How challenging is a game that can be played by a script? If that's the kind of exploit the Governor is supposed to prevent, then WoW can't be much of a challenge. Maybe game designers should concentrate on creating games that are subtle enough so that characters can't benefit by mindless, repetitious actions, instead of installing spyware.
I think it's inevitable that the internet will splinter. It's probably the only method left to please all parties involved. Then nations of the world will then have control of each of their own little slice of the internet.
I wonder. This could be a test of how much strength the nation-state system retains in the world today. I'm betting that nothing happens, other than lots of talk. That's because states don't run the world any more, nor do synthetic states like the EU. No, we haven't been taken over by aliens nor do mega-corporations run this globe (though they have a bit to say about what happens, just like the remnant-states do)...nobody seems to be in charge right now. I'm not sure that's a bad thing.
I once worked for a company that put its workers in a cubicle warren. The nice thing was that, from time to time, I could stand up, step out of my cubicle and look out a window...wayyyy in the distance. Then one day, they walled up all the windows to build new offices for the managers. One window was left. By that window stood a rubber tree plant. I figured that the rubber tree had a higher status than I...it must be an executive plant. That was my clue to leave. (Well ok, they were losing 10 million a year on a hundred employee company, had no idea what market they were aiming at, and my boss was a neurotically obsessed jerk given to fits of kicking my cubicle walls...those may have been supporting factors for my decision.)
The question seems to imply that implementation of a "good" grammar checker is made more difficult by the nature of English grammar. Does that mean there are effective grammar checkers out there for other languages, like German or Gaelic? I kind of doubt it.
I've heard talk about ion engines for a long time, but this is the first time I've heard of one actually being used. Of course, it's quite possible I haven't been paying attention... Does NASA use ion engines on its deep space probes? If not, is this a significant breakthrough? That is, are there notable advantages to ion propulsion over conventional rocket engines?
I, too went on the search for the Holy Grail of keyboards recently. I wanted a simple keyboard with crisp tactile feedback--what I found were keyboards with a bunch of cheesy extra buttons that looked more like organs (is the half-moon key for taking a potty break?), keyboards that light up, keyboards that fold, keyboards with funny-shaped "ergonomic" keys that look like wedges, and so on.
I finally got lucky--after having tried one at work, I bought a Microsoft Natural keyboard (about $17 from new egg, as I recall). This is not the version of the keyboard you usually see in the stores--those have a potty key. This one is intended for OEMs to sell with their PCs--therefore it doesn't have any of the extra junk that justifies slapping a high price on an aftermarket keyboard. It's a simple keyboard with a decent feel. Not great, but decent. It does have a funny wavy shape, but I think that's actually a good thing--in any case, I got used to it quickly.
I bought two just in case I spill my coffee again...
I miss the old MacWrite word processor that came with the first macs. Even a kid could pick it up in a few minutes, and do fancy hand-outs with pretty fonts and graphics.
Heck, I could do that with my IBM PC--just flip the switch and turn it off. That's because it didn't do memory paging. All things being equal, I think I'd rather have paging than the ability to turn my computer off without damaging anything, though.
IM isn't a replacement for email, it's a replacement for the telephone. The crowd who used to have phones permanently grown into their ears now have fingers worn down from constant IM-ing. Though IM and email are alike in that both are text, IM shares a much more important characteristic with the telephone: both phones and IM are synchronous, while email is asynchronous.
To act on an IM or phone call, you have to be there, and you have to respond immediately. That means if you're not at your computer or near your phone, you miss the missive. (Yes, there's phone mail, but that's the most annoying form of communication there is--you have to sit through someone's incoherent explanation of what they want in real time, you can't skim it like a long email.)
I use email almost exclusively as a communication tool, and prefer it over all others most of the time. Why? Well, it's the asynchronicity. I don't have to be there the moment it arrives to respond; Email sits there and waits patiently for me if I'm gone when it arrives. Email doesn't interrupt me--i'm free to ignore it if I want--but I can still reply to it later. I can also take my time composing an email message and say just what I want to say.
