Ouch. A fair comment. And who voted those members of Congress into power? We did.
What's an even fairer comment is that immediately afer 9-11, anyone would have voted for just about anything. And, as you've pointed out, they did just that.
The bigger problem is related to undoing the "mistakes that were made." Throughout US history the large pendulum swings from one extreme viewpoint to another have often taken years to correct, and the ensuing campaigns to raise general awareness, displays of public disobedience, and the filing lawsuits by both sides have eventually led to new laws being passed, presumably better than the existing ones.
As for the Patriot Act, I'm afraid if that if it died tomorrow, it won't be dead. Law enforcement agencies (among others) no doubt have already accustomed themselves to a new way of doing things. All habits die hard. New policies takes time to write, and even longer for everyone involved to get with program.
I can't go there. I grew up on wordprocessing in the DOS days. Like most others, I've learned to use (or suffered with, depending on how you look at it) various iterations of Word, etc. over the years, both at home and at work. I type close to 100 wpm and am familiar with most desktop publishing applications. That said, the conclusion I've come to is that for almost everything but page layout or final authoring, a fast and intuitive text editor beats everything else hands down. Even in a large corporate environments, I've rarely seen an occasion where the 80/20 rule (80% of your time is spent dicking around getting it "look right" while only 20% is spent typing) didn't apply.
My point, I guess, if there is one, is that if you learn to use vi, you'll never need to look back. Or want to. You may even come to the same conclusion that I have that wordprocessors are overused and overrated. For everyone else, Joe's Own Editor might be the ticket.;-)
For anyone who is interested in learning vi, but still hasn't gotten far up the learning curve, there is a version called Cream that may be worth looking at. Anyone who has used UltraEdit would recognise it as a vi/UEdit hybrid. My own opinion of the Cream version is that while it's excellent for vi newbies (and a drop-in replacement for UEdit), it burdens itself with the point-and-clickety aspects of of most Windows editors/programs (which is why we're all using vi in the first place). The developer's opinion (which may differ from my own) is as follows:
*** Cream (for Vim) Version 0.29 Released ***
The Cream (for Vim) project (http://cream.sourceforge.net) has released the latest version of an easy-to-use configuration for Vim. Cream configures the famous Vim text editor so that it is simple to use for those of us familiar with Apple or Windows platform software. Through intuitive menus, keyboard shortcuts, and extensive editing functions, Cream makes Vim approachable for new users and adds powerful features for experienced users on both Windows and Linux.
but reading the group manager of Windows digital media unit say:
"They have spent an inordinate amount of money to generate awareness around their closed ecosystem. (But) as people get more sophisticated in this area they are going to be getting more frustrated with a closed ecosystem."
gets me all choked up. Not in the "it brings tears to my eyes" kind of choked up, but the "the irony is so thick I think may I need a Heimlich maneuver" sort.
"As to whether Stockholm Syndrome applies to customers of abusive service providers (Microsoft, AOL, Blockbuster Video, etc.), I think this is much more akin to the behavior of a battered spouse. In order to justfy bad choices, people will often rationalize and defend their tormentors, even to the extent of projecting the same aspects onto other people's spouses and providers: Her husband really is mean to her, and her Mac crashes just as often as my PC."
Jokes always seem funnier to me when I don't get them at first reading -- yeah, I actually did have to look up "Stockholm Syndrome."
Seems to me that if you could change the shapes of the dogs like they changed the shapes of the planes, the sounds emitted would be... well, different.
"Infect" refers to passing along a nasty. "Effect" means "make happen" or "bring about" as in "Make it so." "Affect" can be understood in terms of a combination the above.
I think you meant to say "worms only affect windows machines".
Doesn't address your questions directly, but I stumbled across a site some time ago that shows in detail the building of a home studio. You can find the picture gallery here.
