Has there been any information released about the potential costs to the consumers for this service? I haven't heard anything other than Earthlink's $39.95/month (which isn't much cheaper than what I currently pay for cable). The only way cable and DSL will face any competition from BPL is if BPL is cheaper. Why pay for BPL if it's not cheaper or at least offers more bandwidth for the same price as cable or DSL?
Sorry,
quoting my post
I once again forgot the link.
It's
The Electric Kool-Aid Bandwidth Test
by Evan Ratliff,
Wired,
November 2001.
Everyone who is interested in this story should read the whole article.
I quoted only few short fragments.
The most important point about
Broadband Over Power Lines
is why anyone started to even think about building it.
We have to ask that question before
we start to talk about interference
and other obvious details.
Was it because most of potential Internet users
don't have telephone lines?
No. It was because we cannot have
billion gigabits per second
using copper, while
according to Luke Stewart with power lines
we somehow can.
It tramples over many frequencies used by FEMA and Ham Operators. Ick!
Oh yes, that's very important indeed.
But what I'd say is
at least equally important
issue with Broadband Over Power Lines is
that little problem
that, well, it's a
fucking scam for god's sake!
I have written about it
countless times. Please let me quote my last post about this very issue:
I just cannot believe this thing is still around.
The only reason
people started trying to use power lines for broadband in the first place was
not because of the actual properties of power grid
as we know it
(most of the comments here talk about the
obvious inefficiencies, so I won't talk about it),
but
a completely new theory invented by
Luke Stewart who
promised more than billion gigabits per second (sic) with his Media Fusion scam.
I suppose Earthlink investors don't know how to
use Google, so
please let me quote
a Wired article from 2001,
by Evan Ratliff:
Luke Stewart boldly sold politicians, businesspeople, and financiers on his trillion-dollar idea: Use the electrical grid to carry data at speeds faster than we've ever seen. Never mind how.
Inventor William "Luke" Stewart is a genuine national treasure, the kind of person who comes along once, maybe twice, in a century. How do I know? Well, I heard it from business executives, congressmembers, academics, military leaders, journalists. These people met Luke Stewart, sized him up, and concluded that his scientific intellect was virtually unparalleled. His ideas, they said, could alter not only the future of the Internet but the fate of humanity itself.
But sometimes you have to go straight to the source. The real reason I know that Luke Stewart is a national treasure - and, I suspect, the reason that all those other people did, too - is that he told me so himself.
[...]
The idea of sending information via the electrical grid, rather than over telephone copper or fiber-optic cable, has been around for decades. The field, known as power line communications, or PLC, is pockmarked with wasted investments and technical failures. Only within the past few months have several companies begun to deploy limited PLC ventures.
[...]
Stewart, however, had a much grander vision, based on what he considered to be a dramatic discovery: Data could hitch a ride on the magnetic field created by electric currents running through power line wires. By piggybacking on this magnetic field, instead of on the electricity itself, he could obtain almost limitless speeds of transmission.
[...] Media Fusion promised to deliver, within two years, bandwidth at speeds thousands of times faster than what's possible with fiber. Stewart was company chair, while the board of directors included government heavyweights such as former Speaker of the House Robert Livingston; Terry McAullife, a leading Democratic fund-raiser and close friend of then-President Clinton; and Admiral James Carey, former chair of the Federal Maritime Commission. The firm's Web site declared that the ASCM technology would "impact every facet of our life," and the computing power of the network would be "exponentially more powerful than any supercomputer to date."
[emphasis added]
[...]
So Luke Stewart - self-proclaimed national treasure - carries on. Chances are, we haven't heard the last of him,
[how true...]
because Stewart sold his vision best to the one person who will never pull the plug: himself.
Read the whole article
and Google around for more informations.
It is a very interesting scam
and quite a successful one at that.
Maybe that's not homeopathy but
it is impressive nonetheless.
Investors, repeat after me: Google is your friend.
If your statement is really true, isn't that quite a bit constraining to linux kernel development?
This should not be a anti-BK-rant (I never used BK and can't say anything about it's qualities), but I think this would be a good argument against it. In the M$/SCO world, one expects such NDAs. But not in the Linux world.
