Give Users (or Power Users, or whatever account) full control
I'm unfortunately a Windows Admin, and I've had to do this to get several models of Visoneer scanners to work for non-admin. Seems to work for other programs as well. You may also have to give them permissions on the Warcraft directory as well. Hope it helps.
I know I shouldn't feed the trolls, but frat-boys' assuming that others are jealous of them is a major cause of the asshat reputation that they as a group receive.
Three were supposed to be drawn, if you count Jack Mort. I think the idea is either that Roland denied his destiny, or accepted it (depending on your viewpoint) by denying the drawing of Jack Mort, especially when you consider that he later draws a different Jack through a different door to the same world (in a different time) - this happens in the Wastelands. I think that he was supposed to draw Jack Mort, and then decided not to because of his unfortunate homicidal tendencies. Interesting thought, though. I'd never seen it from that perspective before.
can't remember the rest, but other authors have used (exploited?) the 'turtle as universe' theme. From either 'The Drawing of the Three,' or 'The Wastelands.'
The best YA book he ever wrote was 'Tunnel in the Sky,' or 'The Menace from Earth.' I didn't like 'Space Suit' much, either.
Re:and if you do...
on
PC Annoyances
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I've noticed that too. Users call me because their computer is spontaneously rebooting, and they automatically think that it's a hardware issue. For example:
User: "My computer is rebooting every 10 minutes. I think that the power supply (or hard drive, or power cable, etc.) must be bad."
Am I the only one who has noticed this happenning? I hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but I'm fairly convinced that MS changed the BSOD default action on purpose to divert the attention (of users who don't know any better) from OS errors, so that they don't form the opinion that Windows 2000 is still not *that* great.
Yeah, I just spent two hours on the phone with them tonight, and the verdict was that they kicked back my porting application because I left the . off of St. (as in I live on Adams St.). This happenned last Wednesday. Naturally, they neglected to inform anyone until I called, and of course, they couldn't change the application in the computer, but rather told me that I'd have to have Verizon resubmit the entire request. I haven't had a bad experience with Cingular in 3 years of service, so I think they're trying to make up for it now.
You too? I got a new contract and two phones from Verizon on 11/26. I'm trying to get a number ported to each of them - one coming from Cingular, the other from ANOTHER Verizon account, and neither one is turned on yet. They keep telling me that it's Cingular's fault.
When saying RIAA, I really meant RIAA members. I shall specify in the future.
I wasn't suggesting that mass copyright violation is right, only that it is happenning, and there's very little way to end it without infringing upon peoples' rights to make legitimate, legal copies. I was trying to make the point that, rather than alienate their customers by pursuing the HUGELY unpopular lawsuits (as well as locking down legitimate copies, and shutting down services that have other legit uses), the RIAA members should instead look at shifting their business model to one that's more sustainable over the long term, and that they should look to companies that have been successful using similar business models.
Of course Red Hat makes you pay for tech support. That's something that people can't pirate. They're giving away what they have little copy control over, and building their business on what they can control. The RIAA members should learn from this.
sorta like how Red Hat produces something of value that's available for free, and then has the audacity to expect to make money off of it?
There's so many ways that the RIAA could shift its business model to make a killing off of file sharing, and they have instead chosen to not move with the times. They deserve what all organizations deserve that fall behind the times: bankruptcy.
It's so you can still hear it when you hit the bathroom or the kitchen during the commercials. We can't have the media companies wasting valuable ad time just because you had to go take care of bodily necessities.
Isaac Asimov once sat in on a college lecture where the class was discussing the message and social implications of a story that he'd written (I forget which one). He maintained his silence for several minutes, until he could hold his comments no longer. He loudly exclaimed that he had absolutely no message in mind when he had written the story, and that its purpose was for nothing more than entertainment value. The instructor politely said that his intentions for the meaning of the story made not one whit of difference in what meaning the audience got out of it.
Point: In art, the intent of your message often has nothing to do with how the piece is actually interpreted. This is especially true in literature. If, for example, the audience of Lord of the Flies interprets the story as nothing more than kids on an island, than who is William Golding to argue? If his intended message (or non-message) was not apparent to the audience, then it's his own fault.
