, sometimes you use titles like Electric Till Corporation (IBM) or Finux(Linux), other times you just used the real world name like Microsoft or Mitsubishi. Were there a legal reason for using ETC instead of IBM, or was it a whim? What was the rational? Sangloth I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry, I'm sure you both have plans to influence Iran not to pursue nuclear weapons... but that is not what I'm asking. I want to know what the US's reaction will be under your administration if Iran ignores outside pressure and continues to pursue nuclear weapons anyway.
(If this is actually submitted, please knock off the sig...)
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis... it doesn't even have to agree with me.
It's a little tough to say this without seeming dismissive of other cultures, but I'm going to try. Imagine for a second that I could say the Inuit language(I've never even heard it) is crap without implying anything about Eskimos.
Some spoken languages are crap, specifically I'm thinking about English. If you take a quick look here you can see a consistent theme is how English speakers are constantly adopting elements from other languages. This has created an inconsistent language with an extremely large and unnecessary vocabulary, which often give multiple ways to say the same thing.
While spoken Japanese is consistent and easy to learn, old written Japanese (Kanji) is sheer crap.
(Stolen Excerpt)
Since programming is often expressing mathematical concepts, another example would be Roman Numerals versus Arabic Numerals. It should be obvious that Roman Numerals are valueless in comparisson.
Anyway, choosing a software language isn't like choosing a spoken language, on several levels.
One level is that you can work with a software language in a vacuum. If you like an obscure language, you can use it to write your project successfully. If you use an obscure spoken language, (Latin), you won't be able to function in modern society.
We tend to huddle around the good languages, which makes this topic alittle tougher. Also, I'm sure you've heard to the tool-kit analogy, about how you don't use a screw driver to knock down a nail, and you don't use Ruby for 3d modern video games or FORTRAN for text processing.
That said, some languages are more suited to more tasks, and other languages are not.
You'll notice that Source Forge's Language Distribution is fairly heavily scewed in certain directions.
Out of thousands of projects, not one person used COBOL.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Clearly this is about the Japanese Recession. Japanese have less spending cash, and are hoarding what they have.
Here in the US, we had fairly mild down-turn which is already reversing itself.
Japan's Recession(Which basically amounts to stagflation) has been going on for 10 years, and is not turning around.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Not too long ago, I think 2002, we signed the SORT treaty with Russia, where we limited ourselves to 2,200 nuclear warheads.
I find this type of alarmism annoying...nuclear weapons have only been used as weapons twice in all of human history. If we survived the Cold War, I find it highly unlikely that we'd blow ourselves up now. Nuclear terrorism may be a valid threat, but nuclear war is a thing of the past.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
This link should work for the symantec description of Sasser. Sangloth I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Directly from Google Zeitgeist:
==
Operating Systems Used to Access Google
February 2004
Windows 98 23%
Windows XP 46%
Windows 2000 18%
Windows NT 3%
Mac 4%
Windows 95 1%
Linux 1%
Other 4%
==
That's Windows 91% vs Mac 4%
I'm not saying Mac's are more or less secure then Windows, because I have touched a Mac in 12 years.
I am saying that
"Security experts say this state of affairs primarily reflects the Mac's very small share of the personal computer market, which makes it an unattractive target for virus writers looking to spread mayhem."
is hardly a lazy analysis. When there are 22.75 Windows Boxen for every Mac, you can assume that:
Virtually all hackers are familiar with Windows.
As a Windows guy, I haven't had to touch a Mac for years.
That's not the case with Macintosh guys.
A Windows attack would reach 22.75 times the audience as a Macintosh attack.
Further more, Macintosh and Linux users are experienced enough with computers to know what an Operating System is.
These people are experienced enough to download patches, and not open all attachments.
I meet people who don't know what version of Windows they are running. These people cheerfully sign up for Gator(Grrrrrr....), double click attachments, and haven't updated virus definitions since the day they got their computer.
Again, I'm not saying that Windows is more secure, I am saying that it's ubiquity has made it the target to attack.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
I used to work with touchscreen videogames at my old job. While touchscreens do have some advantages for an arcade machine...
1. Simple to understand
2. Difficult to vandalize.
those advantages don't mean anything for portable machines, and they have some fairly severe disadvantages...
