I was shocked -- they ask him some really hard questions -- e.g. is process ruining progress/innovation/productivity -- and he just ignores it and says a bunch of blah-blah.
That's looking disastrous -- he's totally in denial.
Google won't destroy Micro$oft --- that sort of crappy attitude will.
This one is so awful. From the looks of it, Linus Torvalds was forced to play the trademark game, because of a slimeball lawyer.
But it appears that because he didn't defend it from early on, he's now unable to claim it in Australia. So he should have been demanding money from all the Linux-name-using folks all these years if he wanted to become the trademark.
How ironic: to frustrate a lawyer slimeball at the behest of his users, Mr. Torvalds makes himself look silly in front of the court.
To get an idea of how scummy the first lawyer was:
That's an excellent point -- this method is orthogonal to the "old-style" controller.
You are right -- can't you just put some gyroscopes in a normal controller, and have a new sort of input?
Also, given that that is the case, why did Nintendo consciously choose to go with this phallic looking, strangely operated controller? They had the choice, but they've just chosen to take a big leap of faith. They say they wanted to broaden the audience for the thing -- but it seems very risky.
I think the folks who suffer with Windows are used to rebooting for all sorts of reasons. E.g. IE runs too slow, my app just crashed, I need to install a new program, something is not working,...
Due to their inability to admin their own machine, some resort to throwing it out and trying again, with new hardware.
I think it is the Unix admins who have the fetish for the no-reboot. Or perhaps a single, precisely done reboot, to remotely bring up a machine with an entirely new OS.
Similary, folks who use windows think they need anti-spyware, anti-virus, extra-special firewall crap --- because they think there's no way a computer can withstand the tide of crap without extra-special help. It is just impossible to imagine that an OS could withstand it all.
Lately it seems that hardware companies are in the game -- e.g. Intel processors with features designed to make up for the deficiencies of Ballmer's bunch in Redmond.
I can imagine that if someone starts with bad behavior, it might build over time. This system would allow authorities to detect it.
E.g. Little Ballmer pushes around chairs in pre-school. Says bad words like "poopy" and "butt".
Teenage Ballmer: rips flies apart, but also throws chairs, says "pussy" and "fuck".
CEO Ballmer: scares the bejeezus out of a nice employee, calls Eric Schmidt a "pussy" and says he'll kill him. Throws chairs for effect.
If they had a database like that showing that from age 4 or so he engaged in violent, aggressive and just plain nasty behavior, it would help to build a case against him.
Just an attempt to pump up the stock
on
Bill Gates Speaks Out
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I'm thinking this is some lame attempt to pump up the stock.
Bill Gates puts the psycho Ballmer in charge. Ballmer would be great if his only job was to crush little, cash-strapped companies run by twitchy VCs.
But when MSFT has to compete with a real company, that has real money, and can hurt them, the psycho stuff doesn't work -- chair throwing. It makes them look bad in the press, like they are desperate.
In earlier times, Ballmer could throw the chair, say "fuck" and "pussy" all he wanted, and nobody would really talk about it, because they'd be thinking --- jeez, if I blab about this, who knows if it will bite me in the ass.
Now that the emperor has no clothes, that shit doesn't work.
So then they have to trot out the Nice Bill to give interviews that dispute the "we are evil" tag, and try to make things look like it will all be OK.
I understand that On Star can send to the car, perhaps via a satellite connection. But how does the car talk back? Or can it not talk back? Is the car really broadcasting anything?
That could get ugly -- e.g. car has mic, and On Star personnel use the mic to listen in on you.
This is something I don't get about satellite radio -- how do they figure out what folks are listening to? E.g. is my satellite receiver talking back to the satellite? (no way!) Or is it broadcasting on some other frequencies, and the satellite radio company has receivers all over the place to pick up those signals (some of them, at least?)
As it is, how does a satellite radio company know what channels are popular/unpopular?
"he claims that this smaller variation leads to the disparity in achievement found between various racial and gender groups"
Actually, he says that it is the lower average IQ that leads to these disparities. That is, the mean, not the standard deviation. Which makes a lot more sense. Stupid people can't get as much done as smart people.
They'd like to think that everything having to do with intellectual abilities is equally distributed -- men/women blacks/jews/asians/whites/arabs. So I guess to them it is racist.
That's what's wrong with the concept of "hate speech" -- one man's gathering of facts and stastistics bees racist to another.
You are right, that orgasm thing is dreadful. I somehow missed it.
This cocktail one was a bit different: very little content for the number of words. By the time I was through, I felt that 30 seconds of my life was gone forever, stolen from me by Lil' Zonky.
Oh well -- I'm just waiting to get hammered by the moderators, or perhaps Zonk himself (he's got unlimited Mod points, right?). But he's probably too busy picking his butt to read through these kvetches.