This is exactly my concern.
There is even this question:
Do you anticipate implementing a source management system in the next: [Please select]
on
BitKeeper's download form, where providing your real name and email address is mandatory.
The use of Bitkeeper for the Linux sources has a grave effect on the
free software community, because anyone who wants to closely track
patches to Linux can only do it by installing that non-free program.
There must be dozens or even hundreds of kernel hackers who have done
this. Most of them are gradually convincing themselves that it is ok
to use non-free software, in order to avoid a sense of cognitive
dissonance about the presence of Bitkeeper on their machines. What
can be done about this?
One solution is to set up another repository for the Linux sources,
using CVS or another free version control system, and arranging to
load new versions into it automatically. This could use Bitkeeper to
access the latest revisions, then install the new revisions into CVS.
That update process could run automatically and frequently.
The FSF cannot do this, because we cannot install Bitkeeper on our
machines. We have no non-free systems or applications on them now,
and our principles say we must keep it that way. Operating this
repository would have to be done by someone else who is willing to
have Bitkeeper on his machine, unless someone can find or make a way
to do it using free software.
The Linux sources themselves have an even more serious problem with
non-free software: they actually contain some. Quite a few device
drivers contain series of numbers that represent firmware programs to
be installed in the device. These programs are not free software. A
few numbers to be deposited into device registers are one thing; a
substantial program in binary is another.
The presence of these binary-only programs in ``source'' files of
Linux creates a secondary problem: it calls into question whether
Linux binaries can legally be redistributed at all. The GPL requires
``complete corresponding source code,'' and a sequence of integers is
not the source code. By the same token, adding such a binary to the
Linux sources violates the GPL.
The Linux developers have a plan to move these firmware programs into
separate files; it will take a few years to mature, but when completed
it will solve the secondary problem; we could make a ``free Linux''
version that doesn't have the non-free firmware files. That by itself
won't do much good if most people use the non-free ``official''
version of Linux. That may well occur, because on many platforms the
free version won't run without the non-free firmware. The ``free
Linux'' project will have to figure out what the firmware does and
write source code for it, perhaps in assembler language for whatever
embedded processor it runs on. It's a daunting job. It would be less
daunting if we had done it little by little over the years, rather
than letting it mount up. In recruiting people to do this job, we
will have to overcome the idea, spread by some Linux developers, that
the job is not necessary.
Linux, the kernel, is often thought of as the flagship of free
software, yet its current version is partially non-free. How did this
happen? This problem, like the decision to use Bitkeeper, re
Granted, it would be great to finally see Subversion nicely integrated with SourceForge, but CVS (the current concurrent versioning system used by SourceForge) while lacking lots of essential (at least for experienced developers) functionality, is free software nonetheless. What I am most concerned about is whether this new version of Subversion is already good enough to use with Linux, so one could contribute without the need to choose between restrictive EULA and being a second class citizen. Does anyone know what features exactly does it still lack, if any, for Linus to accept? I hope it would be legally possible to accept now, but I might be wrong.
[emphasis added]
You've made two posts with the same apparent misconception. Subversion is not bitkeeper. Subversion is completely free. Its license is essentially MIT-ish. There's absolutely no concern by anyone that Subversion is restrictively licensed; especially when the current Linux SCS being compared to it is BitKeeper!
You seem to have completely misunderstood me.
I might have been not clear enough.
Of course Subversion is free software,
there is absolutely no question about that
and that is exactly why I would like to see it
being used in Linux development which, after all,
is free software itself.
What I am concerned about is
the very license of BitKeeper causing
lots of controversy[1][2][3]
with
the clause preventing
the development of competing products,
like the very Subversion we are
talking about.
Starting nmap V. 2.54BETA31 ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ )
No tcp,udp, or ICMP scantype specified, assuming vanilla tcp connect() scan. Use -sP if you really don't want to portscan (and just want to see what hosts are up).
Warning: You are not root -- using TCP pingscan rather than ICMP
Host shop.sco.com (216.250.128.240) appears to be up... good.