Sure, my daughter uses IM all the time for talking to her friends--again, IM is clearly a substitute for the telephone, not for email. I don't think IM is intrinsically evil, but some IM programs are certainly a security hazard (she's also already downloaded one very destructive virus from an IM) so I've toyed with the idea of blocking IM from my home network. Unfortunately, Microsoft's IM monster is a port-prober and can't be shut out at the router. That's criminal...but then criminality is nothing new for the Satan of Seattle.
I have a Sapphire video card (about 9 months from being top-of-the-line, can't remember model number) that's got a built-in passive cooling system. It has pipes that allegedly circulate some kind of fluid to distribute the heat. The whole thing reminds me of an old Buick radiator--it takes up 2 slots worth of room--but it has never given me any problems. And since it doesn't have a fan, it's completely noiseless.
Well, does the chipset really need a fan? I replaced the one on my Abit IS7 motherboard with a Zalman passive cooler that I fastened to the top of the Northbridge with thermally conductive epoxy. Actually, I had to do this--the fan mounts (little eyelets for hooks on the fan case) tore out of the board. But...the temperature sensors say the chipset is operating at 40 degrees C, and that's the same as when it had a fan. I think the NB fans are added for looks more than utility. YMMV.
It bothers me that mission statements are almost never truthful. Instead of "Our mission is to make as much money as possible in the shortest conceivable time", they say something like "We seek to promote customer satisfaction by providing best-of-breed end-to-end seamless integration of enterprise-class solutions to mission-critical needs going forward with our strategic partners".
It's bullshit, and there is an entire class of people who make their living by producing it. They are called "managers", and they can't think.
Not only haven't you heard of Aristotle (who invented the syllogism a long time before the "middle ages"), but you can derive an "ought" from a list of disjointed "is" statements. Clearly, to paraphrase Plato (another dead Greek), you have taken the "cheap" course in philosophy.
Also relevant is the perpetetrator's behavior: when he was observed, he acted as though he were doing something wrong. He tried to hide what he was doing, instead of, say, waving to the house owner and saying, "Hope you don't mind if I use a little of your bandwidth". This furtiveness suggests criminal intent, it suggests that this wasn't just a lost traveler trying to get his bearings by downloading a map. If it was my house, I'd call the cops too--or maybe he'd find himself staring down the barrel of my Glock, depending on circumstances. (Of course, at my house he wouldn't be connecting to my AP so easily, either.)
Distracting irrelevant advertisements on web sites have always been a dumb idea, and whining about the end of "free content" is not going to change that. You want me to watch your stupid ads out of pity? Gimme a break. I installed AdSubtract when it first came out, and I refuse to install Flush because its major use is either to show dumb flashing commercials or even dumber flashing content. (Anyone know how to turn off the tool bar that appears at the top of Firefox and prompts me to download the plugin every time I open a Flushed site?)
On the web at least, you have to be smart to make money, and the smart people (like Google) are doing fine. We just need a few more smart ideas. For example, I think that the concept of "pay per view" content is workable if it were implemented in the right way.
The right way would include the following requirements:
The amount of payment must be very small--so small that it's perceived as inconsequential by the viewer. Say you run an informative tech site that reviews gadgets, but you don't want to take ads because that's going to restrict what you can say about the items you're reviewing. So charge a penny per view of each article. Considering the potential size of a web audience for a really good site, all that copper could turn into a gold mine.
The first one is always free. People aren't going to pay to look at your site unless they've become convinced that it's a valuable resource. So let them look at their first ten articles for free. If the articles are really useful, most people will pay a tiny amount of money to read more. (Or, of course, you could just let people see the first few paragraphs of every article, or whatever.
Authentication and billing should safeguard the viewer's privacy.We'd obviously need a way to authenticate the viewing customer, bill him, and transfer the accumulated pennies to the web site owner's bank account. There are ways to do anonymous authentication where only the intermediary who does the banking knows your identity. Hmm do I sense a business opportunity here? Yeah...I'll file the patent immediately...
As others have pointed out, this is a sort of document management system that rides on top of the traditional file structure. At the very least, you're still going to have to deal with pathnames if you're programming, and you'll have the option of organizing your files in neat logical hierarchies if that's how you like to operate. (Actually, I'm not a Macperson, so I haven't seen this Searchlight thing work, but I'm assuming that the developers did the sensible things...)
Also, I agree that being compelled to enter metadata every time I store a file would be a big pain. However, having the capability to define my own metadata schema and being able to view my files based on those criteria sounds like a neat idea to me.
