That's not necessarily a bad thing. I got an iPod because I use iTunes (and I use iTunes because I used a Mac as my primary computer at the time). For me, the organizational abilities of iTunes are compelling, particularly Smart Playlists. Having that supported by the portable player, which also automatically syncs with it, is doubly so.
Does Amarok (which is the only player I've heard of being comparable to iTunes) support something like Smart Playlists? Does Rockbox support something like Smart Playlists? Can Amarok and Rockbox synchronize the Smart Playlists? Automatically? If the answer to any of these questions is "no," then iTunes/iPod is still the best choice.
Of course, whenever the 8 year old kids saw a big white dude, they always offered the porn first. We must have a great reputation for being lechers over there.
And stupid too, apparently -- what idiot pays for porn?
And to be honest I'm starting to expect this kind of wink-wink nudge-nudge release from Apple. They can't release a product the way consumers want it so they get the recording industry/telecom industy to agree to "rules" that just make their devices likely targets of benign hacking.
If that were the case, Apple would have released a real SDK.
The part of this article that I found most interesting is that you need to use your skin for the touch screen to work - that kinda rules out any sort of future handwriting recognition.
I guess I just really want Apple to give me a real PDA - an iNewton - instead of an iPod that looks kinda like a PDA.
That's okay; PDA screens are physically too small for decent handwriting recognition anyway (let alone the fact that they also really need a higher-resolution (i.e., subpixel) digitizer). Now, a Tablet PC can do decent handwriting recognition. But a PDA? Any PDA? No way!
No kidding. Valve even went so far as to port the engine used for the original Half-Life from OpenGL to Direct3D. And then, when they made the Source engine, they dropped the OpenGL part entirely. Now they've apparently not only had a 180-degree change in heart, but such a big one that they're (maybe) willing to face the cost of porting Source* back to OpenGL? I don't believe it. I mean, it'd be great -- don't get me wrong -- but I don't believe it.
(*Yes, the job description could just be talking about Peggle, but then who the heck cares anyway?)
Software is not an object, and thus it has to be treated as a separate entity. Usually, when you buy a piece of software, you're not purchasing the equivalent of a microwave. You're purchasing a license to use the software in a specified way.
Bullshit! A copy of some software is exactly like any other instance of a copyrighted work, such as a book, CD, or video game. And like a book, CD, or video game, once you buy the copy you can and should be able to do whatever the fuck you want with it, within the bounds of copyright law! Can you resell a book? Absolutely! Can you resell a CD? Yes! Can you resell a video game? Sure! Then you should damn well be able to resell computer software too!
I'm truly sorry that you've been tricked into believing that you're not "really" buying the thing. But in reality, you are buying it, and anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you in hopes that if enough people start to believe it that they can change the law to make it true.
Back in the day... if one company wanted to sell/give/transfer a license to another company, they had to send a letter to Novell on company letterhead stating which company was transferring which licenses to which company along with contact names, phone numbers and addresses.
And even that is ridiculous! If I want to resell a piece of furniture at a garage sale, do I have to call up the manufacturer and beg for permission? No! If I want to resell a book, do I have to call up the author and beg for permission? No! Hell, if I even want to resell a video game, do I have to call up the publisher and beg for permission? NO! (In fact, if I did then Gamestop wouldn't have a business model anymore.) And there's no fucking legitimate reason whatsoever why computer software should be any different!
But I see an upside to this technology. If we're lucky, M$ will never get around to implementing these technologies, and thanks to their patents, no one else will be able to implement such invasive advertising tactics.
No, if we're lucky Microsoft will implement it and everyone will finally get fed up and ditch Windows for Linux or OS X.
Another option would be active cooling with fans and cooling ribs.
That would only work when the air the fans were moving was cooler than the thing you're trying to cool. Since we're talking about cooling a human (without evaporation), that means it only works below an ambient temperature of 98 degrees fahrenheit.
Here's what I don't understand: why couldn't your body accomplish exactly the same thing, except both more efficiently and less unpleasantly, by simply not peeing in the first place?
Why not? I'd be cheaper and more effective than the ridiculousness we're doing now. Sure, it'd also be less humane and piss off the rest of the world even more, but since when did the Bush administration care about those things anyway?
If you subscribe to cable you normally have a set-top box that can take either analogue or digital.
No, in my experience you normally have a "cable-ready" analog TV and just plug the coax straight into the back of it, which is the way it's supposed to be. Then you just use the normal remote that came with the TV to tune to channels.