Initiating Connect() Scan against shop.sco.com (216.250.128.240)
The Connect() Scan took 0 seconds to scan 1 ports.
The 1 scanned port on shop.sco.com (216.250.128.240) is: closed
Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 2 seconds
pth@sd:~$
Is that another desperate PR stunt?
I would like to buy a license,
to sue them in the future for selling it to me.
My lawyer adviced me that
it would be a better investment than SCO stock,
especially in the case of class action lawsuit.
Does anyone has any comments
about their EULA?
Is it legally binding?
If so, then would it be enforceable?
And the most important question: Where do I sign up?
Thanks.
SourceForge said in a FAQ (IIRC of course) that they are waiting until a production version of SVN comes out. Now, when will they implement it? I'm waiting pretty anxiously.
Granted, it would be great to finally see
Subversion nicely integrated with
SourceForge, but CVS (the current
concurrent versioning system used by SourceForge)
while lacking lots of essential
(at least for experienced developers)
functionality, is free software nonetheless.
What I am most concerned about is whether
this new version of Subversion is already good
enough to use with Linux, so one could
contribute without the need to choose
between restrictive
EULA and being a second class citizen.
Does anyone know what features exactly does
it still lack, if any, for Linus to accept?
I hope it would be legally possible to accept
now, but I might be wrong.
Subversion filesystem driver? In Linux?
on
Subversion 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Is there a filesystem that uses subversion as it's underlying "device"? For linux?
Some time ago I worked with Rational ClearCase and the filesystem integration was really nice.
As much as I'd love to see
a Subversion filesystem driver in Linux,
I am not sure if that would be
possible.
Would such a thing be legal
under BitKeeper NDA
to implement by Linux kernel developers?
Sorry, I forgot the link.
It's
The Electric Kool-Aid Bandwidth Test
by Evan Ratliff,
Wired,
November 2001.
Everyone who is interested in this story should read the whole article.
I quoted only few short fragments.
I just cannot believe this thing is still around.
The only reason people started trying to use power lines for broadband in the first place was
not because of the actual properties of power grid
as we know it
(most of the comments here talk about the
obvious inefficiencies, so I won't talk about it),
but
a completely new theory invented by
Luke Stewart who
promised more than billion gigabits per second (sic) with his Media Fusion scam.
I suppose Earthlink investors don't know how to
use Google, so
please let me quote
a Wired article from 2001,
by Evan Ratliff:
Luke Stewart boldly sold politicians, businesspeople, and financiers on his trillion-dollar idea: Use the electrical grid to carry data at speeds faster than we've ever seen. Never mind how.
Inventor William "Luke" Stewart is a genuine national treasure, the kind of person who comes along once, maybe twice, in a century. How do I know? Well, I heard it from business executives, congressmembers, academics, military leaders, journalists. These people met Luke Stewart, sized him up, and concluded that his scientific intellect was virtually unparalleled. His ideas, they said, could alter not only the future of the Internet but the fate of humanity itself.
But sometimes you have to go straight to the source. The real reason I know that Luke Stewart is a national treasure - and, I suspect, the reason that all those other people did, too - is that he told me so himself.
[...]
The idea of sending information via the electrical grid, rather than over telephone copper or fiber-optic cable, has been around for decades. The field, known as power line communications, or PLC, is pockmarked with wasted investments and technical failures. Only within the past few months have several companies begun to deploy limited PLC ventures.
[...]
Stewart, however, had a much grander vision, based on what he considered to be a dramatic discovery: Data could hitch a ride on the magnetic field created by electric currents running through power line wires. By piggybacking on this magnetic field, instead of on the electricity itself, he could obtain almost limitless speeds of transmission.
[...] Media Fusion promised to deliver, within two years, bandwidth at speeds thousands of times faster than what's possible with fiber. Stewart was company chair, while the board of directors included government heavyweights such as former Speaker of the House Robert Livingston; Terry McAullife, a leading Democratic fund-raiser and close friend of then-President Clinton; and Admiral James Carey, former chair of the Federal Maritime Commission. The firm's Web site declared that the ASCM technology would "impact every facet of our life," and the computing power of the network would be "exponentially more powerful than any supercomputer to date."