There are some people who just cannot deal with directory structures. My wife, for example, has been using a computer for years, but she has no idea what a file is, or how to find one on her PC. Something like this would be useful to her. I've been using hierarchical directories for years, but now matter how careful I am, there's always times when I have trouble finding certain files. It'd be nice, for example, if I could enter criteria like, "Photos, Sept-Dec 2002, mistresses", and get the appriate hits. Wait a minute...maybe making files easy to find is a bad idea...
Look, let's apply this filter before we take anything that smacks of "artificial intelligence" seriously: tell me what "natural intelligence" is. For extra credit, find some.
I'm sorry, but your application for a grant has been rejected. Thank you for your time.
And that brings to mind the following question: why are MS still being such 'ssholes about running one copy of the OS on all the computers a (legit) purchaser of the OS owns? I would buy a copy of XP if that didn't mean I'd have to buy a copy for each of the 5 PCs I own, and plead for reactivation every time I change the hardware config on one of them.
Not that I want to encourage anyone to do evil, but it would be nice if there was a way to disable the part of XP that checks for hardware config changes. I'm surprised no one has done this.
I agree that asking you to cough up an annual fee that entitles you to publish your own comments is a bit hard to swallow (so to speak)...but they are trying to deal with a problem that many web information and services providers face--how do you make money doing this? Or (if you are nonprofit) how do you collect enough money to cover expenses?
Ads are usually a dumb idea--they're annoying, and the web is not your dad's TV. I control what happens on my computer, so I shut out all those annoying, animated ads. The only time I like ads--and when they are effective--is when I'm looking to buy something, and the ads give me information relevant to my research on that product. (That's why I like Google ads.)
Annual memberships are another way, but I've seldom forked over the $10 or $20 (or whatever) that some membership websites ask for "premium content," nor do I respond to appeals for charity, along the lines of "please donate some $$ to keep this website afloat".
I know, I know, I'm a bad person. But there are a lot of lazy cheapskates like me out there parasitically sucking the lifeblood out of really useful websites that some poor hardworking geek is providing for free out of the kindness of his heart (until he burns out, the website goes away, and he goes into another career, like being a pharmacist).
But hold on. I'd like to offer a solution to the problem posed by social parasites such as myself. The solution to getting paid for providing web content is...charge for it. But don't charge a lump sum--charge very little. Charge so little that people don't notice. Suppose that you run a site that contains all sorts of valuable resources for people who like to play some game...like Everquest (a favorite of mine--I'm a D.E., of course). How would you like to collect a penny for every time someon hits your site to look up the details on where to find a rare artifact? No begging, no membership solicitations, no tearful pleas for charity. Just another penny on the stack every time someone opens a web page of yours. It might not make you rich...but if your content is worthwhile, you'd be able to meet expenses. And if your site is really popular, who knows--you might live quite well.
It's an odd fact of human psychology that I (who am, of course, a normal Dark Elf...er human) wouldn't mind paying little tiny dribbles of money for stuff I really enjoy, where I would rebel at having to authorize a lump sum payment.
So how do you implement a scheme like this? Sure, the devil is in the details. We'd need some infrastructure--a way of authenticating who the visitor is, a way of billing the visitor, and a way of transferring the accumulated funds to the web host. That would take some doing--but it's not rocket science. Even Paypal might manage it. Public/private key schemes could be used for authentication of anonymous accounts. Web services providers would get paid, and I'd see another line item on my credit card every month, and breathe a sigh of relief that I am not a complete parasite after all.
Nah, the "net donations model" isn't flawed, it's hopelessly hippy hoppy fluffy bunny naive. Anyone with sense knows that it takes money to live, therefore people with sense don't work for free. If some smart-but-naive person wants to give away free software, I'll take it and laugh at his plea for "donations". On the other hand, if he has the guts to state a reasonable price, I pay it. I respect people who make useful software and know its value; I have nothing but amused contempt for people who do not value their own work enough to state a price. And I give them exactly what they ask for--nothing.
.... Maybe storms or whatever stripped mars of it's atmosphere erased any visible signs from the surface such as vegetation.
Uh...the atmosphere blew itself away?
