I can't speak for other folks, but here are my reasons:
1) I'm tired of marketing companies that think they can do anything they want on my computer without my permission.
2) I have a rule of thumb that I live by in everything I do: I never reward arrogance.
3) I'm a contrarian by nature (I always root for the little guy).
4) I'm a control freak (I want to understand how my computer works AND I want to be able to change it if I so desire).
5) I'm cheap.
6) I expect the things that I buy to work forever with zero problems (except for the problems I create myself, which I consider "learning opportunities").
I would agree that robotic exploration is getting much more capable than it was back in the sixties. And I agree that 20 years from now we may be able to sit here on Earth and learn all there is to know about another place. The question is: What is all that learning for? If it is simply to say "Hmmm, that's interesting" and then turn our backs and go look at something else that's "interesting" then I say we have already lost ourselves. It would be the same thing as sending robotic explorers to study the ocean shoreline and never going to experience the shore yourself. Would you be willing to tell your kids that what they see is all they get, with no expectation of anything new or different? Not I. Humans are explorers. It is a fundamental part of our very nature. And as cool and effective as our technology is becoming, if our exploration of space is not ultimately to prepare the way for humans to follow then we are denying fulfillment to an essential part of the human psyche. In other words, at some point we have to go if we are to be true to ourselves. There is no other viable option.
You know, this looking back can be facinating. Humankind succeeded in landing on the Moon (granted with effort) in 40 years (counting from pre-WWII to 1969). Thirty six years later we're struggling to go back. Is that a fair description? I think so. While we have progressed in many areas, we are hardly any better at getting off this planet than we were back then. Legend has it that when 2001: A Space Odyssey was first shown to NASA employees, they were awed by the vision of space exploration the movie portrayed. Up to that point, it is said that NASA was thinking in terms of sensor and robotic exploration. Sound familiar? It should, since that is the kind of mission we design today without exception. Apparently, it looks like the vision in the movie failed to inspire a real change. While I think robotic exploration is the right first step, how long does it take to make that second step of sending human explorers?
I have a widescreen laptop, and while the screen is great, I've decided the weight is just too much. My next laptop (whenever that might be) will weight less, so the only way I'm going to get a 19 inch or better laptop is if they get the weight down at the same time.
The problem is that many people may confuse some of the stupid remarks made by The Onion with the stupid remarks made by President Bush and therefore may become confused...after all, we don't want the world associating the official US Government Seal with misinformation and stupidity, do we?
(c) [...] any person who commits any of the following acts is guilty of a public offense:
(7) Knowingly and without permission accesses or causes to be accessed any computer, computer system, or computer network.
(3) Any person who violates paragraph (6), (7), or (8) of subdivision (c) is punishable as follows:
(A) For a first violation which does not result in injury, an infraction punishable by a fine not exceeding two hundred fifty dollars ($250).
Aa you say, according to California law the reporter who tested a user name and password and then reported the issue is guilty.
Re:The show will need local humor appeal
on
Homer Becomes Omar
·
· Score: 1
Actually........the show's writers have never really pinpointed where "Springfield" is...
The show will need local humor appeal
on
Homer Becomes Omar
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Taking Homer and stripping out all of the Americanisms isn't going to make it funny to people with a mideast cultural sense of humor (it would probably be funnier if they just left the Americanisms in). Homer is a success in America because we are laughing at ourselves. I would bet Omar could be as much of a success if the show could present the same kind of local irreverent humor about life there like it does for life in the US.
Microsoft Windows - Operating system. Provides resource allocation to underlying computer hardware. Note: No warrantee, no guarantees, may have security issues.
Microsoft Security - Subscription security service. Provides security monitoring of underlying insecure operating system. Note: No warrantee, no guarantees, may have security issues.
Six month's since the Internet fragmented into a thousand separate networks, companies across the globe report an astounding 600% increase in productivity on average. Said one spokeperson, "Not only have computer virus infections fallen to an all time low, we're saving over 98% of our bandwidth costs. Plus, we have so much budget left over each month from our IT operations, we're rolling out a profit sharing plan to all our employees." Numerous businesses report skyrocketing demand. For example, print media said they've seen an explosion in demand for magazines. Of course, all is not good news. Some technology companies have reported a drastic drop in demand for many of their products. "We are having a real tough quarter," said one Symantec sales manager, on condition of anonymity. Cisco also reported much less demand for it's high end networking boxes. "We can't give 'em away. I've never seen anything like it."