[emphasis added]
[...]
So Luke Stewart - self-proclaimed national treasure - carries on. Chances are, we haven't heard the last of him,
[how true...]
because Stewart sold his vision best to the one person who will never pull the plug: himself.
Read the whole article
and Google around for more informations.
It is a very interesting scam
and quite a successful one at that.
Maybe that's not homeopathy but
it is impressive nonetheless.
Investors, repeat after me: Google is your friend.
What about EROS?
Or KeyKOS?
Were they excluded from the study for some reason?
Using only few other possibilities to compare with, I could be the world prettiest and smartest man as well...
An anonymous reader writes
"From the Boston Globe: 'Researchers said yesterday that they have created the world's first robotic scientist, a system that can form theories, devise experiments, and then carry out the experiments almost entirely without human help.' Now, if it could file patents and lawsuits, it would be ready to enter today's world of technology."
Now, if it could only invent a scientist who... Oh, dear God! My brain!
You have disabled comments in
your journal so I post it here,
willing to take the risk of being moderated
as off topic.
That having been said, we will miss you here, MsGeek...
"I'm pretty sure that I'm addicted to caffeine... I get nasty headaches if I skip coffee and soda for a day. If I go even longer, then the headaches get worse and I start to become (even more of) a pain in the ass [...]"
I have already experienced nasty headaches
and some other strange symptoms caused by caffeine or the lack thereof...
But pain in the ass? Never.
Well, I guess I'm not addicted then. Thank God!
Seriously though,
as I've already written in my journal,
I'm somewhat concerned about the interaction of caffeine with antidepressants and mood stabilizers.
If anyone of you has any experience with heavy doses of caffeine (in the order of magnitude of g per day) combined with psychotropic drugs commonly used in the treatment of bipolar disorder, unipolar depression and other affective disorders, please share your experience. Thanks.
"I'm pretty sure that I'm addicted to caffeine... I get nasty headaches if I skip coffee and soda for a day. If I go even longer, then the headaches get worse and I start to become (even more of) a pain in the ass [...]"
I have already experienced nasty headaches
and some other strange symptoms caused by caffeine or the lack thereof...
But pain in the ass? Never.
Well, I guess I'm not addicted then. Thank God!
I am very interested in your relationship to your parents.
Please tell me about your education.
How did your parents react to especially masturbation
or illustrations of nude women?
I know what are you trying to achieve.
You seem to imply that I am a pornography-addicted onanist
because of supposed lack of proper education received from my parents.
You are suggesting that I am a sick deviant today
who tries to hide that shameful fact behind the facade of hypocrisy.
I have to disappoint you, though.
When my parents found pornographic materials in my room
(when I was six years old I had yet no idea
that pornography and masturbation is so wrong)
I was punished appropriately and thanks to that very punishment
which successfully persuaded me to never humiliate myself
that way ever again,
I am a perfectly normal person instead of a sick pervert today.
What was your point again?
good lord, it was most likely a joke.
Throw it away and laugh, then maybe think about
modifying the behavior that prompted that to be sent to you.
Excuse me if I had taken offense,
it was a terrible day. You know,
the whole institute laughing and
all of those people concluding that
"such a gift is perfect for an arse-hole, Sir.
Oh, I didn't mean you, Sir!"
Right... Didn't mean my arse!
As if it wasn't bad enough,
in most of European languages there's
a vulgar idiom to say something
in the lines of "I don't give a damn about [something]"
but literally means "I have [something] in my arse."
So, I went to the caffee machine and
other people there started to look at me
with those stupid smiles and one of them said
that they were just talking about "arse plugs"
and they all think that there's nothing to be embarassed about
and such a toy can be great for anal muscles
especially for someone who spend most of the day sitting,
to which I shouted this idiom "I have it in my arse!"
with the obvious intetnion to finally end this whole farce,
but instead of shutting up
he instantly looked at my buttocks with straight face and said:
"Really?! I would have never noticed, Sir!"
resulting in one moron spitting coffee all over the place,
other one choking with a donut,
another idiot falling off the chair
and all of them laughing like there were no tomorrow.
