Server Error in '/main' Application.
Server Too Busy
Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.
I remember when everybody had a fit because Intel was including a unique identifier in the new P4s.
It just goes to show you how all the hollaring about privacy will just result in pointless noise-making anyway. Companies know that they can invade people's privacy and ultimately it just doesn't really matter, and nobody's going to stop them. They're going to get away with it, people are going to spy on you, and guess what? You're gonna accept it. As long as they wrap it in pretty paper, we as a society have a history of taking the bait damn near EVERY SINGLE TIME.
The proof is in the pudding, folks. There was lots of noise over Social Security Numbers back in the day. How many of you have SSN's?
Lots of noise over drug testing and whether people should be allowed to do what they want to their own bodies. How many of us still accept a drug test when we apply for a new job?
There was lots of noise of Windows XP activiation. How many of you use Windows XP?
Lots of noise over Gmail's mail scanning. How many of you use Gmail?
Lots of noise over this Real ID stuff. How many of us are going to have Real ID's?
Lots of noise over all this DRM stuff. How many of us still buy music from iTMS?
Lots of noise over this RFID stuff. How many of us are going to have RFID's implanted into our hands or forheads...... you get the idea.
The government knows it. Corporations know it. They just have to give it time. You'll accept it. Eventually you'll stop complaining, and they will have their way. You'll be forced into compliance without ever "really" accepting it. They just have to do it methodically. All it takes is a little bait, and a bit of time. It won't be long until we don't really have any concept of privacy anymore anyway, and people will wonder what all the hoop-holla was about to begin with. There are countless examples. These are just a couple.
If the PSP's screen resolution is 480x272, and the GBA's resolution is 240x160, then why does the image look so incredibly small? Sure, this thing is still in beta (right?) but for this, I might as well just keep carrying around my GBA. Maybe they shoulda finished the thing before showing it off so much.
Urrg.. maybe because the PSP's screen resolution is 480x272 and the GBA's resolution is 240x160?
Think of it like a monitor. The higher you set the resolution on your monitor, the smaller the text on your screen gets.
My problem with something similar to this idea (not the under 12 thing, but the sex offender in general thing...):
I seriously question how many guys are put into jail today after being accused of raping a girl. How often is it "he said, she said"? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to defend rapists, but the whole movie-production of a woman screaming "rape rape!" is hardly ever the case. In today's society, all a woman really needs to do is accuse some non-multi-millionaire of rape, show a little sperm, and he's in jail for a loooooong time.
I definitely don't hold it against some women to pull such an act any more than I hold it against some guy to actually willingly do it to begin with.
Yeah, maybe for IE.....
There's no way on earth that's true for Windows. Not a chance. I can count on one hand how many people I know personally that run Linux or other non-Windows PC-compatible OS full time.
You think you're so cool you hurt. You have mirrors on every wall in your "loft apartment", which is really a grimy little apartment next to a guy who plays Guns 'n Roses at 3am. All of your furniture is from Ikea. You sometimes think that changing your name to "Steve" would be "pretty cool". When you go to bars you only drink Miller Lite. No body ever asks you for help with their computers because they know you don't know anything but OS X, even if you do tell them you "run Unix" now. Your friends openly laugh at you. There's a high probability that you're homosexual - or at the very least, metrosexual
That was a great song. And anybody who says that there was no conscious knowledge of its LSD properties is on Crack.... despite what all the band members say.
When you play some sort of sports video game or whatever, and are doing well, the crowd starts cheering louder and louder. Eventually, it just can't get any louder.
Google is so highly praised for everything they're doing right now that as the audience, we simply can't make any more noise in cheering them on.
I'd rather my kids watch violence than sex.
Not here. Kids are exposed to enough violence the way it is. At some point they may think of it as second nature.
On the other hand, kids exposed to nudity and sex will almost surely make them uncomfortable. And if kids do start asking questions, that perfect. It gives parents the opportunity to actually talk about sex with their kids, which is something that is far too lacking these days. It's so much easier just to let the schools do it, right? I think that wanting kids to be exposed to violence over sex is nothing more than a parent being uncomfortable, rather than what's "better" for the child.
Sex over violence any day. We're a backwards society for thinking otherwise (America).
There's a lot of posts here about how Gmail is much better because of its UI. While I readily admit the great implementation of the conversation views, the shortcut keys, the clean interface, the fast searching, and all the other little things that makes GMail a really great product, keep in mind that many of these things are web-specific implementations.
