The guy didn't even grok the comment, much less the article. Nowhere did anyone state that you were making a laser. It did state, quite clearly, that you'd be able to re-purpose a DVD laser to make a handheld laser.
I know it's flamebait, but I just gotta put this into perspective.
Fire is a huge threat and can take lives in an instant. Though, the industries that deal with those risks are heavily regulated and actual metrics have been established that must be adhered to in order to insure that their products are up to par before making it to market. Think about any company that manufactures products that utilize natural gas. Stoves, furnaces, tanks to store natural gas, pipes to transport, etc. Many metric standards have been established, through rigorous testing, that insure these products don't fail under normal conditions and for good reason. You don't have to blindly trust company X when they claim their products are safe.
Now think about the software industry. How many vendors can Slashdot name that constantly parade around claiming to have made there products secure and virtually hackproof? Oh yeah? Where's the metrics to prove that? Where is the regulatory industry that requires specific guidelines and standards be adhered to when dealing with information of a sensitive nature?
Conventions like Defcon are needed to remind everyone exactly how fragile and insecure many of these products are.
While I don't think this is technically illegal, there is the fact that he intentionally replaced it with an image that was directly related to McCain's character. Intent goes a long way in US courts. Had he replaced it with a general image not directly related to McCain (Goatse?) than he'd probably stand a better chance if this does make it in front of a Judge.
Re:GNOME, Ubuntu, and the colour green...
on
Gnome 2.18 Released
·
· Score: 1
The complementary color for brown is cyan (if you want to beat a dead horse). I've a friend that is red-green color blind. Wonder why it's called red-green colorblind?
Re:GNOME, Ubuntu, and the colour green...
on
Gnome 2.18 Released
·
· Score: 1
Red is green's complimentary color. Not brown. Unless I missed some advanced art class that went beyond the basics.
I do get your point, though. Green and brown are found together in nature everywhere you look. Green is also associated with nature in the marketing circles. So, incorporating green and brown should make my purty desktop seem more like a tree. Great, and I've already been thinking my computer is alive!
I hear you man. It's why I pointed out the entry level options of the Mac Pro. I don't need the "Porsche" of computers and neither do most desktop users.
I've read your reply, as well as those below yours. Keep this in mind: I'm a Mac admin where I work and I've converted quite a few PC users to Macs. I just got my sister to jump ship to an iMac (w/ C2D). I've nothing against the iMac and think it is an excellent piece of hardware. I'm tired of repairing spyware ridden Window's machines as favors.
But... We're on Slashdot. And the average Joe here on Slashdot just isn't going give up the versatility of a PC unless they can afford a Mac Pro. It's that simple. Ask any self respecting computer geek if he would by an iMac for their primary desktop. You'd get very few that would.
As far as the panel goes... The 17" iMac that is priced comparatively to my system has a 17" widescreen panel. It's resolution is nowhere near that of my new 22" widescreen, 1680x1050 screen. Maybe the color of the apple panel is a bit more vibrant, but... I'm not into licking my screen;)
All that said... I love Apple hardware and Mac OS X... They just don't offer a mid-range desktop in my price range for a home PC.
I have to agree on the price issue many people raise. I wouldn't say Apple is expensive if you compare their specs to an equivalent PC, but I'd still say they sell expensive systems.
I do think many people want control over their hardware. The only true desktop Apple offers is the Mac Pro. An entry level Mac Pro comes with two dual core xeon processors. Four cores for a home desktop? Maybe for a professional. But your average Joe isn't going to dump $2500 on a desktop for Mac OS and hardware control combined. They'll buy a cheap PC and configure/upgrade as much as possible. They might even find away to hack OS X onto that machine and save a few bucks. I don't think Apple will go on a legal crusade over the OSX86 market.
If apple gave me a $1500 desktop, I'd jump ship on my next PC purchase. I just built a $1300 Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM system last month and plan on adding a new monitor for a grand total of $1700.00. I'd never get what I wanted out of a new Mac for that price. I'd get a beefed up iMac. pffft.
I have to agree. Emulating IE is never a good idea. It's unpredictable enough without the emulation.
For the mac-centric designer at our small company I setup a spare Dell P3 733MHz with multiple versions of IE, Firefox and Opera fore testing. One of those could be had for about $100 on retrobox. Paired with a KVM, it's much more reliable and not expensive for someone developing websites to afford.
I support a small graphics design team that upgraded to OS X 10.2 a few years back. At that time, the fastest machine we had was a Dual 500MHz G4. I know, I know, talk about holding back on hardware upgrades. Like I said, I support, I don't purchase or recommend.