Actually, the submitter understands this perfectly. In the first place, the comment was a joke. In the second place, if you read the article, you would see that they mention we can shield against excess solar radiation far easier than cosmic rays, so the joke is half serious. So there...phttttttt!
I will be surprised if Microsoft has any existing software product surviving in 10 years in a dominating position to be honest (if it does then we have failed). Services, on the other hand, are quite likely. Plus, if I'm right, you will see large patent holders argue for extensions to patent life in the coming years, just as we have seen for copyrights. It's all speculation, of course, but one rule of thumb is that established players always argue for the expansion or strengthing of the current rules of play.
Microsoft collects patents today in part to have ammunition to file countersuits when other companies sue them (that's big business 101). However patents are also good for Microsoft's twilight years, when the only thing they will have left of any real controlling influence will be their software patent portfolio. Then they'll be hell bent on collecting any and all royalties from said portfolio just to bolster their waning proprietary business. You can bet that part of the reasoning behind Microsoft securing so many software patents right now is to provide a "retirement plan" for the business once their software products no longer dominate the market (they've got the money now, why not buy a little "insurance" for the future?).
It may be insane but it has been a consistent argument used by any number of copyright holders. It's been so prevalent that the DMCA itself contains a "safe harbor" for ISP's that explicitly exempts the ISP from copyright infringement for the temporary copies held by the ISP's system. The problem with the necessity to provide a safe harbor for transitory copies is that it opens up the possibility of copyright infringement for anyone not specifically exempted (instead of for example defining what a transitory copy is and then making a blanket declaration that all transitory copies are exempt).
Slashdot Mirror
Right...that should convince the South Korean government (and the rest of the world) that they're not an abusive monopoly.
I can't speak for other folks, but here are my reasons:
1) I'm tired of marketing companies that think they can do anything they want on my computer without my permission.
2) I have a rule of thumb that I live by in everything I do: I never reward arrogance.
3) I'm a contrarian by nature (I always root for the little guy).
4) I'm a control freak (I want to understand how my computer works AND I want to be able to change it if I so desire).
5) I'm cheap.
6) I expect the things that I buy to work forever with zero problems (except for the problems I create myself, which I consider "learning opportunities").
I would agree that robotic exploration is getting much more capable than it was back in the sixties. And I agree that 20 years from now we may be able to sit here on Earth and learn all there is to know about another place. The question is: What is all that learning for? If it is simply to say "Hmmm, that's interesting" and then turn our backs and go look at something else that's "interesting" then I say we have already lost ourselves. It would be the same thing as sending robotic explorers to study the ocean shoreline and never going to experience the shore yourself. Would you be willing to tell your kids that what they see is all they get, with no expectation of anything new or different? Not I. Humans are explorers. It is a fundamental part of our very nature. And as cool and effective as our technology is becoming, if our exploration of space is not ultimately to prepare the way for humans to follow then we are denying fulfillment to an essential part of the human psyche. In other words, at some point we have to go if we are to be true to ourselves. There is no other viable option.
You know, this looking back can be facinating. Humankind succeeded in landing on the Moon (granted with effort) in 40 years (counting from pre-WWII to 1969). Thirty six years later we're struggling to go back. Is that a fair description? I think so. While we have progressed in many areas, we are hardly any better at getting off this planet than we were back then. Legend has it that when 2001: A Space Odyssey was first shown to NASA employees, they were awed by the vision of space exploration the movie portrayed. Up to that point, it is said that NASA was thinking in terms of sensor and robotic exploration. Sound familiar? It should, since that is the kind of mission we design today without exception. Apparently, it looks like the vision in the movie failed to inspire a real change. While I think robotic exploration is the right first step, how long does it take to make that second step of sending human explorers?
I have a widescreen laptop, and while the screen is great, I've decided the weight is just too much. My next laptop (whenever that might be) will weight less, so the only way I'm going to get a 19 inch or better laptop is if they get the weight down at the same time.
The problem is that many people may confuse some of the stupid remarks made by The Onion with the stupid remarks made by President Bush and therefore may become confused...after all, we don't want the world associating the official US Government Seal with misinformation and stupidity, do we?