The last thing I want is a damn extra box with an extra remote with extra cords and extra complexity and extra frustration!
Hell, you know what? With all this fucked-up DRM and CableCard and incompatible whoozits and whatzits and bullshit, digital TV doesn't work the way it's supposed to (see above for my definition of "supposed to") anyway! Maybe once they drop the damn DRM entirely and just let the TV plug directly into the wall, then digital TV will be ready for prime-time. Until then, it's not!
You would have to know what it does in order to implement it, so the question wasn't useless because it still tested that knowledge (albeit in a roundabout way).
But the point of asking them about linked lists is that even if they're using the library, they still have to know why they're picking the particular class they intend to use. How the fuck is somebody going to make an intelligent choice between a LinkedList and an ArrayList when they don't understand the difference between a linked list and an array? If you hire somebody that incompetent, you'll end up with code that has elements inserted/removed from the middle all the time being implemented as an array, reading through 2D arrays according to the wrong axis (e.g. reading "0, 10, 20,... 1, 11, 21..." instead of "1, 2, 3, 4,..."), and all kinds of stupid crap like that -- assuming that it worked otherwise correctly to begin with, which would be pretty damn unlikely!
My question is, how reliable are the photos? I mean, to properly issue a ticket wouldn't you have to make sure the license plate was always in view of the camera, and wouldn't that be hard to accomplish given that the meters are usually next to the car rather than behind it, the car's position in the space could vary, somebody could put a sticker over the camera lens, etc.? If blinded the camera they could park for free with impunity, since obviously if they've got camera enforcement they wouldn't be sending meter maids to check too...
Or heck, even running the indexing service whenever a file is written (excluding temporary files, of course) would make more sense than what Microsoft does -- it apparently re-indexes everything constantly, whether any file is being written or not!
As a sidenote I love how the default is to go to sleep when you close the lid, as if it's going to pop right back when you open it. What do they think their laptop is, a Mac??
That's another thing that pisses me off about Windows (and Linux, actually): why shouldn't it wake up instantly, like Macs do? I wonder, if I installed OS X on my Thinkpad would sleeping cease to suck?
If you were able to make calls from one phone to another without getting routed through the existing cell network, you'd be able to make calls for free, in essence.
So what's the problem? The telco wouldn't be able to meter because they're not using the network, but the telco also shouldn't meter for exactly the same reason! If the call isn't using any of the telco's resources, it should be "free!"
In other words, this sounds like a perfectly great idea to me, and much more in line with how the airwaves, being a public "commons" should have been used from the beginning.
Uh, no. You're thinking of plain old encryption, not DRM -- "DRM" refers specifically to the situation where the intended recipient and attacker are the same person, which is not the case here. Also, normal encryption works fine; it's only DRM that's mathematically-impossible snakeoil.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not necessarily a bad thing. I got an iPod because I use iTunes (and I use iTunes because I used a Mac as my primary computer at the time). For me, the organizational abilities of iTunes are compelling, particularly Smart Playlists. Having that supported by the portable player, which also automatically syncs with it, is doubly so.
Does Amarok (which is the only player I've heard of being comparable to iTunes) support something like Smart Playlists? Does Rockbox support something like Smart Playlists? Can Amarok and Rockbox synchronize the Smart Playlists? Automatically? If the answer to any of these questions is "no," then iTunes/iPod is still the best choice.
And stupid too, apparently -- what idiot pays for porn?
You sure you're not confusing Valve with Bungie?
If that were the case, Apple would have released a real SDK.
That's okay; PDA screens are physically too small for decent handwriting recognition anyway (let alone the fact that they also really need a higher-resolution (i.e., subpixel) digitizer). Now, a Tablet PC can do decent handwriting recognition. But a PDA? Any PDA? No way!
No kidding. Valve even went so far as to port the engine used for the original Half-Life from OpenGL to Direct3D. And then, when they made the Source engine, they dropped the OpenGL part entirely. Now they've apparently not only had a 180-degree change in heart, but such a big one that they're (maybe) willing to face the cost of porting Source* back to OpenGL? I don't believe it. I mean, it'd be great -- don't get me wrong -- but I don't believe it.
(*Yes, the job description could just be talking about Peggle, but then who the heck cares anyway?)
Like what, specifically?
