Seems like it's going to be an interesting continuity-versus-drama challenge in that, if Indy can't die (having drank from the Holy Grail in the previous movie), what enemies/threats does he really have for the assumed action scenes?
(From a link off the main linked page)
Speaking about the story, Lucas adds that is it "vaguely in the realm of the supernatural. We have to accept the fact that Indiana Jones is an older man. But it's been hell getting a script out of it."
Seems like it would have to be... and I can understand the difficulty.:)
For example, former programmer Chris Peters bought the PBA (Professional Bowlers Association)...
If you can't beat them... just redefine the value of "splits".
Yeah... anecdotally, capping my upload at 20KB/s (I'm on an unbalanced up/down cable broadband connection), made an -enormous- difference. I went from seeming to max out at around 25KB/s down to frequently seeing 100-200KB/s.
Pure conjecture: perhaps unlimited up is actually interfering with communication between the client and tracker... unlimited up also makes my web browsing very slow, not because I don't have the free down to pull page images quick, but, I'm guessing, the maxed-out up is actually slowing the http requests I'm sending to the web server.
$20 per month / 720 hours = about 3 cents an hour.
Since they say they begin "manually reviewing, hand-picking and approving important correspondence", how does this work? To pay someone $6/hour, they'd need to be reviewing at least 200 mailboxes simultaneously. My confidence level of their accuracy under these circumstances would be considerably -lower- than a software solution.
My friend's shameless display of his oversized cellphone was finally put to rest when I trotted out my Ajeeb chess-playing automaton......though the very, very short master-level chessplayer was admittedly difficult to source.
At any rate, McBride has no plans to compromise SCO's claims. The title of his address Tuesday night to the Computer Digital Expo at Mandalay Bay was: "There's No Free Lunch -- or Free Linux."
But isn't this exactly what SCO wants, in terms of their product development costs?
Is your analysis of/. as a generalized mass of mentally-deficient thieves, provided without any actual information, indicative of the general quality of your teaching?
If nothing else, maybe it clarifies the source of underlying conflict.
Frankly, I don't want "single-sign-on", and I don't get why other people would either. The information I'd want
to be available to my bank is completely different from what I'd want to be available to "Jim's Hardware Shack".
Presumably, in order for this to work effectively, if you have one standardized set of information about "you",
it would have to be the superset of information you'd need for all the sites you use. And, to be efficient
from an implementation standpoint, I'd expect this information will be replicated all over the place in various caching
mechanisms. This leaves your information fully available to web site operators reputable, disreputable, secure and
hackable alike. As well as likely creating a situation where if your primary "record" is compromised, it could
provide enough information to allow access "as you" to *all* the web sites you use. This seems like quite a
high price to pay for the need to create a separate login for each site, which realistically, is probably on the
order of a dozen or two registered sites a year for most users.
Yes, and this is a major reason I'm surprised. By making it transparent so that even a beginner can use it, they are potentially losing revenue.
Props for the double-question-mark with the "You people", though. Makes the massive generalization convincing.
What's the point? Among others,
Proxomitron is free, takes 5 minutes to set up, and is massively configurable for popup/banner/script/etc. blocking.
The strange thing here for me is why Microsoft would do this from a business perspective. I would think they're drawing a fair amount
of income from their MSN portal advertising. Maybe it doesn't work for MSN? Or they're only blocking popups because the don't plan on having them
on a MSN linked site anyway?
I feel that most of the advantages mentioned for another moon project would also apply to a large expanse of oceanfront property I've had my eye on near Cancun, given a sufficient level of government support. I even have a white paper detailing the implementation, at a far reduced cost. Oh, and the command center would be *so* sweet...
(A libertarian with karma to burn... whaddya expect...?)
There are two levels at which this law could apply, to the system holding the CVS repository, and anticipated systems deploying a future kernel from it.
Off the top, this clause seems rather pertinent:
(6) knowingly and with intent to defraud traffics (as defined in section 1029) in any password or similar information through which a computer may be accessed without authorization...