Given this contributor's complete cluelessness about the present state of the martian atmosphere, his absurd hypothesis to account for its (counterfactual) disappearance, and his ignorance of the use of the apostrophe ("its" vs. "it's"), I'd say this is one of the poorer posts I've seen in the past couple of weeks. Well, ok, I haven't been reading/. much any more. And this is one of the reasons.
If this guy gets modded plus 4, why haven't I been invited to join the Slashdot editorial board? Why haven't I been promoted to demi-god? Or even hemi-semi-demi-god? It must be my sig.
AFAIK, normal Windows 2000 won't let you run more than 2 processors on any one box. But if you activate Hyperthreading on a dual core chip, you effectively have 4 processors--2 of which Windows will refuse to use. (I found this out when I got a dual Xeon Workstation at my job, but the doofi in IT wouldn't give me a Windows Server license because I had "no need".) Could this be the reason why Hyperthreading is turned off on the low-end dual cores? Because the average Joe won't want to spring for a Windows Server license to get the full potential out of his new box?
Yes, but this has nothing to do with XSL vs. CSS, it's about HTML vs. PDF. And yes, if control is what you're after, then PDF is the way to go. How dare a mere user set his browser's font size larger just because his eyes aren't so good anymore and he'd rather see big print? (Sure, I can magnify PDF, but that doesn't reflow the document, and I'm left scrolling all over the place to get to see the whole thing, sort of like a fly crawling over a giant newspaper page.)
There may be a good reason for your desire to control...but I sure hope it isn't just a desire to dictate how your documents look in my browser.
Q: How can you tell if a website was designed by a know-nothing monkey? A: "This site best viewed in 800x600, 1024x768, etc."
Slashdot Mirror
How challenging is a game that can be played by a script? If that's the kind of exploit the Governor is supposed to prevent, then WoW can't be much of a challenge. Maybe game designers should concentrate on creating games that are subtle enough so that characters can't benefit by mindless, repetitious actions, instead of installing spyware.
I wonder. This could be a test of how much strength the nation-state system retains in the world today. I'm betting that nothing happens, other than lots of talk. That's because states don't run the world any more, nor do synthetic states like the EU. No, we haven't been taken over by aliens nor do mega-corporations run this globe (though they have a bit to say about what happens, just like the remnant-states do)...nobody seems to be in charge right now. I'm not sure that's a bad thing.
I once worked for a company that put its workers in a cubicle warren. The nice thing was that, from time to time, I could stand up, step out of my cubicle and look out a window...wayyyy in the distance. Then one day, they walled up all the windows to build new offices for the managers. One window was left. By that window stood a rubber tree plant. I figured that the rubber tree had a higher status than I...it must be an executive plant. That was my clue to leave. (Well ok, they were losing 10 million a year on a hundred employee company, had no idea what market they were aiming at, and my boss was a neurotically obsessed jerk given to fits of kicking my cubicle walls...those may have been supporting factors for my decision.)
The question seems to imply that implementation of a "good" grammar checker is made more difficult by the nature of English grammar. Does that mean there are effective grammar checkers out there for other languages, like German or Gaelic? I kind of doubt it.
I've heard talk about ion engines for a long time, but this is the first time I've heard of one actually being used. Of course, it's quite possible I haven't been paying attention... Does NASA use ion engines on its deep space probes? If not, is this a significant breakthrough? That is, are there notable advantages to ion propulsion over conventional rocket engines?
I finally got lucky--after having tried one at work, I bought a Microsoft Natural keyboard (about $17 from new egg, as I recall). This is not the version of the keyboard you usually see in the stores--those have a potty key. This one is intended for OEMs to sell with their PCs--therefore it doesn't have any of the extra junk that justifies slapping a high price on an aftermarket keyboard. It's a simple keyboard with a decent feel. Not great, but decent. It does have a funny wavy shape, but I think that's actually a good thing--in any case, I got used to it quickly.
I bought two just in case I spill my coffee again...
I miss the old MacWrite word processor that came with the first macs. Even a kid could pick it up in a few minutes, and do fancy hand-outs with pretty fonts and graphics.
Heck, I could do that with my IBM PC--just flip the switch and turn it off. That's because it didn't do memory paging. All things being equal, I think I'd rather have paging than the ability to turn my computer off without damaging anything, though.