Saying something like "In excess of ten thousand radio stations broadcast their programs on the Internet." is all well and good, but the thing has a knob, doesn't it? If it was A Really Big Knob, I imagine you could scan through a few hundred stations, but wouldn't it have to be A Really Really Awfully Big Knob to get through all of them?
"Quick poll: how many of you have figured out how to completely remove Media Player, for instance from a server (where one has no conceivable use for it), so that Windows Update doesn't plague you with offers to patch or upgrade it?)"
Not me. But I did figure out that the only way to remove FrontPage (which I never installed) was to remove Outlook. As soon as I can find a solution to getting rid of Pinball, I'll report back.
I'd suggest that if no agreement can be made with respect to the meanings of words used in a discussion, there is no discussion, meaningful or otherwise.
I'd also suggest that the OP did a fair job of parsing the spin offered by Ashcroft & Co. What surprises me is he neglected the "international syndicate" hyperbole.
BTW, for your next post, you might want to make clear whether you mean "desperate" or "disparate." Words are important.
I think everyone would agree that no one really likes dealing with one or multiple passwords. Even someone accustomed to using multiple passwords would cringe at the thought of replacing the collection of keys in his or her pocket with a series of alphanumeric characters.
So what kind of alternatives exist? There's got to be some company out there implementing something on a software level, if not making effective use of such things as smart cards, USB devices, thumbprint readers, etc.
If you can recognise your computer, then it's only logical your computer should be able to recognise you. I mean, it's staring right back at you, right?
The legal department of most corporations (those that can afford one) consists mostly of general counsel and support staff. Additionally, there may be a few attorneys whose background is either corporate law or something specifically related to the company's business. It would be highly unusual that any such company has a full-time litigator, unless you consider Kevin McBride full-time. Or a litigator. Bada bing.
In the case of trials, companies always hire outside counsel. Just like corporate lawyers handle corporate work (much of which can be done in-house), trial lawyers are hired for trials.
As for the $300/hr, you're a bit off the mark. When a company hires an outside law firm, most of the billable hours result from work being done by junior attorneys on down to paralegals and secretaries. A senior partner at a major law firm may bill out such a rate, but no such partner is going to devote all his time to any one client, and no client would stand for the expense of having all the work done by a senior partner when it could be done by someone down the ladder for much cheaper.
You'd be suprised how few cases ever get close to be tried.
"Error Occurred While Processing Request Error Diagnostic Information A problem was encountered trying to access the system registry. Error number 6 occurred.
Please inform the site administrator that this error has occurred (be sure to include the contents of this page in your message to the administrator)."
I think the reason why people pay attention half-conversations rather than full ones is that half-conversation are not conversations.
You could, of course, argue that they are, but a more normal interpretation of someone yacking into a digital device is not a conversation, but simply someone yacking into a digital device. Any dog would tell you the same thing.
Put another way, there's little discernable difference between someone talking on a cell phone and talking into a dictaphone, muttering to himself, making rude noises, or reading aloud from a book. The deference given to people holding private conversations in public spaces is due in large part to the natural instict to give up your minority rights (only one of you) to the majority (the two people having a conversation). If there's just the two of you, the guy with the digital device doesn't deserve majority rule, regardless of how many digital devices he's got powered on.
2. The space you'll save is directly proportional to the extra airflow (read "fans") you'll need. The smaller the unit and/or the more stuff inside each unit, the more fans you'll need and the more noise you'll end up with.
3. A 4U unit is about the same size as a tower PC. Invariably, a 4U is designed to use more fans than a typical tower PC and as a result will be noisier. A typical 2U unit is designed with 3 mid-case fans, and an exhaust fan (in addition to the fans on the power supply fan and the processor). Swap out all the fans for the quietest replacements you can buy, and you'll still end up with something you'll want to put in another room or far away from where you work.
4. Rack enclosures are expensive. Audio racks and relay racks, while cheaper, are NOT appropriate for any number of reasons. You can, however, find budget or used enclosures (still not cheap), just as you can design your own (a week in the garage). Rack accessories are also expensive. You can find a Slashdot article on the subject of enclosures here.