Well, that sucks. I realize that there were scouring scenes in the mirror pool, but I still think that in removing the entire section of story from the end, you lose a great amount of insight on character development over the course of the story... You don't get to see how Merry, Pippin, and Sam have grown into great leaders of their people, and you don't get to see the ultimate brokenness of Frodo over his failure (even though the ring was destroyed, Frodo still ultimately failed his task). Also, you miss out on seeing what Saruman and Wormtounge are reduced to - for me, the satisfaction of that far outweighed what happens to Frodo.
Bottom line: the ending was Tolkien summarizing the entire point of the series. I think that his intention was to show that we all have choices, and that they define who we are. Without the final chapters, the story becomes just another blood-and-guts fantasy epic (which is what a lot of people have been calling the movies from the beginning), albiet a good one. Tolkien's message has been completely lost.
Sorry, I didn't hear before that they were axing the shire. It still sucks far worse than any edits thus far. Needless to say, I'll still see the damned thing, and I'll probably like it.
didn't seem like it had any shots of the Shire after the battle and the destruction of the ring... Does anyone else think that Peter Jackson is going to totally screw up the original ending *really bad*? I keep hoping that he keeps it more or less as written (I'd love to see a small army of Hobbits trouncing Sauruman's henchmen), but given what he has cut out already as "non-essential," I can't help but have some misgivings.
Don't get me wrong, I actually thought the first two movies were quite entertaining. I didn't really mind him cutting out Bombadil, and I'm willing to overlook the horrible treatment of Treebeard, but something tells me that they're just going to totally screw up the beauty of the original ending.
doesn't?? It was working last night. I was messing around with my FTP server, and it looks like I applied password settings to the web and the FTP server. Sorry, I'll fix it tonight when I get home. In the meantime, here's the Google cache. The Mp3 downloads will work from there because the Mp3s are not hosted on the downed server.
I assure you that the insane hardcore rantings of Civil Authority are well worth the second look. Please let me know what you think.
You do increase the journey time by gradually decelerating, but if we ever get the technology to function at the limits of what the human body can handle, then there will be no alternative.
For example:
Say you accelerate 90% of the distance to Mars at 15G's (assuming that the human body or onboard equipment can even stand 15G's for more than a few seconds/minutes without imploding and/or ceasing to function). Then, you'll have to decelerate at a much greater G-Force in order to stop in time, maybe 1000G's, which would certainly crush any humans, and probably most equipment. To incorporate braking that close into the planet without crashing, you're limited in how much acceleration you can do up until that point. Say you want to brake at 15G's for 10 seconds when you arrive at Mars. In that case, you must be going much slower when you start braking to actually stop in time, which means that your constant acceleration must be slower. Heinlein's craft accelerated/decelerated at a constant 3-5G's over a period of several days/weeks. Even that might be a stress on people.
This isn't all bad though. Keep in mind that we're talking acceleration, and that means that at 2G's, we're going 19.6 meters/sec faster every second for half of the journey, and 19.6 meters/second slower every second for the other half. At those delta Vs, we could get to Mars in a few days, even with half the trip being deceleration.
Good insight in your post, though.
By the way, I think you jogged my memory... Could it have been 'The Rolling Stones,' or one of the Laz and Lor books?
Easy. Heinlein suggested that the best way to slow down a constant acceleration craft is to turn it around (I believe his fictional craft used gyroscopes of some kind), so that the back end (where the ions come out) points in the direction that the craft is moving. The idea is that if it releases the same amount of thrust for the same amount of time in braking as acceleration, then it will be at zero velocity when it gets where it's going (assuming it's timed right). Can't remember which books/stories he talked about this, but I'm certain that he did.
I think that this stuff will be great for some applications (like portable PCs), but bad
for others. I don't know about you guys, but I will never give up my
dead-tree versions of 'The Moon is a Harsh Mistress,' or 'Fahrenheit 451.'
I'm sorry, I just think that for some applications (most literature),
the media has been mature for quite a long time. I think there's just a
catharsis about having a real book in my hands.
Also, what happens if sometime in the future, the government decides
that Fahrenheit 451 is too subversive to allow the masses access to? Or
that 'Catcher in the Rye,' or EE Cummings' poetry is too obscene?
Would it be going too far to think that the Dept of Homeland Security (or
whatever passes for it in the future), would be able to remotely crash
all copies of them before a modern G. Montag could memorize it?