1. While using a touchscreen, your fingers will obscure what you are seeing on the screen, especially for the small portable screen.
2. Touchscreen's are weaker then a macintosh mouse. You can only click, it's difficult to drag an object, or anything other then just click on the screen. Your hands could accomplish more on the controller. That way you could hit multiple buttons, instead of just clicking.
Besides, imagine playing an action game, and moving your hand from the buttons to the screen, and back to the buttons. It wouldn't work in an action game, and you can do menu selection faster using the buttons. I'm all for innovation, but this is going to be a gimmick.
Sangloth
I appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
To paraphrase, the bill defines spyware as programs that send "Identifying personal information" without user knowledge or consent. It has a list of obvious exceptions, what's left is spyware.
...
a. "Identifying personal information" means
the following:
(1) Name.
(2) Address, including the street name or name of city or town.
(5) Social security number.
(8) Any other information identifying an individual.
(I cut some stuff out, but you get the idea.)
Do we hate spyware because it sends out this kind of information, or do we hate it because it runs in the background, shows pop-ups, and makes the computer unstable?
I don't have a problem with the bill, but I don't think it target's the underlying problem of nearly self-installing crap-ware.
btw, my computer's always 100% spyware free, it's my parents' computer that's beyond redemption.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
If I post as an AC, you know that I'm an AC, nothing more, nothing less.
When you read a review on Amazon.com, you are expecting an unbiased review. The person making a self-interested post is actively decieving you.
There is a difference between wishing to preserve your anonimity, and trying to pretend that you are something that you are not.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Suppose some terrorists took innocent hostages in order to exchance them for known terrorists in prison, and demanded an exchance. If we actually went though with the exchance, it would be a short term good at a severe long term cost when more groups of innocent people are taken hostage by other groups.
Buying out the SCO would encourage more bad behaviour. Better to stick this through, no matter what the cost. It may be messy in the short term, but in the long term it will dissuade this sor tof behaviour.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
This could just as easily have been a Football game, it just wouldn't have garnered this attention. I remember 3 years ago they pre-emptively tear gassed students at the CU - CSU football game to prevent a riot. When the police were asked for justification, they cited the riots that had happened every year for the previous 5 years.
For that matter, we tend to have some kind of riot whenever the Av's Hockey team loses.
The actions of a single individual don't define a group.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
I remeber how hot the Twin Towers burned from the Jet Fuel of the airplanes. Wouldn't it be the same if a Taero get's in an accident on the ground?
Even if this scheme were possible, you'd be crazy to drive a $400,000(+ assembly) car on the open road.
I've got an idle question for any people knowledgable in the area. Would flying be more energy efficient then ground transportation?
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
Anybody remember Fighter's History?
I've never played either Crazy Taxi or Simpson's Road Rage, but Fighter's History was practically a palette shift of Street Fighter 2. Capcom took DataEast to court, and lost. The judge felt that while there were definitaly similarities, Fighter's History was a different game of the same genre.
Uncanny Simularities"
Quick Summation Half way down
I'm surprised, I remember the entire thing so vividly, but I just can't find more resources about it on the web....
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
I didn't visit Slashdot when the cuecat controversy happened, but after reading this comment I went over the archives.
Cue cat may have had alot of money, but they blew it all giving out silly bar code scanners. This was their buisiness model.
The SCO has alot of money, and they are spending it all on litigation. This is the SCO's buisiness model.
There's a substantial diference.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.
That the P, PG, PG-13, R, NC-17 system is not endorsed or enforced by the government. It's a form of self-censorship voluntarily undertaken by movie theaters. Here's a more in depth explanation. The explanation does not note that the ratings system can often arbitrary or illogical.
What's being proposed here is Government legeslation. It's entirely different. The article does say that stores aren't rigorously enforcing these voluntary ratings, but I think that argument's crap. Before I got a job, (age 16), there was no way I could afford a video game, or a video game system. I was completely dependant on my parents. The ratings are there for parents to see. The scenario where a child scraps together enough money for a video game is of an entirely different magnitude from where a child scraps together enough money for a video game.
The Bee article just says it's legaslation pending, but usually anti-video game legaslation has extreme fines in response to any infraction. This isn't the way it should be.
Sangloth
I'd appreciate any comment with a logical basis...it doesn't even have to agree with me.