To act on an IM or phone call, you have to be there, and you have to respond immediately. That means if you're not at your computer or near your phone, you miss the missive. (Yes, there's phone mail, but that's the most annoying form of communication there is--you have to sit through someone's incoherent explanation of what they want in real time, you can't skim it like a long email.)
I use email almost exclusively as a communication tool, and prefer it over all others most of the time. Why? Well, it's the asynchronicity. I don't have to be there the moment it arrives to respond; Email sits there and waits patiently for me if I'm gone when it arrives. Email doesn't interrupt me--i'm free to ignore it if I want--but I can still reply to it later. I can also take my time composing an email message and say just what I want to say.
Sure, my daughter uses IM all the time for talking to her friends--again, IM is clearly a substitute for the telephone, not for email. I don't think IM is intrinsically evil, but some IM programs are certainly a security hazard (she's also already downloaded one very destructive virus from an IM) so I've toyed with the idea of blocking IM from my home network. Unfortunately, Microsoft's IM monster is a port-prober and can't be shut out at the router. That's criminal...but then criminality is nothing new for the Satan of Seattle.
I have a Sapphire video card (about 9 months from being top-of-the-line, can't remember model number) that's got a built-in passive cooling system. It has pipes that allegedly circulate some kind of fluid to distribute the heat. The whole thing reminds me of an old Buick radiator--it takes up 2 slots worth of room--but it has never given me any problems. And since it doesn't have a fan, it's completely noiseless.
Well, does the chipset really need a fan? I replaced the one on my Abit IS7 motherboard with a Zalman passive cooler that I fastened to the top of the Northbridge with thermally conductive epoxy. Actually, I had to do this--the fan mounts (little eyelets for hooks on the fan case) tore out of the board. But...the temperature sensors say the chipset is operating at 40 degrees C, and that's the same as when it had a fan. I think the NB fans are added for looks more than utility. YMMV.
It's bullshit, and there is an entire class of people who make their living by producing it. They are called "managers", and they can't think.
Not only haven't you heard of Aristotle (who invented the syllogism a long time before the "middle ages"), but you can derive an "ought" from a list of disjointed "is" statements. Clearly, to paraphrase Plato (another dead Greek), you have taken the "cheap" course in philosophy.
Also relevant is the perpetetrator's behavior: when he was observed, he acted as though he were doing something wrong. He tried to hide what he was doing, instead of, say, waving to the house owner and saying, "Hope you don't mind if I use a little of your bandwidth". This furtiveness suggests criminal intent, it suggests that this wasn't just a lost traveler trying to get his bearings by downloading a map. If it was my house, I'd call the cops too--or maybe he'd find himself staring down the barrel of my Glock, depending on circumstances. (Of course, at my house he wouldn't be connecting to my AP so easily, either.)
On the web at least, you have to be smart to make money, and the smart people (like Google) are doing fine. We just need a few more smart ideas. For example, I think that the concept of "pay per view" content is workable if it were implemented in the right way.
The right way would include the following requirements:
Also, I agree that being compelled to enter metadata every time I store a file would be a big pain. However, having the capability to define my own metadata schema and being able to view my files based on those criteria sounds like a neat idea to me.
There are some people who just cannot deal with directory structures. My wife, for example, has been using a computer for years, but she has no idea what a file is, or how to find one on her PC. Something like this would be useful to her. I've been using hierarchical directories for years, but now matter how careful I am, there's always times when I have trouble finding certain files. It'd be nice, for example, if I could enter criteria like, "Photos, Sept-Dec 2002, mistresses", and get the appriate hits. Wait a minute...maybe making files easy to find is a bad idea...
Yet Another Worthless Neural Simulation.
Look, let's apply this filter before we take anything that smacks of "artificial intelligence" seriously: tell me what "natural intelligence" is. For extra credit, find some.
I'm sorry, but your application for a grant has been rejected. Thank you for your time.
At first, I read this as "an enormous reader writes..."
And that brings to mind the following question: why are MS still being such 'ssholes about running one copy of the OS on all the computers a (legit) purchaser of the OS owns? I would buy a copy of XP if that didn't mean I'd have to buy a copy for each of the 5 PCs I own, and plead for reactivation every time I change the hardware config on one of them.