OTOH, it would be great for portable computing. As a helpdesk tech, I
*hate* having to carry 21" CRTs up 3 flights of stairs.
The game is using an improper analogy, and so are you, and you know it. The proper analogy would be:
Write songs, record songs, make cover art, take advantage of free internet marketing. The problem is that the teachers who are implimenting this anti-filesharing indoctrination are either uneducated about the real issues of the problem (as you seem to be), or they are simply against free marketing. It costs absolutely nothing to put your songs up on p2p, and, if you're lucky, your music gets more grassroots credibility because you actually worked to market yourself rather than going through the labels' money machine. As an independant musician, I honestly can't see what the big deal is. My band has gained more money/fans from giving out free music (both online and off) than we ever would have gotten by charging for each and every copy. I don't wish for the labels to take away my distribution channel just because they don't know how to properly capitolize on it.
Let me put it in Slashdot standard format for you:
Me:
1.Make music
2.Use free marketing channel
3.Gain fans
4.charge fans for other merch, like t-shirts, concert tickets, and CDs for the ones that want legit copies and album art.
5.Profit!
Labels:
1.Buy music
2.Pay for marketing
3.Gain fans
4.Sue fans
5.Go bankrupt!
Now, which one makes more sense?
Bottom line: The labels are paying radio stations to allow people to listen to their music for free. Why don't the labels use p2p to do the same thing, and avoid having to pay radio stations? Your guess is as good as mine.
TRS-80? I want Megabug! Was anyone else addicted to that? Polaris was cool too.
Seriously, though, I first started programming on one of those, with BASIC, and a tape drive when I was 6 years old. I would be awesome if I could play the games from it again on my Athlon.
if you can't get them changed, and the majority of the public does NOT support your position on getting it changed, tough luck, you lose, move on
What if the majority of the public does support the change, but you still can't get it changed because of well-funded, well-organized corporate lobbies?
I'd like to report that I'm filing a lawsuit against Kingston, Abit, Western Digital, Toshiba, AMD, Nvidia, Red Hat, and Microsoft because they made the components of the self-built computer that I play GTA on, and it's led to violent tendencies in me and my kids.
Slashdot Mirror
Hkey_Local_Machine
Warcraft (or whatever)
Right-click
Permissions
Give Users (or Power Users, or whatever account) full control
I'm unfortunately a Windows Admin, and I've had to do this to get several models of Visoneer scanners to work for non-admin. Seems to work for other programs as well. You may also have to give them permissions on the Warcraft directory as well. Hope it helps.
See the turtle of enormous GIRTH,
On his shell, he holds the EARTH,
can't remember the rest, but other authors have used (exploited?) the 'turtle as universe' theme. From either 'The Drawing of the Three,' or 'The Wastelands.'
User: "My computer is rebooting every 10 minutes. I think that the power supply (or hard drive, or power cable, etc.) must be bad."
Am I the only one who has noticed this happenning? I hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but I'm fairly convinced that MS changed the BSOD default action on purpose to divert the attention (of users who don't know any better) from OS errors, so that they don't form the opinion that Windows 2000 is still not *that* great.
You too? I got a new contract and two phones from Verizon on 11/26. I'm trying to get a number ported to each of them - one coming from Cingular, the other from ANOTHER Verizon account, and neither one is turned on yet. They keep telling me that it's Cingular's fault.
I wasn't suggesting that mass copyright violation is right, only that it is happenning, and there's very little way to end it without infringing upon peoples' rights to make legitimate, legal copies. I was trying to make the point that, rather than alienate their customers by pursuing the HUGELY unpopular lawsuits (as well as locking down legitimate copies, and shutting down services that have other legit uses), the RIAA members should instead look at shifting their business model to one that's more sustainable over the long term, and that they should look to companies that have been successful using similar business models.
Of course Red Hat makes you pay for tech support. That's something that people can't pirate. They're giving away what they have little copy control over, and building their business on what they can control. The RIAA members should learn from this.
There's so many ways that the RIAA could shift its business model to make a killing off of file sharing, and they have instead chosen to not move with the times. They deserve what all organizations deserve that fall behind the times: bankruptcy.