DMCA violation? Copyright violation? Breaking your shrinkwrap?
It would seem that given the illegality of this, you'd might was well not do it, and use a different OS, like NetBSD, FreeBSD or some Linux-based OS.
The last thing I need is the BSA (Business Software Alliance) coming to my place of business with a bunch of pigs and poring over my crap to find violations and then hit me for $20K per violation.
It's a Mitzvah that this befalls Cisco. As previously mentioned here, they have no trouble ruining the lives of those who attempt to help make a more secure world by improving their product.
A pox on their house.
It is allowed that hackers make worms that exploit Cisco hardware and disrupt the businesses of those who stupidly subsidize such misanthropic activities.
I think the big deal is that he did TCP/IP before anybody else. He was the first.
Since then there are all sorts of protocols that fix flaws in TCP/IP. There are even protocols implemented in languages (not C) amenable to machine proofs of correctness. That's Ensemble (originally developed at Cornell)
However, I suspect the main problem is getting those rolled out -- given that TCP/IP is jammed in the kernel, and given that we don't use exokernels or something similar that would allow for radical experimentation with network protocols, we'll be using TCP/IP forever.
People who can't secure their computer shouldn't connect it to the internet.
What little negative feedback that these people get is good for all of us -- the zombies are a threat to us all, if only due to a DDOS.
Yeah, I'm happy that Mac users have to reboot and suffer their share of problems. They've chosen to hand their security over to Apple. It is important that they suffer some consequences now and then.
I guess I wouldn't be such a crab if running a BSD box wasn't so irritating.
Slashdot Mirror
I was shocked -- they ask him some really hard questions -- e.g. is process ruining progress/innovation/productivity -- and he just ignores it and says a bunch of blah-blah.
That's looking disastrous -- he's totally in denial.
Google won't destroy Micro$oft --- that sort of crappy attitude will.
Zonk, IBM wants the older workers to switch careers, not just anyone.
It wouldn't make sense that IBM would ask their most productive workers to leave work. They just want the deadwood out.
You are kidding, right? How does $35.7 billion sound?
This one is so awful. From the looks of it, Linus Torvalds was forced to play the trademark game, because of a slimeball lawyer.
But it appears that because he didn't defend it from early on, he's now unable to claim it in Australia. So he should have been demanding money from all the Linux-name-using folks all these years if he wanted to become the trademark.
How ironic: to frustrate a lawyer slimeball at the behest of his users, Mr. Torvalds makes himself look silly in front of the court.
To get an idea of how scummy the first lawyer was:
Torvalds didn't plan on gaining trademark protection for the word "Linux" when he began work on his OS, but by 1996 he started wishing he had. That's when William R. Della Croce Jr. of Boston first started demanding 10 percent royalties on sales from Linux vendors, based on a trademark claim he had filed in 1994. The Linux kernel was still free software, but according to Della Croce, the name itself was his property.
That's 10 percent! What a parasite! It makes me think he deserves the Mr. Hands treatment.
Well, it doesn't look too ergonomic, and more importantly, it doesn't look "game-y". I think it looks dorky.
Whereas the standard controller, with its colors and "aggressive" styling appeals directly to males.
But I guess that's the point: Nintendo is trying to get away from that stuff.
That's an excellent point -- this method is orthogonal to the "old-style" controller.
You are right -- can't you just put some gyroscopes in a normal controller, and have a new sort of input?
Also, given that that is the case, why did Nintendo consciously choose to go with this phallic looking, strangely operated controller? They had the choice, but they've just chosen to take a big leap of faith. They say they wanted to broaden the audience for the thing -- but it seems very risky.
Notice how I got "-1 Flamebait" for pointing out that Zonk screwed up for the bazillionth time?
This is exactly the sort of thing that makes one want to join GNAA or the jihad.
No more Mr. Nice Guy.
Zonk, you can't patent a phrase -- you trademark it.
This is why the jihad hates you -- you suck as an editor.
That's not funny.
...
I think the folks who suffer with Windows are used to rebooting for all sorts of reasons. E.g. IE runs too slow, my app just crashed, I need to install a new program, something is not working,
Due to their inability to admin their own machine, some resort to throwing it out and trying again, with new hardware.
I think it is the Unix admins who have the fetish for the no-reboot. Or perhaps a single, precisely done reboot, to remotely bring up a machine with an entirely new OS.
Similary, folks who use windows think they need anti-spyware, anti-virus, extra-special firewall crap --- because they think there's no way a computer can withstand the tide of crap without extra-special help. It is just impossible to imagine that an OS could withstand it all.
Lately it seems that hardware companies are in the game -- e.g. Intel processors with features designed to make up for the deficiencies of Ballmer's bunch in Redmond.
I can imagine that if someone starts with bad behavior, it might build over time. This system would allow authorities to detect it.