Not that I want to encourage anyone to do evil, but it would be nice if there was a way to disable the part of XP that checks for hardware config changes. I'm surprised no one has done this.
I agree that asking you to cough up an annual fee that entitles you to publish your own comments is a bit hard to swallow (so to speak)...but they are trying to deal with a problem that many web information and services providers face--how do you make money doing this? Or (if you are nonprofit) how do you collect enough money to cover expenses?
Ads are usually a dumb idea--they're annoying, and the web is not your dad's TV. I control what happens on my computer, so I shut out all those annoying, animated ads. The only time I like ads--and when they are effective--is when I'm looking to buy something, and the ads give me information relevant to my research on that product. (That's why I like Google ads.)
Annual memberships are another way, but I've seldom forked over the $10 or $20 (or whatever) that some membership websites ask for "premium content," nor do I respond to appeals for charity, along the lines of "please donate some $$ to keep this website afloat".
I know, I know, I'm a bad person. But there are a lot of lazy cheapskates like me out there parasitically sucking the lifeblood out of really useful websites that some poor hardworking geek is providing for free out of the kindness of his heart (until he burns out, the website goes away, and he goes into another career, like being a pharmacist).
But hold on. I'd like to offer a solution to the problem posed by social parasites such as myself. The solution to getting paid for providing web content is...charge for it. But don't charge a lump sum--charge very little. Charge so little that people don't notice. Suppose that you run a site that contains all sorts of valuable resources for people who like to play some game...like Everquest (a favorite of mine--I'm a D.E., of course). How would you like to collect a penny for every time someon hits your site to look up the details on where to find a rare artifact? No begging, no membership solicitations, no tearful pleas for charity. Just another penny on the stack every time someone opens a web page of yours. It might not make you rich...but if your content is worthwhile, you'd be able to meet expenses. And if your site is really popular, who knows--you might live quite well.
It's an odd fact of human psychology that I (who am, of course, a normal Dark Elf...er human) wouldn't mind paying little tiny dribbles of money for stuff I really enjoy, where I would rebel at having to authorize a lump sum payment.
So how do you implement a scheme like this? Sure, the devil is in the details. We'd need some infrastructure--a way of authenticating who the visitor is, a way of billing the visitor, and a way of transferring the accumulated funds to the web host. That would take some doing--but it's not rocket science. Even Paypal might manage it. Public/private key schemes could be used for authentication of anonymous accounts. Web services providers would get paid, and I'd see another line item on my credit card every month, and breathe a sigh of relief that I am not a complete parasite after all.
Nah, the "net donations model" isn't flawed, it's hopelessly hippy hoppy fluffy bunny naive. Anyone with sense knows that it takes money to live, therefore people with sense don't work for free. If some smart-but-naive person wants to give away free software, I'll take it and laugh at his plea for "donations". On the other hand, if he has the guts to state a reasonable price, I pay it. I respect people who make useful software and know its value; I have nothing but amused contempt for people who do not value their own work enough to state a price. And I give them exactly what they ask for--nothing.
Uh...the atmosphere blew itself away?
Given this contributor's complete cluelessness about the present state of the martian atmosphere, his absurd hypothesis to account for its (counterfactual) disappearance, and his ignorance of the use of the apostrophe ("its" vs. "it's"), I'd say this is one of the poorer posts I've seen in the past couple of weeks. Well, ok, I haven't been reading /. much any more. And this is one of the reasons.
If this guy gets modded plus 4, why haven't I been invited to join the Slashdot editorial board? Why haven't I been promoted to demi-god? Or even hemi-semi-demi-god? It must be my sig.
AFAIK, normal Windows 2000 won't let you run more than 2 processors on any one box. But if you activate Hyperthreading on a dual core chip, you effectively have 4 processors--2 of which Windows will refuse to use. (I found this out when I got a dual Xeon Workstation at my job, but the doofi in IT wouldn't give me a Windows Server license because I had "no need".) Could this be the reason why Hyperthreading is turned off on the low-end dual cores? Because the average Joe won't want to spring for a Windows Server license to get the full potential out of his new box?
There may be a good reason for your desire to control...but I sure hope it isn't just a desire to dictate how your documents look in my browser.
How about: A: It loads in Acrobat.