Regardless, OS X has always had a very fluid GUI on older hardware. We even had some old G3's at the time that we used for various tasks (just don't let them go to sleep.. they'll sleep forever). These ran OS X just fine, also. Even subsequent releases of 10.3 and 10.4 continued to run rather smoothly in terms of GUI interactivity on older hardware.
Waiting for apps to load, that's another story. But very much expected, considering we were using dated hardware.
In fact, after we finally purchased some new G5's, I was a bit disappointed, because the GUI performed almost identically. App performance went through the roof, in contrast.
Your first point is the exact reason I would never buy one of these. I'm waiting for a wifi capable MP3 player without any limitations. It's not anything special or innovative. It's just xfer'ing a file from one point to another via WiFi. I can already do this with my laptop.
It's a shame a company like Microsoft has so many reservations about pushing technology in the direction they want to go, instead of letting the entertainment schmucks steer them into a corner. You'd think they'd have wisened up by now and would start blazing a trail for others to follow... Ahhh, well... we'll wait and see.
It's inevitable that some company somewhere is going to produce a non-DRM player with WiFi.
The feature is only worthless because it is crippled. Why rip a CD when it is so much quicker/easier to transfer a file digitally via WiFi? Why should I be confined to listening to music on my friends player? What if I want to hear it at home?
br.
It's a great (and obvious) idea. Just a very bad implementation.
Here's a hint to the DS buyer waiting to find a friend to play with: Music is much more universal than a gameboy will ever be.
People have been trading music since they could record it. I don't know about you, but as a teenager and as an adult, my major source of new music comes from friends. We share music with each other all the time. You know, go outside, get in the car and go to a friends house to visit. Maybe have a beer and listen to a CD or two.
If this thing didn't have the 3 song limit, everyone would have one.
The problem here is that the technology is being pushed by Microsoft. It's OK though. Other companies will come along with similar devices and hopefully the technology will evolve into something better. Transmitting a file wirelessly isn't voodoo.
Linux.com has been running these articles for a while now. Just search their site for "my sysadmin toolbox" and you'll get a bunch of articles from different folks. Most of the other articles are more technical in nature and some of them are from professionals that work with linux for a living.
It's actually a nice set of articles for those trying to pick up a few tricks here and there.
The submitter posted the most recent article, which happens to be more towards desktop use. There are much more appropriate examples, like this article here.
Look at the description of one of these linux systems:
Ideal owner: The most demanding users requiring elite dual-processor power, cutting-edge features and plenty of room to grow
"Elite dual-processor power." Hrrrmmm... Something tells me they aren't aiming this at your average home user. This is aimed at the basement hackers that have been bitching about Dell not selling anything but Windows on their desktops. It's a way for them to still sell hardware to geeks that don't feel like building their own system.
It is not a way for them to push millions of additional sales to their desktop division. It is a reaction to the geeks that complained about Dell not selling anything but Windows based PC's.
Just my thoughts.
you'd have 8 gallons of cooking oil that wanted out, and if you weren't at home could very well destroy the board.
------
Leave it to a geek to be worried about his mobo when 8 gallons of oil spill onto the floor.
I'd rather replace my mobo anyday. Try getting 8 gallons of oil out of burbur. Or better yet, try the same mess on hardwood or linoleum. I can see it now:
(slip) Shit, my fscking back. Gotta hurry, must get up before mobo dies!
(slip-splotch-boom) Oohhh... My aching head. How am I ever gonna get outta this mess!
(bam-slip)(careening into corner of desk, eye-first) Ahhhh! I can't see! I'm blind! My baby! My baby! Don't worry, I'll save you, baby!
[voice from bedroom] Is everything OK dear? Who are you talking to?
(splotch-bam-boom) Everything fine, honey.. Just a few minor diffi.. (bang)
Honey! Quick, call Compusa, STAT! She's not gonna make it!
How did you act when you first came to the job? Did you tell the boss off witin your first few years with the company? Don't know about you, but it took me a few years to let my emotions truly show before management.
Something tells me, it's just bad news to go against the grain until you've got some years behind you at a company.
Where I work, it's always someone at least 30 that really gets into it with mgmt. Surprisingly enough, there are very few "star" workers that aren't in their 20 somethings. I'd guess 75% of the most functional workers are in their 20's.
I see alot of gripes on here about identifying music by typing some lyrics into Google, or what have you. I myself have found and purchased alot of CD's using that same method and I would be very upset if I no longer had those tools available.
