Hollywood can be reliablely counted on to screw _everything_ up.
Fire 20 bullets from a six shooter. 100 bullets from a semi auto and one magazine.
One bullet instantly kills any bad guy. (But good guys can get shot in the face and still go on to kick the bad guys ass.)
Have a round chambered, but work the action and one doesn't pop out, but hey, "working the action is cool and scary..".
Lasers being visible. Lasers being audible. Audible shit in space. And no one has ever heard of Newton's laws.
So given that we know Hollywood has such a rotten track record with the things we geeks know, I guess one thing we can rejoice about is this - all that sex the male leads are getting is just as fictional and unrealistic as the above..
But in reading through the "fine" article, I still don't know what the hell "dunc tank" is. (Other than funding for Debian projects.) Anyone care to explain..?
What I'd like to know is what length of time constitutes one "ticket".. the chances of a neutron star coming through in our lifetimes? In a decade? In a year? Per nanosecond?
RMS may be a freak but I think he's right in that we have to be careful about the language we use; it defines and affects the thought patterns of both speaker and listener.
RMS isn't the first to expound this idea, either. In 1984, George Orwell made the point that controlling language meant controlling thought, thus the party in power created "Newspeak". The [RI/MP]AA are trying to tell the populace right now that DRM is double plus good for them. Our job as geeks is to make sure they don't buy it.
.. wikipedia had a penny for everyone who bashed it, the wikipedia organization would be richer than Gates.
I for one cherish WP, and use it as a jumping point for most anything. It's probably my second most referenced general research tool after google.
The thing is, those who bash it are rarely saying anything all that new, and certainly nothing new to anyone who uses WP on a regular basis..
Every (honest) caveat that these bashers stipulate is pretty much a gimme - but the real issue is, is this not true for ALL information sources which you have not personally fact checked? What one shouldn't look at in terms of the end result is not so much "who gets to edit", but what the over all process is. WP's process ensures a high signal to noise ratio, even though the noise itself may sometimes be worse than other sources. In terms of editorial policy, WP answers the long asked question "who watches the watchers" with a resounding "WE do!"; thus far I have faith in this process - and near as I can tell, I always will.
It seems like a bad idea now, because there is no reliable mechanism to ENSURE a certain amount of bandwidth and latency.
But if such a mechanism could be charged for separately (thus violating 'net neutrality'), I am sure they would be built. And that would be a good thing in my book - and not just for the one possible use I mentioned, but for the many possible uses no one has yet to think up for such a type of network.
And how, exactly, do you see that happening? Let's say that the government tomorrow morning declares that the telcos and the cablecos can no longer have a monopoly on the last mile connection to their cusomers. What happens next?
[quote]If they're not going to filter, degrade, or impair any service, why wouldn't they be FOR net neutrality?[/quote]
If they stay true to those words, there are still options they can provide customers who want to pay premiums: faster services and/or guaranteed bandwidth. Think guaranteed as in "remote surgery".
Thus, government-mandated Net Neutrality is the best we can get, and I'll live with it.
Uh.. no. Thats not the best we can get. You earlier stated that we're in this situation where more government is the solution because of government (the granted monopolies).
Here's an idea: recind those monopolies. Let the market be really free.
US government, for one, has a couple of military use supercomputers up there that they aren't even willing to acknowledge the existance of.
Just so long as one of them isn't named SKYNET, I'm content..
Given that we don't conclusively understand the way the earth works, it strikes me as insanely arrogant to think we can CONTROL the biosphere. We should work on controlling our own (that is, INDIVIDUAL) actions before we try to tell "mother nature" what to do..
IMHO, the CRA should rename itself to truly reflect what it stands for. And we all know they will say they stand "against piracy". So they should name themselves the Creators Rights Alliance Againt Piracy.
I think that then and only then will the right message get across..
My guess would be that they want to balance the number of calls to each phone number, and they want to know how many people participated. Sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Those goals are reasonable - but can be attained without forcing a signup to get the numbers.
You can ASK people "if you participate, please let us know".
And you can ask them to choose a number by rolling a die.
I'm not saying that the registration is evil, it's just counter intuitive in this context, not to mention annoying.
DefectiveByDesign will provide the numbers to call when you sign up.
Why should I have to sign up? Just post the damn numbers and then request I sign up, and explain why it's important. I mean, I know that requiring registration is by no means the equal of DRM, but on some philosophical levels it does present it's ironies..
# Comments are for wusses chant()
for {Microsoft.Employees}
do
print "Why %borg should step down." (Microsoft.Employees)
rejoice()
for a = 1 to 1000000000 # This comment does nothing, like comments are good for anything anyways.
print "REJOICE! The evil Empire is dead! Long live the mighty penguin!"
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe, but I won't *believe* it till I watch it on youtube.
Hollywood can be reliablely counted on to screw _everything_ up.
..".
..
Fire 20 bullets from a six shooter. 100 bullets from a semi auto and one magazine.
One bullet instantly kills any bad guy. (But good guys can get shot in the face and still go on to kick the bad guys ass.)
Have a round chambered, but work the action and one doesn't pop out, but hey, "working the action is cool and scary
Lasers being visible. Lasers being audible. Audible shit in space. And no one has ever heard of Newton's laws.