Perhaps you'd care to demonstrate specifically why this act, in total, would not apply? That'd be more informative.
Due to the superior acoustical properties involved, the next version of the phone will be interfacing with the nasal cavity. Company officials tout this version as having intrinsically greater privacy effects, as well.
Well, this isn't really that surprising. Unfortunate, but unsurprising.
It's the basic political pattern of the formation of an oligarchy. A new force enters the scene, propelled by
fortunate environmental circumstances, such as Microsoft's extremely high margins and overbearing market control coupled with the idealism of
Open Source development. Typically, they are strident in their "freedom" and/or "anti-monopoly" stance. Once the force finds itself established, though, the things that got it there in the
first place start to look a lot less desirable. "May the best man win" becomes "may I and my friends win".
Red Hat is discontinuing all but their "Enterprise" versions of Linux (as was previously mentioned here), because of a lack of profitability. So,
from this perspective, the desktop is irrelevant. Supporting Linux for the desktop doesn't translate into more money, while supporting Microsoft for
this role potentially does, either via overlapping stock portfolios or joint business ventures.
Naturally, I have no way of knowing if Suzlik's intent is along these lines in this particular instance. It is, however, the direction that the econonomic
considerations will drive companies in Red Hat's position toward, and if Red Hat isn't advocating Microsoft wherever it can't turn a profit now, I expect it
will be soon.
Slashdot Mirror
Seems like it's going to be an interesting continuity-versus-drama challenge in that, if Indy can't die (having drank from the Holy Grail in the previous movie), what enemies/threats does he really have for the assumed action scenes?
:)
(From a link off the main linked page)
Speaking about the story, Lucas adds that is it "vaguely in the realm of the supernatural. We have to accept the fact that Indiana Jones is an older man. But it's been hell getting a script out of it."
Seems like it would have to be... and I can understand the difficulty.
For example, former programmer Chris Peters bought the PBA (Professional Bowlers Association)... If you can't beat them... just redefine the value of "splits".
Yeah... anecdotally, capping my upload at 20KB/s (I'm on an unbalanced up/down cable broadband connection), made an -enormous- difference. I went from seeming to max out at around 25KB/s down to frequently seeing 100-200KB/s. Pure conjecture: perhaps unlimited up is actually interfering with communication between the client and tracker... unlimited up also makes my web browsing very slow, not because I don't have the free down to pull page images quick, but, I'm guessing, the maxed-out up is actually slowing the http requests I'm sending to the web server.
So says yet another person on the way to the inevitable compulsive compliance with Miss Rand's specific demanded epistemology...
...or the advocates of the preceding scientific model?
So, theoretically, the industry could evolve to "Amagoo", which could function both as a company name -and- an appropriate description?
Probably.
But it seems like this idea is broken if they let people say "I'll take commercial mail about subject X", and if they don't, how's it personal?
...and, according to their site (contrary to headline), it's $19.95 a -year-. So, make that 2400 mailboxes... Fast readers, I hope.
"24 hours a day" * 30 days/month = 720 hours
$20 per month / 720 hours = about 3 cents an hour.
Since they say they begin "manually reviewing, hand-picking and approving important correspondence", how does this work? To pay someone $6/hour, they'd need to be reviewing at least 200 mailboxes simultaneously. My confidence level of their accuracy under these circumstances would be considerably -lower- than a software solution.
My friend's shameless display of his oversized cellphone was finally put to rest when I trotted out my Ajeeb chess-playing automaton... ...though the very, very short master-level chessplayer was admittedly difficult to source.
Trade you my b-tree for your linked-list...
At any rate, McBride has no plans to compromise SCO's claims. The title of his address Tuesday night to the Computer Digital Expo at Mandalay Bay was: "There's No Free Lunch -- or Free Linux."
But isn't this exactly what SCO wants, in terms of their product development costs?