On the other hand, you have a seemingly endless amount of lyric sites that house quite a bit of copyrighted lyrics. That in itself should not be a punishable crime, if you ask me. The problem is when alot of these sites employ advertising and other things to garner cash for their service. You then have many sites potentially turning a small profit by distributing copyrighted lyrics.
If the major labels would just wisen up and start providing complete archives of songs lyrics in a reasonable manner (no charges), then it would be a win/win situation for everybody. Instead, they don't ever once consider the benefit involved in such a service and begin this assanine crusade to jail people that are helping the labels out in the first place.
The real problem is that the major labels are too f*cking stupid to provide a much needed service to their loyal customers. Those folks then turn to someone else that is doing the job right.
Ignoring customers at a time like this is their major fault. I could care less if someone else is turning a profit off their lyrics because of it. As well as many other frustrated consumers.
Where is the reasonable solution? The RIAA and record labels don't have one. They continue to delve into lawsuit after lawsuit with little or no effect at all. Before you know, all of the lyrics sites will spring up in areas where copyright means nothing.
Consumers won't tolerate it? Most consumers could care less about the how their content gets to them. As long as it gets there. If the majority of customers have no problem getting to Google, Yahoo, MSN, etc., then they won't complain.
No, no. It'll have to be someone with some technical knowledge to refute this one.
I can see the marketing spin now. Bell will be telling the little guy how this service helps them provide faster content and a better price and blah, blah, blah. Your average end user won't even realize they are being scammed.
It'll never happen, though. I can't really see the benefit in this for anyone but Bell. Why would a Google or Yahoo pay Bell to route their traffic faster? Is a half second page load not fast enough for Google?
The way I see it, he is just outlining the current state of affairs and packaging it all pretty like in hopes that money will come his way. Yahoo and Google (probably) already spend more than most on networking/routing/whatever. It's how things already work. If you're Google, you don't buy hosted web space and conduct business. You strike up deals with Tier 1 providers.
At least, this is the way I see things. Perhaps someone else could enlighten me if I am way off base.
The article speaks about security vulnerabilities. Not bugs within an interface or anything of that nature. Most of the bugs listed on bugzilla are not related to functional problems, not security.
Slashdot Mirror
+4 insightful? WTF?
The guy didn't even grok the comment, much less the article. Nowhere did anyone state that you were making a laser. It did state, quite clearly, that you'd be able to re-purpose a DVD laser to make a handheld laser.
I know it's flamebait, but I just gotta put this into perspective. Fire is a huge threat and can take lives in an instant. Though, the industries that deal with those risks are heavily regulated and actual metrics have been established that must be adhered to in order to insure that their products are up to par before making it to market. Think about any company that manufactures products that utilize natural gas. Stoves, furnaces, tanks to store natural gas, pipes to transport, etc. Many metric standards have been established, through rigorous testing, that insure these products don't fail under normal conditions and for good reason. You don't have to blindly trust company X when they claim their products are safe. Now think about the software industry. How many vendors can Slashdot name that constantly parade around claiming to have made there products secure and virtually hackproof? Oh yeah? Where's the metrics to prove that? Where is the regulatory industry that requires specific guidelines and standards be adhered to when dealing with information of a sensitive nature? Conventions like Defcon are needed to remind everyone exactly how fragile and insecure many of these products are.
While I don't think this is technically illegal, there is the fact that he intentionally replaced it with an image that was directly related to McCain's character. Intent goes a long way in US courts. Had he replaced it with a general image not directly related to McCain (Goatse?) than he'd probably stand a better chance if this does make it in front of a Judge.
The complementary color for brown is cyan (if you want to beat a dead horse). I've a friend that is red-green color blind. Wonder why it's called red-green colorblind?
Red is green's complimentary color. Not brown. Unless I missed some advanced art class that went beyond the basics. I do get your point, though. Green and brown are found together in nature everywhere you look. Green is also associated with nature in the marketing circles. So, incorporating green and brown should make my purty desktop seem more like a tree. Great, and I've already been thinking my computer is alive!
I hear you man. It's why I pointed out the entry level options of the Mac Pro. I don't need the "Porsche" of computers and neither do most desktop users.
I've read your reply, as well as those below yours. Keep this in mind: I'm a Mac admin where I work and I've converted quite a few PC users to Macs. I just got my sister to jump ship to an iMac (w/ C2D). I've nothing against the iMac and think it is an excellent piece of hardware. I'm tired of repairing spyware ridden Window's machines as favors. But... We're on Slashdot. And the average Joe here on Slashdot just isn't going give up the versatility of a PC unless they can afford a Mac Pro. It's that simple. Ask any self respecting computer geek if he would by an iMac for their primary desktop. You'd get very few that would. As far as the panel goes... The 17" iMac that is priced comparatively to my system has a 17" widescreen panel. It's resolution is nowhere near that of my new 22" widescreen, 1680x1050 screen. Maybe the color of the apple panel is a bit more vibrant, but... I'm not into licking my screen ;)
All that said... I love Apple hardware and Mac OS X... They just don't offer a mid-range desktop in my price range for a home PC.