If by home use, you're implying you intend to put everything in a specially-ventilated and sound-proofed closet or recording-studio grade enclosure, another room, or basement, I'd say go for it. If not, you'll regret it.
You seem to be suggesting that crashing objects from great distances doesn't advance science. Granted there's no "David Letterman School of Physics" but isn't dropping rubber balls and watermelons off a roof what inspired Galileo?
Don't know about you, but if we could have fire extinguisher-powered wheelchair races on the moon, I think Newton if he were alive would enjoy them as much as any guy named "Bubba."
What I find incredibly silly is that decisions can be made based solely on the informed opinions of scientists and researchers.
Every day it seems another study is published on [insert your favourite food, beverage, substance here] making conclusions on its health benefits/risks. Let's take wine as a mundane example, as it's been actively studied for decades. You actually believe anyone really understands how any of its thousands of chemical components work, let alone what effect any of them individually or as a group affect the human body? Not bloodly likely.
Every time I read a study on garlic (to use another example), I take it with a grain of salt. Then I add olive oil, some heat, a splash of wine and remember what my grandmother had to say about its benefits.
Studies are narrow and specific by definition. Life ain't.
I'm not suprised. I'm reasonably familiar with the format as I've authored numerous CHM files and spent even more time re-compiling others (removing those HTMLHelp-specific features that MS and anyone following their lead insists on adding that I consider both nutty and inappropriate). IIRC, development stopped on v1.x a long time ago, and the much heralded new help system has some real problems of its own. A number of existing bugs for v1.x have been documented for some time, like those referred to here. Others, well, for years no one at MS has shown any interest in fixing anything unless it involves an embarrassing exploit.
It's too bad, really. I'm not at all impressed with what little MS has done with the format (it still strikes me as afterthought), but compiled HTML can be a blessing. Anyone with tens of thousands of HTML docs on their drive (a handful of O'Reilly books?), can appreciate the simplicity of a single file.
Slashdot Mirror
Ouch. A fair comment. And who voted those members of Congress into power? We did.
What's an even fairer comment is that immediately afer 9-11, anyone would have voted for just about anything. And, as you've pointed out, they did just that.
The bigger problem is related to undoing the "mistakes that were made." Throughout US history the large pendulum swings from one extreme viewpoint to another have often taken years to correct, and the ensuing campaigns to raise general awareness, displays of public disobedience, and the filing lawsuits by both sides have eventually led to new laws being passed, presumably better than the existing ones.
As for the Patriot Act, I'm afraid if that if it died tomorrow, it won't be dead. Law enforcement agencies (among others) no doubt have already accustomed themselves to a new way of doing things. All habits die hard. New policies takes time to write, and even longer for everyone involved to get with program.
I can't go there. I grew up on wordprocessing in the DOS days. Like most others, I've learned to use (or suffered with, depending on how you look at it) various iterations of Word, etc. over the years, both at home and at work. I type close to 100 wpm and am familiar with most desktop publishing applications. That said, the conclusion I've come to is that for almost everything but page layout or final authoring, a fast and intuitive text editor beats everything else hands down. Even in a large corporate environments, I've rarely seen an occasion where the 80/20 rule (80% of your time is spent dicking around getting it "look right" while only 20% is spent typing) didn't apply.
;-)
My point, I guess, if there is one, is that if you learn to use vi, you'll never need to look back. Or want to. You may even come to the same conclusion that I have that wordprocessors are overused and overrated. For everyone else, Joe's Own Editor might be the ticket.