So given that we know Hollywood has such a rotten track record with the things we geeks know, I guess one thing we can rejoice about is this - all that sex the male leads are getting is just as fictional and unrealistic as the above
But in reading through the "fine" article, I still don't know what the hell "dunc tank" is. (Other than funding for Debian projects.) Anyone care to explain ..?
What I'd like to know is what length of time constitutes one "ticket" .. the chances of a neutron star coming through in our lifetimes? In a decade? In a year? Per nanosecond?
Dude!
/. postings, yours would just _have_ to be in it! What a riot :)
If there is ever a "best of" or "funniest of" for
I am very glad I wasn't drinking anything or I'd have spat it all over my monitor.
Interesting tech, but how easy will it be to recover other messages? ...
This could all to easily be a security disaster waiting to happen
I have mod points, but alas I've already commented in this thread. But I would like to thank you for that, because, DAMN, that's a useful bit of info.
Actually, that sounds far closer to a Gentoo installation ..
I think it goes further than you took it, though:
Microsoft is the theater owner, and is very aware of the fire. He is in fact standing there in front of the smoldering flames to hide them.
And telling all the ushers to stand in the way, too.
And he's lit up a big fat cigar to cloak the smoke as best as possible.
And he's laughing nervously and encouraging others to light up, too, so the fire is cloaked by everyone smoking
.. wikipedia had a penny for everyone who bashed it, the wikipedia organization would be richer than Gates.
..
I for one cherish WP, and use it as a jumping point for most anything. It's probably my second most referenced general research tool after google.
The thing is, those who bash it are rarely saying anything all that new, and certainly nothing new to anyone who uses WP on a regular basis
Every (honest) caveat that these bashers stipulate is pretty much a gimme - but the real issue is, is this not true for ALL information sources which you have not personally fact checked? What one shouldn't look at in terms of the end result is not so much "who gets to edit", but what the over all process is. WP's process ensures a high signal to noise ratio, even though the noise itself may sometimes be worse than other sources. In terms of editorial policy, WP answers the long asked question "who watches the watchers" with a resounding "WE do!"; thus far I have faith in this process - and near as I can tell, I always will.
It seems like a bad idea now, because there is no reliable mechanism to ENSURE a certain amount of bandwidth and latency.
But if such a mechanism could be charged for separately (thus violating 'net neutrality'), I am sure they would be built. And that would be a good thing in my book - and not just for the one possible use I mentioned, but for the many possible uses no one has yet to think up for such a type of network.
Glorious competition.
[quote]If they're not going to filter, degrade, or impair any service, why wouldn't they be FOR net neutrality?[/quote] If they stay true to those words, there are still options they can provide customers who want to pay premiums: faster services and/or guaranteed bandwidth. Think guaranteed as in "remote surgery".
I'm not saying we do have a free market, but surely the best way to get one is not more laws and regulations.
When did Verizon do this, and more importantly, why?
Thus, government-mandated Net Neutrality is the best we can get, and I'll live with it.
.. no. Thats not the best we can get. You earlier stated that we're in this situation where more government is the solution because of government (the granted monopolies).
Uh
Here's an idea: recind those monopolies. Let the market be really free.
Thats it. I've heard enough.
If it will take NEW LAWS to enforce net neutrality, then screw net neutrality.
I'll stick with the free market, rather than let Congress tell me who I can see and when.
Telling a 15 year old she has to lie in court otherwise she will be tried for perjury is not only unethical but brutal.
Wow. Haven't heard of that case. Can you provide a link?
Don't forget they don't have to knock now ..
US government, for one, has a couple of military use supercomputers up there that they aren't even willing to acknowledge the existance of. Just so long as one of them isn't named SKYNET, I'm content ..
Given that we don't conclusively understand the way the earth works, it strikes me as insanely arrogant to think we can CONTROL the biosphere. We should work on controlling our own (that is, INDIVIDUAL) actions before we try to tell "mother nature" what to do ..
IMHO, the CRA should rename itself to truly reflect what it stands for. And we all know they will say they stand "against piracy". So they should name themselves the Creators Rights Alliance Againt Piracy.
..
I think that then and only then will the right message get across
My guess would be that they want to balance the number of calls to each phone number, and they want to know how many people participated. Sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Those goals are reasonable - but can be attained without forcing a signup to get the numbers.
You can ASK people "if you participate, please let us know".
And you can ask them to choose a number by rolling a die.
I'm not saying that the registration is evil, it's just counter intuitive in this context, not to mention annoying.
DefectiveByDesign will provide the numbers to call when you sign up.
..
Why should I have to sign up? Just post the damn numbers and then request I sign up, and explain why it's important. I mean, I know that requiring registration is by no means the equal of DRM, but on some philosophical levels it does present it's ironies
# Comments are for wusses
chant()
for {Microsoft.Employees}
do
print "Why %borg should step down." (Microsoft.Employees)
rejoice()
for a = 1 to 1000000000
# This comment does nothing, like comments are good for anything anyways.
print "REJOICE! The evil Empire is dead! Long live the mighty penguin!"
main()
while Microsoft.Exists=1
chant()
rejoice()