Stupid memes are those stupid inside jokes you have with friends, except that the inside is enormous. Furthermore, the jokes get older much more quickly, so people end up trying to out-weird the most recent meme.
In case you missed it, this is the best of the more recent Zero Wing parodies.
And that a mark can also be defined by use. Has anyone ever heard of a "Firefox" in those two countries, that is even computer-related? What is the time limitation on trademark disputes in those two jurisdictions?
It's the closest legal language in current use that describes how many of us feel about the supposed ownership of ideas.
Perhaps it is a rationalization of illicit acts.
But perhaps it is also part of one of the more common problems in history: We have an idea that we believe would allow for society to function far more efficiently and fairly. We also believe that our idea is justifiable by (social) scientific and philosophical means. Now, how do we best go about getting society to give our idea a chance? Do we go about it by convincing the establishment directly to allow it, or do we use the often crude actions of the populace to force change? Are social conservatives best appeased by taking small steps toward our goal, or is a go-for-broke, all-or-nothing approach the only acceptable way? Generally, should we attempt to appease or to overpower?
It's the same social process that has been happening (at a more advanced stage) with, for example, racial equality and sexual equality. We are a force of change that views itself as progress. However, we all have different ideas as to how this change can best come about; thus, on the way to our goal, we will often undermine ourselves.
The one thing that makes the small-time artist or coder seek strong copyright is that they cannot bear the thought of someone else taking credit for their work.
Mere portscanning doesn't intentionally clog all bandwidth.
IANA network security expert, but I'd say put a more capable firewall behind the router (read: a Linux or BSD box) and make it the DMZ.
At least you don't have some punk trying to find a weak username/password combo through SSH. (Silly script kiddie, you can't login to root through SSH on my box.)
The other issue with Wireless is that releasing the specs could invite FCC issues.
See the MADWIFI drivers for Atheros hardware. The hardware will not prevent the user from broadcasting on licensed channels, and FCC regulations prevent software-controlled radios from allowing users to do so.
Whoever wrote the appropriate driver for OpenBSD reverse-engineered and open-sourced the abstraction layer that controls the hardware, violating this regulation.
It's much easier to match an existing specification, that it is to write a good known working specification. It is valuable IP.
How does that make it valuable? Because it forces the competition to also expend extra money? Have they even done a cost analysis? I don't understand how something like this would have an effect of any significance; the numbers involved surely neither justify nor unjustify the action.
Looking at the build scripts, you realize that x86_64 support isn't exactly a gargantuan effort. Half of the packages even look at an environment variable to know when not to pass -march to gcc. I suspect that the only reason that Patrick himself hasn't rolled out binaries is because he doesn't have the hardware to test it.
What about something like OpenMP? It seems to me that it could be used to make certain simple tasks highly parallelized, freeing the programmers' time to work on threading dissimilar jobs.
Sure, at the single network level, moderation is good. I also meant at the level of the entire Internet, diversity is good.
Everyone makes the "Oh, but if enough of us switch, then they'll start attacking [name of OS] too!" and commercial developers don't want to write cross-platform because it's not profitable.
I propose that this offloads much of the cost onto the user setups, who pay in lost productivity, lost or stolen data, and sometimes directly financially, because they represent a large target. I argue that there is enough of this happening that "complex" malware is being written, increasing the damage done, then perhaps the hidden costs equal or exceed that of developers' time and salary to make software work on diverse systems, something that can be recouped by raising prices slightly across the board.
It's the same supporting argument as for diversity in biological systems, except that in this case, the selection is more effective than random.
No, it ain't just kiddies seeing who they can 0wn anymore. They are playing for keeps now.
Wouldn't this be a successful argument for platform diversity? They have the motivation to write complex malware, but do they have the motivation to write complex and cross-platform malware?
Can one then conclude that because the common wisdom seems to favor a uniform system, this is those people's just deserts?
1. So what? 2. If you make a game we want bad enough, we will buy it. 3. That's not exactly a coding issue. If you require a certain version of a library, ship it with the game. 4. libSDL; games use custom GUIs. 5. So what?
To the contrary: if someone is willing to grant others even a portion of their fantasies, even if for money, there is nothing particularly unhealty about that. What's unhealthy is when fantasy and reality become blurred for these people on a full-time basis.
vfat is the greatest common denominator of file systems.
The number of filesystems Windows supports is pathetic, because it boils down to FAT32, NTFS, ISO9660, and SMB/CIFS. Your options are really quite limited.
I'm covering the overall architecture of the brain right now in my intro. psych. class.
It looks remarkably like a computer architecture when broken into components. You have your I/O neurons, interfacing with a component that discards noise. From here it is put onto a bus, into what the textbook labels as the "executive" (CPU). The executive can store and load from short-term memory (registers)---there are different kinds for various senses and parts of cognition---and do other brain-type things. It can also store and retrieve from long-term memory.
Slashdot Mirror
Stupid memes are those stupid inside jokes you have with friends, except that the inside is enormous. Furthermore, the jokes get older much more quickly, so people end up trying to out-weird the most recent meme.
In case you missed it, this is the best of the more recent Zero Wing parodies.
Unfortunately, they don't know or won't care for what they have to do to attain it.
And that a mark can also be defined by use. Has anyone ever heard of a "Firefox" in those two countries, that is even computer-related? What is the time limitation on trademark disputes in those two jurisdictions?
It's the closest legal language in current use that describes how many of us feel about the supposed ownership of ideas.
Perhaps it is a rationalization of illicit acts.
