You couldn't physically transport a piece of paper anywhere in the country by yourself for 8-cents. Even taking it across town would cost you more
Yes, but when there are 200,000 of them, and my cost is the same, I'm sure I could do it. Cheaper too.
safe workplaces, a cleaner environment
Unh hunh.. These are the schmucks that took forty years to even restrict sales of benzene, and fifty to reduce the maximum exposure to a level that wasn't giving everyone cancer. Sure sounds clean and safe to me!
social safety nets that prevent the least fortunate of society from starving to death or dying from preventable disease
I'm laughing. Everone that lives solely on social security is below the poverty line. Welfare is a joke too.
I didn't mean to imply AT&T was good; Just that they were the least of the two evils. Oh, and it's a quote from/usr/local/games/bin/fortune.
The AARD routine in Win 3.1 wasn't a virus, only an underhanded trick to reduce the load on beta support and increase the sales of MSDOS 5.
I'm guessing the mentality ran "Gee, we might have to make some changes to 3.1 to make it run better on DR DOS. Losers running DR DOS deserve a crash, ain't gonna do it."
While encrypted, a pain in the ass, and down right dirty, AARD had no chance of propogation without the direct interaction of a programmer at Microsoft. So no, it wasn't a virus.
There were in this country two very large monopolies. The larger of the two had the following record: the Vietnam War, Watergate, double- digit inflation, fuel and energy shortages, bankrupt airlines, and the 8-cent postcard. The second was responsible for such things as the transistor, the solar cell, lasers, synthetic crystals, high fidelity stereo recording, sound motion pictures, radio astronomy, negative feedback, magnetic tape, magnetic "bubbles", electronic switching systems, microwave radio and TV relay systems, information theory, the first electrical digital computer, and the first communications satellite. Guess which one got to tell the other how to run the telephone business?
Nope. A decreased chance. Seeing a girl's bedroom is as good as seeing the girl. There are a myriad of excuses to have the hockey schedule on the fridge, from 'My wife picks up the neighbor's kid when she picks the girls from ballet' to 'My twelve year old, Daphne, was so good they moved her into boys AAA Pee-Wee this year.'.
I hearby apologize to everyone I flamed. I was wrong. For lack of a better programming language at my disposal, here's an Office macro that proves not only am I an idiot, I'd only get the car half as much as Rev Snow.
Sub goat_problem()
Dim chosen As Integer
Dim you As Integer
Dim looper As Integer
Dim swi As Integer
Dim norm As Integer
For looper = 1 To 20000 Step 1
chosen = Int((Rnd() * 3) + 1)
you = Int((Rnd() * 3) + 1)
If (chosen = you) Then norm = norm + 1
If (Not (chosen = you)) Then swi = swi + 1
Next looper
looper = MsgBox("goat " & swi & " " & "notgoat " & norm & " " & swi / norm, vbOKOnly, "goat?")
End Sub
Heh.. Why worry about it, when the answer can easily be gained through social engineering at no cost?
'Man, three kids.. How do you handle the sibling rivalry?' should produce at least one childs name and the gender of the other two. If it doesn't, eg, you get a result like 'Oh, it is/is not terribly bad.' you have to go fishing again. If you had siblings, or have at two children of the same sex, try the empathy ploy. Detail how when you/your children had to share a room, the infighting was worse, and ask if keeping them seperated could be the reason/solution.
If I think about it that way, it's still a 1/2 problem since the second goat is a known quantity.
Think about it like this. You are presented with three doors, one open displaying a goat, *before* you make your choice. (When the door is opened is meaningless, as it always displays a goat) You cannot choose the open door, obviously, so there are only 2 to choose from.
Heh.. I was expecting a standard magicians lead routine. Hadn't seen that as a 'online' version. How many people would remember more than one card, so what danger is there in not changing them all?:)
I'd seen the real world equivalent. Took me one try to beat it, and only because I cheated. (Cards you have just laid out in front of you in intentionally spilled beer on do NOT suddenly become dry and fresh. You can always smell the beer)
Take the five changed cards, and invert them on the bottom of the deck. If you know how to tab them into a cut, I'd shuffle a time or two and make them arrive at the bottom. Pick through the deck for them, in front of the patsy. Have the pick made, then tell them to shuffle the six and place them back on top of the deck, removing any chance the order will ring a bell with the patsy. Tell them to think about it, while you grab the deck and deal the changed cards to them after a quick inversion.
Arguments and code simulations? Why? Are your co-workers mentally weak? This is an open and shut case of logical analysis.
At first glance, there are three doors, two goats, and one car. However, this is misleading.
In any run of the problem, one of the unchosen doors is shown to be a goat. You cannot choose that door, and both it and its associated goat never enter into the statistical problem.