Bullshit! A copy of some software is exactly like any other instance of a copyrighted work, such as a book, CD, or video game. And like a book, CD, or video game, once you buy the copy you can and should be able to do whatever the fuck you want with it, within the bounds of copyright law! Can you resell a book? Absolutely! Can you resell a CD? Yes! Can you resell a video game? Sure! Then you should damn well be able to resell computer software too!
I'm truly sorry that you've been tricked into believing that you're not "really" buying the thing. But in reality, you are buying it, and anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you in hopes that if enough people start to believe it that they can change the law to make it true.
And even that is ridiculous! If I want to resell a piece of furniture at a garage sale, do I have to call up the manufacturer and beg for permission? No! If I want to resell a book, do I have to call up the author and beg for permission? No! Hell, if I even want to resell a video game, do I have to call up the publisher and beg for permission? NO! (In fact, if I did then Gamestop wouldn't have a business model anymore.) And there's no fucking legitimate reason whatsoever why computer software should be any different!
He did!
It's like Beryl. Hope that helps! ; )
No, if we're lucky Microsoft will implement it and everyone will finally get fed up and ditch Windows for Linux or OS X.
That would only work when the air the fans were moving was cooler than the thing you're trying to cool. Since we're talking about cooling a human (without evaporation), that means it only works below an ambient temperature of 98 degrees fahrenheit.
But if you're using it for that, why a condom? You might as well just get a normal balloon instead.
Here's what I don't understand: why couldn't your body accomplish exactly the same thing, except both more efficiently and less unpleasantly, by simply not peeing in the first place?
Why not? I'd be cheaper and more effective than the ridiculousness we're doing now. Sure, it'd also be less humane and piss off the rest of the world even more, but since when did the Bush administration care about those things anyway?
No, in my experience you normally have a "cable-ready" analog TV and just plug the coax straight into the back of it, which is the way it's supposed to be. Then you just use the normal remote that came with the TV to tune to channels.
The last thing I want is a damn extra box with an extra remote with extra cords and extra complexity and extra frustration!
Hell, you know what? With all this fucked-up DRM and CableCard and incompatible whoozits and whatzits and bullshit, digital TV doesn't work the way it's supposed to (see above for my definition of "supposed to") anyway! Maybe once they drop the damn DRM entirely and just let the TV plug directly into the wall, then digital TV will be ready for prime-time. Until then, it's not!
You would have to know what it does in order to implement it, so the question wasn't useless because it still tested that knowledge (albeit in a roundabout way).
But the point of asking them about linked lists is that even if they're using the library, they still have to know why they're picking the particular class they intend to use. How the fuck is somebody going to make an intelligent choice between a LinkedList and an ArrayList when they don't understand the difference between a linked list and an array? If you hire somebody that incompetent, you'll end up with code that has elements inserted/removed from the middle all the time being implemented as an array, reading through 2D arrays according to the wrong axis (e.g. reading "0, 10, 20, ... 1, 11, 21 ..." instead of "1, 2, 3, 4, ..."), and all kinds of stupid crap like that -- assuming that it worked otherwise correctly to begin with, which would be pretty damn unlikely!
My question is, how reliable are the photos? I mean, to properly issue a ticket wouldn't you have to make sure the license plate was always in view of the camera, and wouldn't that be hard to accomplish given that the meters are usually next to the car rather than behind it, the car's position in the space could vary, somebody could put a sticker over the camera lens, etc.? If blinded the camera they could park for free with impunity, since obviously if they've got camera enforcement they wouldn't be sending meter maids to check too...
Or heck, even running the indexing service whenever a file is written (excluding temporary files, of course) would make more sense than what Microsoft does -- it apparently re-indexes everything constantly, whether any file is being written or not!
That's another thing that pisses me off about Windows (and Linux, actually): why shouldn't it wake up instantly, like Macs do? I wonder, if I installed OS X on my Thinkpad would sleeping cease to suck?
So what's the problem? The telco wouldn't be able to meter because they're not using the network, but the telco also shouldn't meter for exactly the same reason! If the call isn't using any of the telco's resources, it should be "free!"
In other words, this sounds like a perfectly great idea to me, and much more in line with how the airwaves, being a public "commons" should have been used from the beginning.
Uh, no. You're thinking of plain old encryption, not DRM -- "DRM" refers specifically to the situation where the intended recipient and attacker are the same person, which is not the case here. Also, normal encryption works fine; it's only DRM that's mathematically-impossible snakeoil.
No, because NetworkManager doesn't work properly yet. For example, NetworkManager cannot connect to any network with a hidden SSID.