Google has done very well with their web interface, but also remember that Yahoo offers obscene amounts of services linked to your one Yahoo ID that Google just plain can't compete with at this point. The integration that Yahoo has with their vast array of services, in my mind, makes up for some of the email-specific things that they are currently lacking. For example, the ability for Yahoo to send you an SMS message when you have a new email, or when you have an appointment scheduled. Or maybe you'd prefer an email on that appointment - they will do that, too. Yahoo integrates everything it does very well - integration with Yahoo Messenger, Yahoo Games, etc.
I'm not condemning Google by any means, but I do think that some of the views expressed on this article about Yahoo are somewhat shallow in their insights. Yahoo can, and no doubt will, continue to improve their mail service above the new 1GB storage. And Google will continue to develop all of those services that Yahoo is already offering. Either way, it's win-win for all of us.
Mr. Stevenson said he had hired a programmer, whom he would not identify, to add the list sign-up function to the sites. He said that the amount of resources put into security on the sites had seemed adequate, but "in retrospect, this was not enough, and we need to do more."
He had hired a programmer.... *nod*
And my mother's still a virgin....
After birthing me yesterday.
We're quickly moving into an age when the ability for a person to have access to the internet isn't an option anymore, but a necessity. Governments providing basic internet services to the community is very logical in helping progress our society forward into the future. Bills such as this which explicitly outlaw such things is absolutely moronic.
As for the people who fear the destruction of competition.... it's unfounded. I can still get TV over the airwaves for free, but the cable companies seem to be doing just fine. Just because the service is there doesn't mean that there can't be better alternatives available. The government shouldn't be investing in the technology to give everybody 100GB/sec download and upload speeds anyway.
The only really destructive things I see in public internet anyway is the ability for Big Brother to be perpetually monitoring us.... and the fact that WiFi really needs to get locked down in terms of security, or such kinds of public internet services could spark unprecidented numbers of identity fraud cases to a point that it becomes epidemic.
Slashdot Mirror
For rejection, yes.
I've submitted a few articles for rejection, myself. I'm starting understand how "Red" felt! (Shawshank Redemption).
hEhEhE, I'm no 5-digit-er myself.
You must be new. Welcome to Slashdot!
Most people would either be lying, not honest with themselves, or just plain don't know themselves very well if they were to disagree with that.
I'll give you $50 to do that.
It just goes to show you how all the hollaring about privacy will just result in pointless noise-making anyway. Companies know that they can invade people's privacy and ultimately it just doesn't really matter, and nobody's going to stop them. They're going to get away with it, people are going to spy on you, and guess what? You're gonna accept it. As long as they wrap it in pretty paper, we as a society have a history of taking the bait damn near EVERY SINGLE TIME.
The proof is in the pudding, folks. There was lots of noise over Social Security Numbers back in the day. How many of you have SSN's?
Lots of noise over drug testing and whether people should be allowed to do what they want to their own bodies. How many of us still accept a drug test when we apply for a new job?
There was lots of noise of Windows XP activiation. How many of you use Windows XP?
Lots of noise over Gmail's mail scanning. How many of you use Gmail?
Lots of noise over this Real ID stuff. How many of us are going to have Real ID's?
Lots of noise over all this DRM stuff. How many of us still buy music from iTMS?
Lots of noise over this RFID stuff. How many of us are going to have RFID's implanted into our hands or forheads...... you get the idea.
The government knows it. Corporations know it. They just have to give it time. You'll accept it. Eventually you'll stop complaining, and they will have their way. You'll be forced into compliance without ever "really" accepting it. They just have to do it methodically. All it takes is a little bait, and a bit of time. It won't be long until we don't really have any concept of privacy anymore anyway, and people will wonder what all the hoop-holla was about to begin with. There are countless examples. These are just a couple.
Sleep well!
Urrg.. maybe because the PSP's screen resolution is 480x272 and the GBA's resolution is 240x160?
Think of it like a monitor. The higher you set the resolution on your monitor, the smaller the text on your screen gets.
The guy that owns vizaweb is a good personal friend of mine. You can be sure this site will come up next time I see him.
My problem with something similar to this idea (not the under 12 thing, but the sex offender in general thing...):
I seriously question how many guys are put into jail today after being accused of raping a girl. How often is it "he said, she said"? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to defend rapists, but the whole movie-production of a woman screaming "rape rape!" is hardly ever the case. In today's society, all a woman really needs to do is accuse some non-multi-millionaire of rape, show a little sperm, and he's in jail for a loooooong time.
I definitely don't hold it against some women to pull such an act any more than I hold it against some guy to actually willingly do it to begin with.
I hadn't seen or heard any bad things about Skype when I was looking into them. I now have my reason - John Dvorak is hyping it.
Yeah, maybe for IE..... There's no way on earth that's true for Windows. Not a chance. I can count on one hand how many people I know personally that run Linux or other non-Windows PC-compatible OS full time.