The actual problem has only two doors, one goat, one car. Plain old 50/50 chance. There is no gain to be had by changing doors.
Well, unless the door is hung a bit high and you can see goat legs under the door you have chosen.
Far easier than that. We have a sales tax program running on AS/400 that will determine tax rate for any address on the planet; City, county, state/province, country. Only cost us five figures, and another low four to integrate it into the billing system.
Microsoft?
Porting to Linux?
Whuuuuuuuaaa..
[technos falls dead on the keyboard, drooling, and suggests others do the same, for this is surely a sign of the endo of the world]
It's not 'abandoning your children' to tell the government they have no right in telling you how you raise your children.
How would you like it if some new law stated you could no longer read to your children from the Bible because it had been substantivly disproved in case law, it contained lewd and lascivious material unfit for children, and mature intellectual themes not easily understood by anyone under 18?? Each of thses is true, but you wouldn't like it, and even though I will never read to mine from the Bible I wouldn't like it either.
Okay, wrong flame. The CIPA is the Children's Internet Protection Act not the Children's Online Protection Act./blatent_try_to_save_face
Sorry, Timothy. You were right, the submitter was wrong.
They're charging a fee for our data. There was no 'data submitted automatically becomes the property of..' bullshit. They relicensed our intellectual property without notification or permission.
So, I am hearby relicensing, sans notification, my submission of the CD hash and track information for all of the rereleases of the Elton John catalogue. Gracenote, you have 24 hours to pull these entries from your database or pay the newly instated license fee, which is a free license to the rest of the database for grip, mp3cddb, and any other remotly useful cddb application I have used recently but can't think of off the top of my head.
if a major part of the project is to figure out how to do X, and you look at code that tells you how to do X, then you are indeed guilty of cheating
Come on. Code is the best, most concise way of explaining anything. If you want me to build a rocket, do you expect me to not check out a collection of Goddard's writing to see what he thought of the effect of motion on a shutter system, or a set of his plans to see what exactly your 'Rocket Science 101' book meant whan it talked about fuel tank reinforcement? If my final rocket is substantially different from my source material, and I cite Mr. Goddard for his inspiring me to use gel-based, gravity fed fuel for the cooling system, I am not 'cheating'. As for the 'figure it out' part, there is not a project under the sun any student would be capable of doing that has not been done before, and very few that have not been documented beyond the level of copiously, and researching code or documentation samples is fair research when cited as such.
As for reuse of portions of prior, unrelated projects; If I wrote a data handling routine that would meet all the requirements for an aspect of the project but one, copied in the code and made a few modifications, what is the harm? I would have reimplemented it in exactly the same way! Why place that insane burden on students?
Damn, man.. Those fuckers are built like rocks. I didn't know it until I hit that link, but I've seen a few of those on industrial sampling/analysis equipment. Didn't know they were PS/2, the equipment had a fully sealed panel, but I don't think there are two companies making keyboards exactly like that..
Those probably will beat the shit out of IBMs, regardless of my prior recomendation of (and my affinity for) them.
Lexmark (not IBM) still makes them. Want a brand new Model M, it'll run you like $75..
And they hold up to anything. I've seen them fresh off a six year lease with (insert major automobile company) where they were used at dealerships as parts locater terminals in the service department. One had apparently spent much of its life in a pool of gear oil from the amount of sludge in the panel, and it was still typing 100% before cleaning. One of Emerson Electric's divisions used to use them directly on the manufacturing floor, and once again, after nearly six years they worked, just needed a bath in soapy water to get the grime out and return them to factory condition.
when you buy something at the store, your paying for all the shoplifted items also
Lower theft, lower price, eh?
Do you honestly think Microsoft is going to decrease their price when piracy decreases? They've already got us paying out the nose, why in Gods name would they let us stop? And the OEMs? Do you think they got a price break when they went to piracy-proof re-imagers? Nope.
Five lines of Russian are just as incomprehensible to me as that perl program; Does that mean books published in Russian are not covered by the right to free speech? I don't think Joe Redneck is going to argue that only English is covered..
You can do every thing Ghost does with nfs, dd and cp.. Shit, even SMB and NT on the backend.. The only real problem is the initial images, which require patience when being stuffed over the network.
Slashdot Mirror
You couldn't physically transport a piece of paper anywhere in the country by yourself for 8-cents. Even taking it across town would cost you more
/usr/local/games/bin/fortune.
Yes, but when there are 200,000 of them, and my cost is the same, I'm sure I could do it. Cheaper too.
safe workplaces, a cleaner environment
Unh hunh.. These are the schmucks that took forty years to even restrict sales of benzene, and fifty to reduce the maximum exposure to a level that wasn't giving everyone cancer. Sure sounds clean and safe to me!
social safety nets that prevent the least fortunate of society from starving to death or dying from preventable disease
I'm laughing. Everone that lives solely on social security is below the poverty line. Welfare is a joke too.