For anyone who is interested in learning vi, but still hasn't gotten far up the learning curve, there is a version called Cream that may be worth looking at. Anyone who has used UltraEdit would recognise it as a vi/UEdit hybrid. My own opinion of the Cream version is that while it's excellent for vi newbies (and a drop-in replacement for UEdit), it burdens itself with the point-and-clickety aspects of of most Windows editors/programs (which is why we're all using vi in the first place). The developer's opinion (which may differ from my own) is as follows:
*** Cream (for Vim) Version 0.29 Released ***
The Cream (for Vim) project (http://cream.sourceforge.net) has
released the latest version of an easy-to-use configuration for Vim.
Cream configures the famous Vim text editor so that it is simple to
use for those of us familiar with Apple or Windows platform software.
Through intuitive menus, keyboard shortcuts, and extensive editing
functions, Cream makes Vim approachable for new users and adds
powerful features for experienced users on both Windows and Linux.
but reading the group manager of Windows digital media unit say:
gets me all choked up. Not in the "it brings tears to my eyes" kind of choked up, but the "the irony is so thick I think may I need a Heimlich maneuver" sort.
A relevant quote on the subject:
Jokes always seem funnier to me when I don't get them at first reading -- yeah, I actually did have to look up "Stockholm Syndrome."
In Vegas you can witness the the same behaviour around slot machines. Maybe they know something the rest of don't?
I saw it the last time round. Wasn't much to speak of.
Seems to me that if you could change the shapes of the dogs like they changed the shapes of the planes, the sounds emitted would be ... well, different.
I know for a fact it works on cats.
"worms only effect windows machines"
"Infect" refers to passing along a nasty.
"Effect" means "make happen" or "bring about" as in "Make it so."
"Affect" can be understood in terms of a combination the above.
I think you meant to say "worms only affect windows machines".
Affectionately speaking, of course.
Doesn't address your questions directly, but I stumbled across a site some time ago that shows in detail the building of a home studio. You can find the picture gallery here.
Saying something like "In excess of ten thousand radio stations broadcast their programs on the Internet." is all well and good, but the thing has a knob, doesn't it? If it was A Really Big Knob, I imagine you could scan through a few hundred stations, but wouldn't it have to be A Really Really Awfully Big Knob to get through all of them?
"Quick poll: how many of you have figured out how to completely remove Media Player, for instance from a server (where one has no conceivable use for it), so that Windows Update doesn't plague you with offers to patch or upgrade it?)"
Not me. But I did figure out that the only way to remove FrontPage (which I never installed) was to remove Outlook. As soon as I can find a solution to getting rid of Pinball, I'll report back.
You'd think this, at least on Slashdot, would obvious by now.
I'd suggest that if no agreement can be made with respect to the meanings of words used in a discussion, there is no discussion, meaningful or otherwise.
I'd also suggest that the OP did a fair job of parsing the spin offered by Ashcroft & Co. What surprises me is he neglected the "international syndicate" hyperbole.
BTW, for your next post, you might want to make clear whether you mean "desperate" or "disparate." Words are important.
Well, maybe not, but while we're on the subject it's worth a look.
Processing encrypted email shouldn't be too difficult.
$ keyword,$user);}}
while(){$_=~ tr/A-Za-z/N-ZA-Mn-za-m/;if(/$keyword/){displayAd(
I think everyone would agree that no one really likes dealing with one or multiple passwords. Even someone accustomed to using multiple passwords would cringe at the thought of replacing the collection of keys in his or her pocket with a series of alphanumeric characters.
So what kind of alternatives exist? There's got to be some company out there implementing something on a software level, if not making effective use of such things as smart cards, USB devices, thumbprint readers, etc.
If you can recognise your computer, then it's only logical your computer should be able to recognise you. I mean, it's staring right back at you, right?
The legal department of most corporations (those that can afford one) consists mostly of general counsel and support staff. Additionally, there may be a few attorneys whose background is either corporate law or something specifically related to the company's business. It would be highly unusual that any such company has a full-time litigator, unless you consider Kevin McBride full-time. Or a litigator. Bada bing.
In the case of trials, companies always hire outside counsel. Just like corporate lawyers handle corporate work (much of which can be done in-house), trial lawyers are hired for trials.