But perhaps it is also part of one of the more common problems in history: We have an idea that we believe would allow for society to function far more efficiently and fairly. We also believe that our idea is justifiable by (social) scientific and philosophical means. Now, how do we best go about getting society to give our idea a chance? Do we go about it by convincing the establishment directly to allow it, or do we use the often crude actions of the populace to force change? Are social conservatives best appeased by taking small steps toward our goal, or is a go-for-broke, all-or-nothing approach the only acceptable way? Generally, should we attempt to appease or to overpower?
It's the same social process that has been happening (at a more advanced stage) with, for example, racial equality and sexual equality. We are a force of change that views itself as progress. However, we all have different ideas as to how this change can best come about; thus, on the way to our goal, we will often undermine ourselves.
Exclusive rights, no. Attribution, yes.
The one thing that makes the small-time artist or coder seek strong copyright is that they cannot bear the thought of someone else taking credit for their work.
Seriously, this is not unique at all. Mplayer's been able to do this for years with the help of libaa (B&W) and libcaca (color).
Mere portscanning doesn't intentionally clog all bandwidth.
IANA network security expert, but I'd say put a more capable firewall behind the router (read: a Linux or BSD box) and make it the DMZ.
At least you don't have some punk trying to find a weak username/password combo through SSH. (Silly script kiddie, you can't login to root through SSH on my box.)
The other issue with Wireless is that releasing the specs could invite FCC issues.
See the MADWIFI drivers for Atheros hardware. The hardware will not prevent the user from broadcasting on licensed channels, and FCC regulations prevent software-controlled radios from allowing users to do so.
Whoever wrote the appropriate driver for OpenBSD reverse-engineered and open-sourced the abstraction layer that controls the hardware, violating this regulation.
It's much easier to match an existing specification, that it is to write a good known working specification. It is valuable IP.
How does that make it valuable? Because it forces the competition to also expend extra money? Have they even done a cost analysis? I don't understand how something like this would have an effect of any significance; the numbers involved surely neither justify nor unjustify the action.
Looking at the build scripts, you realize that x86_64 support isn't exactly a gargantuan effort. Half of the packages even look at an environment variable to know when not to pass -march to gcc. I suspect that the only reason that Patrick himself hasn't rolled out binaries is because he doesn't have the hardware to test it.
Disney is more likely to poison Studio Ghibli than Ghibli save Disney from its current evil incarnation.
I mean, come on: It's Disney; they can't do anything without the suits fucking somebody up.
There appears to have been an attempt at adding it (see GOMP), starting about 2 years ago, but it appears dead.
Given the multi-core trend at hand, it could really be useful to continue.
And if not OpenMP, then what? A high-level threading language or language extension is going to be necessary, and OpenMP
1) makes a good case for being the best solution to date, and
2) is open.
That may take a new language or maybe c+++.
What about something like OpenMP? It seems to me that it could be used to make certain simple tasks highly parallelized, freeing the programmers' time to work on threading dissimilar jobs.
That just might change the situation.
for example, when the Simpsons writers contacted NASA for the 40,000th digit of pi, NASA actually sent them a printout of all 40,000 digits.
They do know such information is available online, don't they?
Is that for real? There are exceptions?! In a shell language?!
A shell language should not be anywhere near as verbose as that junk.
QTparted runs as a frontend for parted and ntfsresize seamlessly, or at least the version on Knoppix does.
It looks like this is my lucky day.
Not that MS cares, or anything, seeing as no one can push them around at their own game.
Sure, at the single network level, moderation is good. I also meant at the level of the entire Internet, diversity is good.
Everyone makes the "Oh, but if enough of us switch, then they'll start attacking [name of OS] too!" and commercial developers don't want to write cross-platform because it's not profitable.
I propose that this offloads much of the cost onto the user setups, who pay in lost productivity, lost or stolen data, and sometimes directly financially, because they represent a large target. I argue that there is enough of this happening that "complex" malware is being written, increasing the damage done, then perhaps the hidden costs equal or exceed that of developers' time and salary to make software work on diverse systems, something that can be recouped by raising prices slightly across the board.
It's the same supporting argument as for diversity in biological systems, except that in this case, the selection is more effective than random.
No, it ain't just kiddies seeing who they can 0wn anymore. They are playing for keeps now.
Wouldn't this be a successful argument for platform diversity? They have the motivation to write complex malware, but do they have the motivation to write complex and cross-platform malware?
Can one then conclude that because the common wisdom seems to favor a uniform system, this is those people's just deserts?
There's also ClamAV, which is a GPLed virus scanner (mainly for mailservers, but it does have a daemonized scanner and a CLI-based frontend).
1. So what?
2. If you make a game we want bad enough, we will buy it.
3. That's not exactly a coding issue. If you require a certain version of a library, ship it with the game.
4. libSDL; games use custom GUIs.
5. So what?
To the contrary: if someone is willing to grant others even a portion of their fantasies, even if for money, there is nothing particularly unhealty about that. What's unhealthy is when fantasy and reality become blurred for these people on a full-time basis.
vfat is the greatest common denominator of file systems.
The number of filesystems Windows supports is pathetic, because it boils down to FAT32, NTFS, ISO9660, and SMB/CIFS. Your options are really quite limited.
The FAT patent was invalidated.
I'm covering the overall architecture of the brain right now in my intro. psych. class.
It looks remarkably like a computer architecture when broken into components. You have your I/O neurons, interfacing with a component that discards noise. From here it is put onto a bus, into what the textbook labels as the "executive" (CPU). The executive can store and load from short-term memory (registers)---there are different kinds for various senses and parts of cognition---and do other brain-type things. It can also store and retrieve from long-term memory.
It is a computer---just a very, very analog kind.