Hmm... self-contradiction, baseless claims, conspiracy theories, projection, delusions of grandeur... aren't these primary symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia?
Is your analysis of /. as a generalized mass of mentally-deficient thieves, provided without any actual information, indicative of the general quality of your teaching?
If nothing else, maybe it clarifies the source of underlying conflict.
(YHBT?)
For "great and seminal" it's hard to beat Alan Turing's 1950 (!) paper on AI.
Frankly, I don't want "single-sign-on", and I don't get why other people would either. The information I'd want to be available to my bank is completely different from what I'd want to be available to "Jim's Hardware Shack".
Presumably, in order for this to work effectively, if you have one standardized set of information about "you", it would have to be the superset of information you'd need for all the sites you use. And, to be efficient from an implementation standpoint, I'd expect this information will be replicated all over the place in various caching mechanisms. This leaves your information fully available to web site operators reputable, disreputable, secure and hackable alike. As well as likely creating a situation where if your primary "record" is compromised, it could provide enough information to allow access "as you" to *all* the web sites you use. This seems like quite a high price to pay for the need to create a separate login for each site, which realistically, is probably on the order of a dozen or two registered sites a year for most users.
Yes, and this is a major reason I'm surprised. By making it transparent so that even a beginner can use it, they are potentially losing revenue. Props for the double-question-mark with the "You people", though. Makes the massive generalization convincing.
What's the point? Among others, Proxomitron is free, takes 5 minutes to set up, and is massively configurable for popup/banner/script/etc. blocking.
The strange thing here for me is why Microsoft would do this from a business perspective. I would think they're drawing a fair amount of income from their MSN portal advertising. Maybe it doesn't work for MSN? Or they're only blocking popups because the don't plan on having them on a MSN linked site anyway?
I feel that most of the advantages mentioned for another moon project would also apply to a large expanse of oceanfront property I've had my eye on near Cancun, given a sufficient level of government support. I even have a white paper detailing the implementation, at a far reduced cost. Oh, and the command center would be *so* sweet...
(A libertarian with karma to burn... whaddya expect...?)
...two people in a car drive around endlessly...
And I thought my deadlines were unreasonable.
There are two levels at which this law could apply, to the system holding the CVS repository, and anticipated systems deploying a future kernel from it.
Off the top, this clause seems rather pertinent:
(6) knowingly and with intent to defraud traffics (as defined in section 1029) in any password or similar information through which a computer may be accessed without authorization...
Perhaps you'd care to demonstrate specifically why this act, in total, would not apply? That'd be more informative.
Due to the superior acoustical properties involved, the next version of the phone will be interfacing with the nasal cavity. Company officials tout this version as having intrinsically greater privacy effects, as well.
Longer list.
Well, this isn't really that surprising. Unfortunate, but unsurprising.
It's the basic political pattern of the formation of an oligarchy. A new force enters the scene, propelled by fortunate environmental circumstances, such as Microsoft's extremely high margins and overbearing market control coupled with the idealism of Open Source development. Typically, they are strident in their "freedom" and/or "anti-monopoly" stance. Once the force finds itself established, though, the things that got it there in the first place start to look a lot less desirable. "May the best man win" becomes "may I and my friends win".
Red Hat is discontinuing all but their "Enterprise" versions of Linux (as was previously mentioned here), because of a lack of profitability. So, from this perspective, the desktop is irrelevant. Supporting Linux for the desktop doesn't translate into more money, while supporting Microsoft for this role potentially does, either via overlapping stock portfolios or joint business ventures.
Naturally, I have no way of knowing if Suzlik's intent is along these lines in this particular instance. It is, however, the direction that the econonomic considerations will drive companies in Red Hat's position toward, and if Red Hat isn't advocating Microsoft wherever it can't turn a profit now, I expect it will be soon.
Or is it the removal of testicles that we're out for?
I'm fully in support of this. If they aren't "bluejacking" before this, they will be.