As for the $300/hr, you're a bit off the mark. When a company hires an outside law firm, most of the billable hours result from work being done by junior attorneys on down to paralegals and secretaries. A senior partner at a major law firm may bill out such a rate, but no such partner is going to devote all his time to any one client, and no client would stand for the expense of having all the work done by a senior partner when it could be done by someone down the ladder for much cheaper.
You'd be suprised how few cases ever get close to be tried.
No, he means (and you meant) "queue".
Google is your friend.
"Error Occurred While Processing Request
Error Diagnostic Information
A problem was encountered trying to access the system registry. Error number 6 occurred.
Please inform the site administrator that this error has occurred (be sure to include the contents of this page in your message to the administrator)."
I think the reason why people pay attention half-conversations rather than full ones is that half-conversation are not conversations.
You could, of course, argue that they are, but a more normal interpretation of someone yacking into a digital device is not a conversation, but simply someone yacking into a digital device. Any dog would tell you the same thing.
Put another way, there's little discernable difference between someone talking on a cell phone and talking into a dictaphone, muttering to himself, making rude noises, or reading aloud from a book. The deference given to people holding private conversations in public spaces is due in large part to the natural instict to give up your minority rights (only one of you) to the majority (the two people having a conversation). If there's just the two of you, the guy with the digital device doesn't deserve majority rule, regardless of how many digital devices he's got powered on.
1. Rackmount equipment generally costs more.
2. The space you'll save is directly proportional to the extra airflow (read "fans") you'll need. The smaller the unit and/or the more stuff inside each unit, the more fans you'll need and the more noise you'll end up with.
3. A 4U unit is about the same size as a tower PC. Invariably, a 4U is designed to use more fans than a typical tower PC and as a result will be noisier. A typical 2U unit is designed with 3 mid-case fans, and an exhaust fan (in addition to the fans on the power supply fan and the processor). Swap out all the fans for the quietest replacements you can buy, and you'll still end up with something you'll want to put in another room or far away from where you work.
4. Rack enclosures are expensive. Audio racks and relay racks, while cheaper, are NOT appropriate for any number of reasons. You can, however, find budget or used enclosures (still not cheap), just as you can design your own (a week in the garage). Rack accessories are also expensive. You can find a Slashdot article on the subject of enclosures here.
If by home use, you're implying you intend to put everything in a specially-ventilated and sound-proofed closet or recording-studio grade enclosure, another room, or basement, I'd say go for it. If not, you'll regret it.
You seem to be suggesting that crashing objects from great distances doesn't advance science. Granted there's no "David Letterman School of Physics" but isn't dropping rubber balls and watermelons off a roof what inspired Galileo?
Don't know about you, but if we could have fire extinguisher-powered wheelchair races on the moon, I think Newton if he were alive would enjoy them as much as any guy named "Bubba."
What I find incredibly silly is that decisions can be made based solely on the informed opinions of scientists and researchers.
Every day it seems another study is published on [insert your favourite food, beverage, substance here] making conclusions on its health benefits/risks. Let's take wine as a mundane example, as it's been actively studied for decades. You actually believe anyone really understands how any of its thousands of chemical components work, let alone what effect any of them individually or as a group affect the human body? Not bloodly likely.
Every time I read a study on garlic (to use another example), I take it with a grain of salt. Then I add olive oil, some heat, a splash of wine and remember what my grandmother had to say about its benefits.
Studies are narrow and specific by definition. Life ain't.
Yeah, but isn't TechTV all about raising voices, interrupting, and babbling?
Ok, maybe a bit harsh.
It's too bad, really. I'm not at all impressed with what little MS has done with the format (it still strikes me as afterthought), but compiled HTML can be a blessing. Anyone with tens of thousands of HTML docs on their drive (a handful of O'Reilly books?), can appreciate the simplicity of a single file.