Apple
You think you're so cool you hurt. You have mirrors on every wall in your "loft apartment", which is really a grimy little apartment next to a guy who plays Guns 'n Roses at 3am. All of your furniture is from Ikea. You sometimes think that changing your name to "Steve" would be "pretty cool". When you go to bars you only drink Miller Lite. No body ever asks you for help with their computers because they know you don't know anything but OS X, even if you do tell them you "run Unix" now. Your friends openly laugh at you. There's a high probability that you're homosexual - or at the very least, metrosexual
And in other news, everybody who knows would like everybody else to know that John C. Dvorak is still a moron.
Well then next time you should specify Free as in Speech, else you may get Beer.
;)
Picky picky picky
http://www.hamar.sk/sphere/
Now Slashdotters have an excuse for not reading the articles!
That was a great song. And anybody who says that there was no conscious knowledge of its LSD properties is on Crack.... despite what all the band members say.
_>
Moving on....
When you play some sort of sports video game or whatever, and are doing well, the crowd starts cheering louder and louder. Eventually, it just can't get any louder.
Google is so highly praised for everything they're doing right now that as the audience, we simply can't make any more noise in cheering them on.
I'd rather my kids watch violence than sex. Not here. Kids are exposed to enough violence the way it is. At some point they may think of it as second nature.
On the other hand, kids exposed to nudity and sex will almost surely make them uncomfortable. And if kids do start asking questions, that perfect. It gives parents the opportunity to actually talk about sex with their kids, which is something that is far too lacking these days. It's so much easier just to let the schools do it, right? I think that wanting kids to be exposed to violence over sex is nothing more than a parent being uncomfortable, rather than what's "better" for the child.
Sex over violence any day. We're a backwards society for thinking otherwise (America).
It works if you don't click quickly and repeatedly in Firefox.
It's almost scary... the JavaScript for this looks to just abuse a buffer overflow in an almost scary-easy way.
function genGluck(str){
var x = str;
var rx=/end/i;
x = x.replace(rx,function($1){
$1.match(rx);
return "";
});
x = x.replace(/^end/,"");
return x;
}
function readMemory()
{
var mem = genGluck("{10,246 "X's" here}end");
mem = mem.replace(/[^\.\\\:\/\'\(\)\"\_\?\=\%\&\;\#\@\- a-zA-Z0-9]+/g, " ");
document.getElementById('result').value = mem;
}
There's a lot of posts here about how Gmail is much better because of its UI. While I readily admit the great implementation of the conversation views, the shortcut keys, the clean interface, the fast searching, and all the other little things that makes GMail a really great product, keep in mind that many of these things are web-specific implementations.
Google has done very well with their web interface, but also remember that Yahoo offers obscene amounts of services linked to your one Yahoo ID that Google just plain can't compete with at this point. The integration that Yahoo has with their vast array of services, in my mind, makes up for some of the email-specific things that they are currently lacking. For example, the ability for Yahoo to send you an SMS message when you have a new email, or when you have an appointment scheduled. Or maybe you'd prefer an email on that appointment - they will do that, too. Yahoo integrates everything it does very well - integration with Yahoo Messenger, Yahoo Games, etc.
I'm not condemning Google by any means, but I do think that some of the views expressed on this article about Yahoo are somewhat shallow in their insights. Yahoo can, and no doubt will, continue to improve their mail service above the new 1GB storage. And Google will continue to develop all of those services that Yahoo is already offering. Either way, it's win-win for all of us.
Mr. Stevenson said he had hired a programmer, whom he would not identify, to add the list sign-up function to the sites. He said that the amount of resources put into security on the sites had seemed adequate, but "in retrospect, this was not enough, and we need to do more."
He had hired a programmer.... *nod*
And my mother's still a virgin....
After birthing me yesterday.
We're quickly moving into an age when the ability for a person to have access to the internet isn't an option anymore, but a necessity. Governments providing basic internet services to the community is very logical in helping progress our society forward into the future. Bills such as this which explicitly outlaw such things is absolutely moronic. As for the people who fear the destruction of competition.... it's unfounded. I can still get TV over the airwaves for free, but the cable companies seem to be doing just fine. Just because the service is there doesn't mean that there can't be better alternatives available. The government shouldn't be investing in the technology to give everybody 100GB/sec download and upload speeds anyway. The only really destructive things I see in public internet anyway is the ability for Big Brother to be perpetually monitoring us.... and the fact that WiFi really needs to get locked down in terms of security, or such kinds of public internet services could spark unprecidented numbers of identity fraud cases to a point that it becomes epidemic.
This is low-life criminal behavior with clear malicious intent. 5 years and $250,000 is not enough for this kind of scum.