I shouted something like
"I am sick of that dildo, vulgar jokes,
and your perverted sense of humour as a whole!"
someone said "You didn't have to call him arse-hole, Sir!"
and they all started laughing all over again, even harder this time.
I was totally pissed off and
I shouted "'As s whole', not 'arse-hole', you sick perverted deviant!"
and now
they all keep saying "as a whole" in such a fast way that it sounds more
like "arse-hole" and in sentences where both phrases
would fit perfectly well to strengthen this miserably foolish pun,
and almost unnoticeably smile looking at me every time they do that.
So you see what a stupid bunch of perverts with poor taste
and equally childish and unintelligent sense of humour
I have to work with.
I really hate them all.
Try to have fun instead of being an ass.:P
Please don't tell me to try to have fun because
I am apparently the only one
here who doesn't have fun at all.
Instead, everyone has fun at my expense.
I can only hope that I will get some respect back after they pay me some
six digit value
for moral damages plus cover my lawyer expenses and psychiatric
treatment. Meanwhile please
don't tell me about "being an ass" because
now my coworkers add "no pun intended" even after pronouncing "S"
in "IMS" for God's sake...
I am really sick of it.
By the way, Happy New Year.
Quite contrary to what you insinuate, I didn't "enjoy" it (sic), as I got it secured by our security team as as soon as I opened the package, to preserve the fingerprints for the investigation. As I've already said, I will not tolerate perverts working here. Over my dead body. This sick deviant
will "probably enjoy anyway" being sodomized in the jail, where he will get for his act of sexual abuse in the place of work.
I'm sorry but I am not going to repeat
old mistakes and let those perverted deviants work here any more, to get my arse sued once again in the future. If it was a joke, I hope this sick bastard will laugh all the way to the prison.
I also got a dildo for Christmas, from one of my coworkers. (It's some sick sodomy kind of dildo, called "arse plug" or something.) As soon as I find out who bought it, he is going to get a big, nice, happy lawsuit from me for the Happy New Year. There is no place for perverts where I work.
Is this version ACID-complaint already? How does it compare with PostgresSQL performance-, consistency- and security-wise? Thanks. I am going to start a new database soon and maybe I'll change my mind in favour of MySQL if this new version satisfies the ACID principles.
What is the real advantage of using DirectX instead of standard OpenGL? I'm going to start a little project soon and I have to decide what tools to use. Are there any problems with OpenGL support on Microsoft systems or what?
Slashdot Mirror
Why? Uhm, let's see... Because of... billion gigabits per second maybe?
Sorry, quoting my post I once again forgot the link. It's The Electric Kool-Aid Bandwidth Test by Evan Ratliff, Wired, November 2001. Everyone who is interested in this story should read the whole article. I quoted only few short fragments.
The most important point about Broadband Over Power Lines is why anyone started to even think about building it. We have to ask that question before we start to talk about interference and other obvious details. Was it because most of potential Internet users don't have telephone lines? No. It was because we cannot have billion gigabits per second using copper, while according to Luke Stewart with power lines we somehow can.
Oh yes, that's very important indeed. But what I'd say is at least equally important issue with Broadband Over Power Lines is that little problem that, well, it's a fucking scam for god's sake!
I have written about it countless times. Please let me quote my last post about this very issue:
I just cannot believe this thing is still around. The only reason people started trying to use power lines for broadband in the first place was not because of the actual properties of power grid as we know it (most of the comments here talk about the obvious inefficiencies, so I won't talk about it), but a completely new theory invented by Luke Stewart who promised more than billion gigabits per second (sic) with his Media Fusion scam. I suppose Earthlink investors don't know how to use Google, so please let me quote a Wired article from 2001, by Evan Ratliff:
Read the whole article and Google around for more informations. It is a very interesting scam and quite a successful one at that. Maybe that's not homeopathy but it is impressive nonetheless.
Investors, repeat after me: Google is your friend.
This is exactly my concern. There is even this question: Do you anticipate implementing a source management system in the next: [Please select] on BitKeeper's download form, where providing your real name and email address is mandatory.