I have to agree on the price issue many people raise. I wouldn't say Apple is expensive if you compare their specs to an equivalent PC, but I'd still say they sell expensive systems.
I do think many people want control over their hardware. The only true desktop Apple offers is the Mac Pro. An entry level Mac Pro comes with two dual core xeon processors. Four cores for a home desktop? Maybe for a professional. But your average Joe isn't going to dump $2500 on a desktop for Mac OS and hardware control combined. They'll buy a cheap PC and configure/upgrade as much as possible. They might even find away to hack OS X onto that machine and save a few bucks. I don't think Apple will go on a legal crusade over the OSX86 market.
If apple gave me a $1500 desktop, I'd jump ship on my next PC purchase. I just built a $1300 Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM system last month and plan on adding a new monitor for a grand total of $1700.00. I'd never get what I wanted out of a new Mac for that price. I'd get a beefed up iMac. pffft.
I have to agree. Emulating IE is never a good idea. It's unpredictable enough without the emulation.
For the mac-centric designer at our small company I setup a spare Dell P3 733MHz with multiple versions of IE, Firefox and Opera fore testing. One of those could be had for about $100 on retrobox. Paired with a KVM, it's much more reliable and not expensive for someone developing websites to afford.
Yes, utter crap indeed.
I support a small graphics design team that upgraded to OS X 10.2 a few years back. At that time, the fastest machine we had was a Dual 500MHz G4. I know, I know, talk about holding back on hardware upgrades. Like I said, I support, I don't purchase or recommend.
Regardless, OS X has always had a very fluid GUI on older hardware. We even had some old G3's at the time that we used for various tasks (just don't let them go to sleep.. they'll sleep forever). These ran OS X just fine, also. Even subsequent releases of 10.3 and 10.4 continued to run rather smoothly in terms of GUI interactivity on older hardware.
Waiting for apps to load, that's another story. But very much expected, considering we were using dated hardware.
In fact, after we finally purchased some new G5's, I was a bit disappointed, because the GUI performed almost identically. App performance went through the roof, in contrast.
They might be working on it already.
I takes forever for a video feed to start with a 6Mb/s downstream. WHat going to happen when they start analyzing that data on there end also?
Here's to hoping MySpace bloats their site out of existence.
"yet still live in America after threatening to leave... go figure"
I'm hoping those same poeple stay and vote.
Your first point is the exact reason I would never buy one of these. I'm waiting for a wifi capable MP3 player without any limitations. It's not anything special or innovative. It's just xfer'ing a file from one point to another via WiFi. I can already do this with my laptop.
It's a shame a company like Microsoft has so many reservations about pushing technology in the direction they want to go, instead of letting the entertainment schmucks steer them into a corner. You'd think they'd have wisened up by now and would start blazing a trail for others to follow... Ahhh, well... we'll wait and see.
It's inevitable that some company somewhere is going to produce a non-DRM player with WiFi.
The feature is only worthless because it is crippled. Why rip a CD when it is so much quicker/easier to transfer a file digitally via WiFi? Why should I be confined to listening to music on my friends player? What if I want to hear it at home?
br. It's a great (and obvious) idea. Just a very bad implementation.
Here's a hint to the DS buyer waiting to find a friend to play with: Music is much more universal than a gameboy will ever be. People have been trading music since they could record it. I don't know about you, but as a teenager and as an adult, my major source of new music comes from friends. We share music with each other all the time. You know, go outside, get in the car and go to a friends house to visit. Maybe have a beer and listen to a CD or two. If this thing didn't have the 3 song limit, everyone would have one. The problem here is that the technology is being pushed by Microsoft. It's OK though. Other companies will come along with similar devices and hopefully the technology will evolve into something better. Transmitting a file wirelessly isn't voodoo.
Linux.com has been running these articles for a while now. Just search their site for "my sysadmin toolbox" and you'll get a bunch of articles from different folks. Most of the other articles are more technical in nature and some of them are from professionals that work with linux for a living.
It's actually a nice set of articles for those trying to pick up a few tricks here and there.
The submitter posted the most recent article, which happens to be more towards desktop use. There are much more appropriate examples, like this article here.