I didn't mean to imply AT&T was good; Just that they were the least of the two evils. Oh, and it's a quote from
The AARD routine in Win 3.1 wasn't a virus, only an underhanded trick to reduce the load on beta support and increase the sales of MSDOS 5.
I'm guessing the mentality ran "Gee, we might have to make some changes to 3.1 to make it run better on DR DOS. Losers running DR DOS deserve a crash, ain't gonna do it."
While encrypted, a pain in the ass, and down right dirty, AARD had no chance of propogation without the direct interaction of a programmer at Microsoft. So no, it wasn't a virus.
There were in this country two very large monopolies. The larger of the two had the following record: the Vietnam War, Watergate, double- digit inflation, fuel and energy shortages, bankrupt airlines, and the 8-cent postcard. The second was responsible for such things as the transistor, the solar cell, lasers, synthetic crystals, high fidelity stereo recording, sound motion pictures, radio astronomy, negative feedback, magnetic tape, magnetic "bubbles", electronic switching systems, microwave radio and TV relay systems, information theory, the first electrical digital computer, and the first communications satellite. Guess which one got to tell the other how to run the telephone business?
Nope. A decreased chance. Seeing a girl's bedroom is as good as seeing the girl. There are a myriad of excuses to have the hockey schedule on the fridge, from 'My wife picks up the neighbor's kid when she picks the girls from ballet' to 'My twelve year old, Daphne, was so good they moved her into boys AAA Pee-Wee this year.'.
Goddamnit.
You're right, I'm wrong.
[/me bashes his head against the table.]
I hearby apologize to everyone I flamed. I was wrong. For lack of a better programming language at my disposal, here's an Office macro that proves not only am I an idiot, I'd only get the car half as much as Rev Snow.
Sub goat_problem()
Dim chosen As Integer
Dim you As Integer
Dim looper As Integer
Dim swi As Integer
Dim norm As Integer
For looper = 1 To 20000 Step 1
chosen = Int((Rnd() * 3) + 1)
you = Int((Rnd() * 3) + 1)
If (chosen = you) Then norm = norm + 1
If (Not (chosen = you)) Then swi = swi + 1
Next looper
looper = MsgBox("goat " & swi & " " & "notgoat " & norm & " " & swi / norm, vbOKOnly, "goat?")
End Sub
Heh.. Why worry about it, when the answer can easily be gained through social engineering at no cost?
'Man, three kids.. How do you handle the sibling rivalry?' should produce at least one childs name and the gender of the other two. If it doesn't, eg, you get a result like 'Oh, it is/is not terribly bad.' you have to go fishing again. If you had siblings, or have at two children of the same sex, try the empathy ploy. Detail how when you/your children had to share a room, the infighting was worse, and ask if keeping them seperated could be the reason/solution.
Leading, generic talk can get you anywhere.
[sigh] I see how there were arguments now.. :)
If I think about it that way, it's still a 1/2 problem since the second goat is a known quantity.
Think about it like this. You are presented with three doors, one open displaying a goat, *before* you make your choice. (When the door is opened is meaningless, as it always displays a goat) You cannot choose the open door, obviously, so there are only 2 to choose from.
Heh.. I was expecting a standard magicians lead routine. Hadn't seen that as a 'online' version. How many people would remember more than one card, so what danger is there in not changing them all? :)
I'd seen the real world equivalent. Took me one try to beat it, and only because I cheated. (Cards you have just laid out in front of you in intentionally spilled beer on do NOT suddenly become dry and fresh. You can always smell the beer)
Take the five changed cards, and invert them on the bottom of the deck. If you know how to tab them into a cut, I'd shuffle a time or two and make them arrive at the bottom. Pick through the deck for them, in front of the patsy. Have the pick made, then tell them to shuffle the six and place them back on top of the deck, removing any chance the order will ring a bell with the patsy. Tell them to think about it, while you grab the deck and deal the changed cards to them after a quick inversion.
Oh, and three socks.
Arguments and code simulations? Why? Are your co-workers mentally weak? This is an open and shut case of logical analysis.
At first glance, there are three doors, two goats, and one car. However, this is misleading.
In any run of the problem, one of the unchosen doors is shown to be a goat. You cannot choose that door, and both it and its associated goat never enter into the statistical problem.
The actual problem has only two doors, one goat, one car. Plain old 50/50 chance. There is no gain to be had by changing doors.
Well, unless the door is hung a bit high and you can see goat legs under the door you have chosen.