Point: In art, the intent of your message often has nothing to do with how the piece is actually interpreted. This is especially true in literature. If, for example, the audience of Lord of the Flies interprets the story as nothing more than kids on an island, than who is William Golding to argue? If his intended message (or non-message) was not apparent to the audience, then it's his own fault.
Bottom line: the ending was Tolkien summarizing the entire point of the series. I think that his intention was to show that we all have choices, and that they define who we are. Without the final chapters, the story becomes just another blood-and-guts fantasy epic (which is what a lot of people have been calling the movies from the beginning), albiet a good one. Tolkien's message has been completely lost.
Sorry, I didn't hear before that they were axing the shire. It still sucks far worse than any edits thus far. Needless to say, I'll still see the damned thing, and I'll probably like it.
Don't get me wrong, I actually thought the first two movies were quite entertaining. I didn't really mind him cutting out Bombadil, and I'm willing to overlook the horrible treatment of Treebeard, but something tells me that they're just going to totally screw up the beauty of the original ending.
I assure you that the insane hardcore rantings of Civil Authority are well worth the second look. Please let me know what you think.
For example:
Say you accelerate 90% of the distance to Mars at 15G's (assuming that the human body or onboard equipment can even stand 15G's for more than a few seconds/minutes without imploding and/or ceasing to function). Then, you'll have to decelerate at a much greater G-Force in order to stop in time, maybe 1000G's, which would certainly crush any humans, and probably most equipment. To incorporate braking that close into the planet without crashing, you're limited in how much acceleration you can do up until that point. Say you want to brake at 15G's for 10 seconds when you arrive at Mars. In that case, you must be going much slower when you start braking to actually stop in time, which means that your constant acceleration must be slower. Heinlein's craft accelerated/decelerated at a constant 3-5G's over a period of several days/weeks. Even that might be a stress on people.
This isn't all bad though. Keep in mind that we're talking acceleration, and that means that at 2G's, we're going 19.6 meters/sec faster every second for half of the journey, and 19.6 meters/second slower every second for the other half. At those delta Vs, we could get to Mars in a few days, even with half the trip being deceleration.
Good insight in your post, though.
By the way, I think you jogged my memory... Could it have been 'The Rolling Stones,' or one of the Laz and Lor books?
Also, what happens if sometime in the future, the government decides that Fahrenheit 451 is too subversive to allow the masses access to? Or that 'Catcher in the Rye,' or EE Cummings' poetry is too obscene? Would it be going too far to think that the Dept of Homeland Security (or whatever passes for it in the future), would be able to remotely crash all copies of them before a modern G. Montag could memorize it?
OTOH, it would be great for portable computing. As a helpdesk tech, I *hate* having to carry 21" CRTs up 3 flights of stairs.
Write songs, record songs, make cover art, take advantage of free internet marketing. The problem is that the teachers who are implimenting this anti-filesharing indoctrination are either uneducated about the real issues of the problem (as you seem to be), or they are simply against free marketing. It costs absolutely nothing to put your songs up on p2p, and, if you're lucky, your music gets more grassroots credibility because you actually worked to market yourself rather than going through the labels' money machine. As an independant musician, I honestly can't see what the big deal is. My band has gained more money/fans from giving out free music (both online and off) than we ever would have gotten by charging for each and every copy. I don't wish for the labels to take away my distribution channel just because they don't know how to properly capitolize on it.
Let me put it in Slashdot standard format for you:
Me:
1.Make music
2.Use free marketing channel
3.Gain fans
4.charge fans for other merch, like t-shirts, concert tickets, and CDs for the ones that want legit copies and album art.
5.Profit!
Labels:
1.Buy music
2.Pay for marketing
3.Gain fans
4.Sue fans
5.Go bankrupt!
Now, which one makes more sense?
Bottom line: The labels are paying radio stations to allow people to listen to their music for free. Why don't the labels use p2p to do the same thing, and avoid having to pay radio stations? Your guess is as good as mine.
Seriously, though, I first started programming on one of those, with BASIC, and a tape drive when I was 6 years old. I would be awesome if I could play the games from it again on my Athlon.
What if the majority of the public does support the change, but you still can't get it changed because of well-funded, well-organized corporate lobbies?
Give me a freakin' break. This is retarded.