Ubuntu would have a fighting chance if they had an enterprise level support model. One that is backed by the Ubuntu name itself.
This is where companies like Redhat and SuSE have a major advantage when it comes to getting their software bundled by big companies like Dell.
Look at the description of one of these linux systems:
Ideal owner: The most demanding users requiring elite dual-processor power, cutting-edge features and plenty of room to grow
"Elite dual-processor power." Hrrrmmm... Something tells me they aren't aiming this at your average home user. This is aimed at the basement hackers that have been bitching about Dell not selling anything but Windows on their desktops. It's a way for them to still sell hardware to geeks that don't feel like building their own system. It is not a way for them to push millions of additional sales to their desktop division. It is a reaction to the geeks that complained about Dell not selling anything but Windows based PC's. Just my thoughts.
you'd have 8 gallons of cooking oil that wanted out, and if you weren't at home could very well destroy the board.
------
Leave it to a geek to be worried about his mobo when 8 gallons of oil spill onto the floor.
I'd rather replace my mobo anyday. Try getting 8 gallons of oil out of burbur. Or better yet, try the same mess on hardwood or linoleum. I can see it now:
(slip) Shit, my fscking back. Gotta hurry, must get up before mobo dies!
(slip-splotch-boom) Oohhh... My aching head. How am I ever gonna get outta this mess!
(bam-slip)(careening into corner of desk, eye-first) Ahhhh! I can't see! I'm blind! My baby! My baby! Don't worry, I'll save you, baby!
[voice from bedroom] Is everything OK dear? Who are you talking to?
(splotch-bam-boom) Everything fine, honey.. Just a few minor diffi.. (bang)
Honey! Quick, call Compusa, STAT! She's not gonna make it!
How did you act when you first came to the job? Did you tell the boss off witin your first few years with the company? Don't know about you, but it took me a few years to let my emotions truly show before management.
Something tells me, it's just bad news to go against the grain until you've got some years behind you at a company.
Where I work, it's always someone at least 30 that really gets into it with mgmt. Surprisingly enough, there are very few "star" workers that aren't in their 20 somethings. I'd guess 75% of the most functional workers are in their 20's.
Just my experience, though.
I see alot of gripes on here about identifying music by typing some lyrics into Google, or what have you. I myself have found and purchased alot of CD's using that same method and I would be very upset if I no longer had those tools available.
On the other hand, you have a seemingly endless amount of lyric sites that house quite a bit of copyrighted lyrics. That in itself should not be a punishable crime, if you ask me. The problem is when alot of these sites employ advertising and other things to garner cash for their service. You then have many sites potentially turning a small profit by distributing copyrighted lyrics.
If the major labels would just wisen up and start providing complete archives of songs lyrics in a reasonable manner (no charges), then it would be a win/win situation for everybody. Instead, they don't ever once consider the benefit involved in such a service and begin this assanine crusade to jail people that are helping the labels out in the first place.
The real problem is that the major labels are too f*cking stupid to provide a much needed service to their loyal customers. Those folks then turn to someone else that is doing the job right.
Ignoring customers at a time like this is their major fault. I could care less if someone else is turning a profit off their lyrics because of it. As well as many other frustrated consumers.
Where is the reasonable solution? The RIAA and record labels don't have one. They continue to delve into lawsuit after lawsuit with little or no effect at all. Before you know, all of the lyrics sites will spring up in areas where copyright means nothing.
Consumers won't tolerate it? Most consumers could care less about the how their content gets to them. As long as it gets there. If the majority of customers have no problem getting to Google, Yahoo, MSN, etc., then they won't complain.
No, no. It'll have to be someone with some technical knowledge to refute this one.
I can see the marketing spin now. Bell will be telling the little guy how this service helps them provide faster content and a better price and blah, blah, blah. Your average end user won't even realize they are being scammed.
It'll never happen, though. I can't really see the benefit in this for anyone but Bell. Why would a Google or Yahoo pay Bell to route their traffic faster? Is a half second page load not fast enough for Google?
The way I see it, he is just outlining the current state of affairs and packaging it all pretty like in hopes that money will come his way. Yahoo and Google (probably) already spend more than most on networking/routing/whatever. It's how things already work. If you're Google, you don't buy hosted web space and conduct business. You strike up deals with Tier 1 providers.
At least, this is the way I see things. Perhaps someone else could enlighten me if I am way off base.
The article speaks about security vulnerabilities. Not bugs within an interface or anything of that nature. Most of the bugs listed on bugzilla are not related to functional problems, not security.
Early adopters? Surely you meant beta testers.