Let me quote Bitkeeper issue from Linux, GNU, and freedom by Richard M. Stallman:
You seem to have completely misunderstood me. I might have been not clear enough. Of course Subversion is free software, there is absolutely no question about that and that is exactly why I would like to see it being used in Linux development which, after all, is free software itself. What I am concerned about is the very license of BitKeeper causing lots of controversy[1][2][3] with the clause preventing the development of competing products, like the very Subversion we are talking about.
I'm a little bit confused... So is it Open SCOurce or not?
Where do I sign up? The host shop.sco.com (linked from How to purchase and activate a SCO IP License website) is up and running, but with port 80 closed! What is going on? See:
pth@sd:~$ nmap -vp80 shop.sco.com
... good.
Starting nmap V. 2.54BETA31 ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ )
No tcp,udp, or ICMP scantype specified, assuming vanilla tcp connect() scan. Use -sP if you really don't want to portscan (and just want to see what hosts are up).
Warning: You are not root -- using TCP pingscan rather than ICMP
Host shop.sco.com (216.250.128.240) appears to be up
Initiating Connect() Scan against shop.sco.com (216.250.128.240)
The Connect() Scan took 0 seconds to scan 1 ports.
The 1 scanned port on shop.sco.com (216.250.128.240) is: closed
Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 2 seconds
pth@sd:~$
Is that another desperate PR stunt? I would like to buy a license, to sue them in the future for selling it to me. My lawyer adviced me that it would be a better investment than SCO stock, especially in the case of class action lawsuit. Does anyone has any comments about their EULA? Is it legally binding? If so, then would it be enforceable? And the most important question: Where do I sign up? Thanks.
Granted, it would be great to finally see Subversion nicely integrated with SourceForge, but CVS (the current concurrent versioning system used by SourceForge) while lacking lots of essential (at least for experienced developers) functionality, is free software nonetheless. What I am most concerned about is whether this new version of Subversion is already good enough to use with Linux, so one could contribute without the need to choose between restrictive EULA and being a second class citizen. Does anyone know what features exactly does it still lack, if any, for Linus to accept? I hope it would be legally possible to accept now, but I might be wrong.
As much as I'd love to see a Subversion filesystem driver in Linux, I am not sure if that would be possible. Would such a thing be legal under BitKeeper NDA to implement by Linux kernel developers?
Sorry, I forgot the link. It's The Electric Kool-Aid Bandwidth Test by Evan Ratliff, Wired, November 2001. Everyone who is interested in this story should read the whole article. I quoted only few short fragments.
Dear Earthlink,
YHBT. YHL. HAND.
I just cannot believe this thing is still around. The only reason people started trying to use power lines for broadband in the first place was not because of the actual properties of power grid as we know it (most of the comments here talk about the obvious inefficiencies, so I won't talk about it), but a completely new theory invented by Luke Stewart who promised more than billion gigabits per second (sic) with his Media Fusion scam. I suppose Earthlink investors don't know how to use Google, so please let me quote a Wired article from 2001, by Evan Ratliff:
Read the whole article and Google around for more informations. It is a very interesting scam and quite a successful one at that. Maybe that's not homeopathy but it is impressive nonetheless.
Investors, repeat after me: Google is your friend.
What about EROS? Or KeyKOS? Were they excluded from the study for some reason? Using only few other possibilities to compare with, I could be the world prettiest and smartest man as well...
Now, if it could only invent a scientist who... Oh, dear God! My brain!
You have disabled comments in your journal so I post it here, willing to take the risk of being moderated as off topic. That having been said, we will miss you here, MsGeek...
Seriously though, as I've already written in my journal, I'm somewhat concerned about the interaction of caffeine with antidepressants and mood stabilizers. If anyone of you has any experience with heavy doses of caffeine (in the order of magnitude of g per day) combined with psychotropic drugs commonly used in the treatment of bipolar disorder, unipolar depression and other affective disorders, please share your experience. Thanks.
I have already experienced nasty headaches and some other strange symptoms caused by caffeine or the lack thereof... But pain in the ass? Never. Well, I guess I'm not addicted then. Thank God!