(c) [...] any person who commits any of the following acts is guilty of a public offense:
(7) Knowingly and without permission accesses or causes to be accessed any computer, computer system, or computer network.
(3) Any person who violates paragraph (6), (7), or (8) of subdivision (c) is punishable as follows:
(A) For a first violation which does not result in injury, an infraction punishable by a fine not exceeding two hundred fifty dollars ($250).
Aa you say, according to California law the reporter who tested a user name and password and then reported the issue is guilty.
Actually........the show's writers have never really pinpointed where "Springfield" is...
Taking Homer and stripping out all of the Americanisms isn't going to make it funny to people with a mideast cultural sense of humor (it would probably be funnier if they just left the Americanisms in). Homer is a success in America because we are laughing at ourselves. I would bet Omar could be as much of a success if the show could present the same kind of local irreverent humor about life there like it does for life in the US.
Yes, unfortunately I read that wrong. The tanks are at 350 atmospheres, which equals 5,145 psi. Quite a bit higher.
You're right, I misread that originally. I'd say that's still rather high for a pressure tank on today's (not so) safe roads...
Microsoft Windows - Operating system. Provides resource allocation to underlying computer hardware. Note: No warrantee, no guarantees, may have security issues.
Microsoft Security - Subscription security service. Provides security monitoring of underlying insecure operating system. Note: No warrantee, no guarantees, may have security issues.
Six month's since the Internet fragmented into a thousand separate networks, companies across the globe report an astounding 600% increase in productivity on average. Said one spokeperson, "Not only have computer virus infections fallen to an all time low, we're saving over 98% of our bandwidth costs. Plus, we have so much budget left over each month from our IT operations, we're rolling out a profit sharing plan to all our employees." Numerous businesses report skyrocketing demand. For example, print media said they've seen an explosion in demand for magazines. Of course, all is not good news. Some technology companies have reported a drastic drop in demand for many of their products. "We are having a real tough quarter," said one Symantec sales manager, on condition of anonymity. Cisco also reported much less demand for it's high end networking boxes. "We can't give 'em away. I've never seen anything like it."
Icann, and you can't.
Sorry, my bad.
Actually, the submitter understands this perfectly. In the first place, the comment was a joke. In the second place, if you read the article, you would see that they mention we can shield against excess solar radiation far easier than cosmic rays, so the joke is half serious. So there...phttttttt!
Sorry, copied that spelling from Google. My bad.
Farfignugen!
We seem to want cheap consumer software, just as we want cheap food, and the result is that we get security holes and bugs.
When he said bugs, did he mean in the software or in the food?
Patent Cross License Agreement signers can't sue each other. Suits are brought by non-signers.
I will be surprised if Microsoft has any existing software product surviving in 10 years in a dominating position to be honest (if it does then we have failed). Services, on the other hand, are quite likely. Plus, if I'm right, you will see large patent holders argue for extensions to patent life in the coming years, just as we have seen for copyrights. It's all speculation, of course, but one rule of thumb is that established players always argue for the expansion or strengthing of the current rules of play.
Microsoft collects patents today in part to have ammunition to file countersuits when other companies sue them (that's big business 101). However patents are also good for Microsoft's twilight years, when the only thing they will have left of any real controlling influence will be their software patent portfolio. Then they'll be hell bent on collecting any and all royalties from said portfolio just to bolster their waning proprietary business. You can bet that part of the reasoning behind Microsoft securing so many software patents right now is to provide a "retirement plan" for the business once their software products no longer dominate the market (they've got the money now, why not buy a little "insurance" for the future?).
Now that he's beginning his new career as a black hat...
It may be insane but it has been a consistent argument used by any number of copyright holders. It's been so prevalent that the DMCA itself contains a "safe harbor" for ISP's that explicitly exempts the ISP from copyright infringement for the temporary copies held by the ISP's system. The problem with the necessity to provide a safe harbor for transitory copies is that it opens up the possibility of copyright infringement for anyone not specifically exempted (instead of for example defining what a transitory copy is and then making a blanket declaration that all transitory copies are exempt).
If you are developing your own cyberattack techniques, here's your chance to test them while "hiding in plain sight".