Warning; I work for CRA's corporate overlord, CIT
Danger, Will Robinson! Plug! Plug! Plug!
Yeah, CRA is pretty good. In the same vein is ourTRS division.
Doesn't take three, only two. And yes, so long as they are non-parallel, and space is infinite, they will meet at some point.
Far easier than that. We have a sales tax program running on AS/400 that will determine tax rate for any address on the planet; City, county, state/province, country. Only cost us five figures, and another low four to integrate it into the billing system.
Microsoft? Porting to Linux? Whuuuuuuuaaa.. [technos falls dead on the keyboard, drooling, and suggests others do the same, for this is surely a sign of the endo of the world]
And 90% of what is termed 'Criminal Sexual Conduct with a Minor' is inflicted by the parents of the minor, so we should lock up all parents too.
It's not 'abandoning your children' to tell the government they have no right in telling you how you raise your children.
How would you like it if some new law stated you could no longer read to your children from the Bible because it had been substantivly disproved in case law, it contained lewd and lascivious material unfit for children, and mature intellectual themes not easily understood by anyone under 18?? Each of thses is true, but you wouldn't like it, and even though I will never read to mine from the Bible I wouldn't like it either.
You can bring your own copy of Playboy in to read. You can also check out a copy from the library if you wish.
Just because you've never tried doesn't mean it can't be done!
Okay, wrong flame. The CIPA is the Children's Internet Protection Act not the Children's Online Protection Act. /blatent_try_to_save_face
Sorry, Timothy. You were right, the submitter was wrong.
The Childrens Online Protection act is COPA, not CIPA. CIPA is a Hong Kong outfit that makes knock off Intel chipset mobos..
They're charging a fee for our data. There was no 'data submitted automatically becomes the property of..' bullshit. They relicensed our intellectual property without notification or permission.
So, I am hearby relicensing, sans notification, my submission of the CD hash and track information for all of the rereleases of the Elton John catalogue. Gracenote, you have 24 hours to pull these entries from your database or pay the newly instated license fee, which is a free license to the rest of the database for grip, mp3cddb, and any other remotly useful cddb application I have used recently but can't think of off the top of my head.
if a major part of the project is to figure out how to do X, and you look at code that tells you how to do X, then you are indeed guilty of cheating
Come on. Code is the best, most concise way of explaining anything. If you want me to build a rocket, do you expect me to not check out a collection of Goddard's writing to see what he thought of the effect of motion on a shutter system, or a set of his plans to see what exactly your 'Rocket Science 101' book meant whan it talked about fuel tank reinforcement? If my final rocket is substantially different from my source material, and I cite Mr. Goddard for his inspiring me to use gel-based, gravity fed fuel for the cooling system, I am not 'cheating'. As for the 'figure it out' part, there is not a project under the sun any student would be capable of doing that has not been done before, and very few that have not been documented beyond the level of copiously, and researching code or documentation samples is fair research when cited as such.
As for reuse of portions of prior, unrelated projects; If I wrote a data handling routine that would meet all the requirements for an aspect of the project but one, copied in the code and made a few modifications, what is the harm? I would have reimplemented it in exactly the same way! Why place that insane burden on students?
Damn, man.. Those fuckers are built like rocks. I didn't know it until I hit that link, but I've seen a few of those on industrial sampling/analysis equipment. Didn't know they were PS/2, the equipment had a fully sealed panel, but I don't think there are two companies making keyboards exactly like that..
Those probably will beat the shit out of IBMs, regardless of my prior recomendation of (and my affinity for) them.
Lexmark (not IBM) still makes them. Want a brand new Model M, it'll run you like $75..
And they hold up to anything. I've seen them fresh off a six year lease with (insert major automobile company) where they were used at dealerships as parts locater terminals in the service department. One had apparently spent much of its life in a pool of gear oil from the amount of sludge in the panel, and it was still typing 100% before cleaning. One of Emerson Electric's divisions used to use them directly on the manufacturing floor, and once again, after nearly six years they worked, just needed a bath in soapy water to get the grime out and return them to factory condition.
when you buy something at the store, your paying for all the shoplifted items also
Lower theft, lower price, eh?
Do you honestly think Microsoft is going to decrease their price when piracy decreases? They've already got us paying out the nose, why in Gods name would they let us stop? And the OEMs? Do you think they got a price break when they went to piracy-proof re-imagers? Nope.
Five lines of Russian are just as incomprehensible to me as that perl program; Does that mean books published in Russian are not covered by the right to free speech? I don't think Joe Redneck is going to argue that only English is covered..
You can do every thing Ghost does with nfs, dd and cp.. Shit, even SMB and NT on the backend.. The only real problem is the initial images, which require patience when being stuffed over the network.