I know what are you trying to achieve. You seem to imply that I am a pornography-addicted onanist because of supposed lack of proper education received from my parents. You are suggesting that I am a sick deviant today who tries to hide that shameful fact behind the facade of hypocrisy. I have to disappoint you, though. When my parents found pornographic materials in my room (when I was six years old I had yet no idea that pornography and masturbation is so wrong) I was punished appropriately and thanks to that very punishment which successfully persuaded me to never humiliate myself that way ever again, I am a perfectly normal person instead of a sick pervert today. What was your point again?
Excuse me if I had taken offense, it was a terrible day. You know, the whole institute laughing and all of those people concluding that "such a gift is perfect for an arse-hole, Sir. Oh, I didn't mean you, Sir!" Right... Didn't mean my arse! As if it wasn't bad enough, in most of European languages there's a vulgar idiom to say something in the lines of "I don't give a damn about [something]" but literally means "I have [something] in my arse." So, I went to the caffee machine and other people there started to look at me with those stupid smiles and one of them said that they were just talking about "arse plugs" and they all think that there's nothing to be embarassed about and such a toy can be great for anal muscles especially for someone who spend most of the day sitting, to which I shouted this idiom "I have it in my arse!" with the obvious intetnion to finally end this whole farce, but instead of shutting up he instantly looked at my buttocks with straight face and said: "Really?! I would have never noticed, Sir!" resulting in one moron spitting coffee all over the place, other one choking with a donut, another idiot falling off the chair and all of them laughing like there were no tomorrow. I shouted something like "I am sick of that dildo, vulgar jokes, and your perverted sense of humour as a whole!" someone said "You didn't have to call him arse-hole, Sir!" and they all started laughing all over again, even harder this time. I was totally pissed off and I shouted "'As s whole', not 'arse-hole', you sick perverted deviant!" and now they all keep saying "as a whole" in such a fast way that it sounds more like "arse-hole" and in sentences where both phrases would fit perfectly well to strengthen this miserably foolish pun, and almost unnoticeably smile looking at me every time they do that. So you see what a stupid bunch of perverts with poor taste and equally childish and unintelligent sense of humour I have to work with. I really hate them all.
Please don't tell me to try to have fun because I am apparently the only one here who doesn't have fun at all. Instead, everyone has fun at my expense. I can only hope that I will get some respect back after they pay me some six digit value for moral damages plus cover my lawyer expenses and psychiatric treatment. Meanwhile please don't tell me about "being an ass" because now my coworkers add "no pun intended" even after pronouncing "S" in "IMS" for God's sake... I am really sick of it. By the way, Happy New Year.
In the unavoidable context of the ongoing DMCA abuse, I have only one question: is this "mod" legal? Any IAALs?
Quite contrary to what you insinuate, I didn't "enjoy" it (sic), as I got it secured by our security team as as soon as I opened the package, to preserve the fingerprints for the investigation. As I've already said, I will not tolerate perverts working here. Over my dead body. This sick deviant will "probably enjoy anyway" being sodomized in the jail, where he will get for his act of sexual abuse in the place of work.
I'm sorry but I am not going to repeat old mistakes and let those perverted deviants work here any more, to get my arse sued once again in the future. If it was a joke, I hope this sick bastard will laugh all the way to the prison.
Perpetual storage, unlike perpetual motion, is a snake oil, which has never been patented!
I also got a dildo for Christmas, from one of my coworkers. (It's some sick sodomy kind of dildo, called "arse plug" or something.) As soon as I find out who bought it, he is going to get a big, nice, happy lawsuit from me for the Happy New Year. There is no place for perverts where I work.
Is this version ACID-complaint already? How does it compare with PostgresSQL performance-, consistency- and security-wise? Thanks. I am going to start a new database soon and maybe I'll change my mind in favour of MySQL if this new version satisfies the ACID principles.
What is the real advantage of using DirectX instead of standard OpenGL? I'm going to start a little project soon and I have to decide what tools to use. Are there any problems with OpenGL support on Microsoft systems or what?