E.g. Little Ballmer pushes around chairs in pre-school. Says bad words like "poopy" and "butt".
Teenage Ballmer: rips flies apart, but also throws chairs, says "pussy" and "fuck".
CEO Ballmer: scares the bejeezus out of a nice employee, calls Eric Schmidt a "pussy" and says he'll kill him. Throws chairs for effect.
If they had a database like that showing that from age 4 or so he engaged in violent, aggressive and just plain nasty behavior, it would help to build a case against him.
I'm thinking this is some lame attempt to pump up the stock.
Bill Gates puts the psycho Ballmer in charge. Ballmer would be great if his only job was to crush little, cash-strapped companies run by twitchy VCs.
But when MSFT has to compete with a real company, that has real money, and can hurt them, the psycho stuff doesn't work -- chair throwing. It makes them look bad in the press, like they are desperate.
In earlier times, Ballmer could throw the chair, say "fuck" and "pussy" all he wanted, and nobody would really talk about it, because they'd be thinking --- jeez, if I blab about this, who knows if it will bite me in the ass.
Now that the emperor has no clothes, that shit doesn't work.
So then they have to trot out the Nice Bill to give interviews that dispute the "we are evil" tag, and try to make things look like it will all be OK.
So famous people drive crappy American cars? Must have been a rental.
Just kidding. You've hit the nightmare scenario on the head though.
How does On Star send back the data?
E.g. oil needs changing....
I understand that On Star can send to the car, perhaps via a satellite connection. But how does the car talk back? Or can it not talk back? Is the car really broadcasting anything?
That could get ugly -- e.g. car has mic, and On Star personnel use the mic to listen in on you.
This is something I don't get about satellite radio -- how do they figure out what folks are listening to? E.g. is my satellite receiver talking back to the satellite? (no way!) Or is it broadcasting on some other frequencies, and the satellite radio company has receivers all over the place to pick up those signals (some of them, at least?)
As it is, how does a satellite radio company know what channels are popular/unpopular?
ZONK: They see through your market segmentation strategy. I'm quitting.
Ballmer: Anybody but Dvorak. Just tell me it isn't fucking Dvorak who sees through my segmentation strategy.
ZONK: Yes, it's Dvorak. He sees right through it. And he says your Kung Fu is shit.
(chair flies through air) CRASH!
Ballmer: Dvorak is a fucking PUSSY! I will kill Dvorak. I've killed all the other media bitches and will so fucking kill Dvorak!
Ballmer: Just tell me it's not Open Office. It's not Open Office, is it?
Commonwealth of Massachusetts: Yes.
(chair flies through air) CRASH....
Ballmer: I WILL KILL MOTHERFUCING OPEN OFFICE! WordPerfect tried to get me, but I fucked them one good. I will fucking kill Open Office.
"he claims that this smaller variation leads to the disparity in achievement found between various racial and gender groups"
Actually, he says that it is the lower average IQ that leads to these disparities. That is, the mean, not the standard deviation. Which makes a lot more sense. Stupid people can't get as much done as smart people.
Well, is this racist?
I suspect a lot of egalitarians would say yes.
They'd like to think that everything having to do with intellectual abilities is equally distributed -- men/women blacks/jews/asians/whites/arabs. So I guess to them it is racist.
That's what's wrong with the concept of "hate speech" -- one man's gathering of facts and stastistics bees racist to another.
You are right, that orgasm thing is dreadful. I somehow missed it.
This cocktail one was a bit different: very little content for the number of words. By the time I was through, I felt that 30 seconds of my life was gone forever, stolen from me by Lil' Zonky.
Oh well -- I'm just waiting to get hammered by the moderators, or perhaps Zonk himself (he's got unlimited Mod points, right?). But he's probably too busy picking his butt to read through these kvetches.
Whenever I read a story here that doesn't have to do with geeks or anything that matters (and how could it matter, given that it predates Linux?), I often notice that the editor in charge of the story is El-Zonko, The Most Zonkoriffic, Zonkalicious one -- -"ZONK" -- who is despised by the folks at anti-slash.org.
Go ahead and mod me down, idiot moderators.
So what sort of violation are you looking at?
DMCA violation? Copyright violation? Breaking your shrinkwrap?
It would seem that given the illegality of this, you'd might was well not do it, and use a different OS, like NetBSD, FreeBSD or some Linux-based OS.
The last thing I need is the BSA (Business Software Alliance) coming to my place of business with a bunch of pigs and poring over my crap to find violations and then hit me for $20K per violation.
The sound Ballmer makes as he flying ninja-kicks Mike Walters (the hapless recruiter who tried to recruit ESR) in the nuts.
And then he throws a chair on the guy, once he's down.
Really, if this picks up, Ballmer will need to have a stack of chairs to throw at people.
Their only defense is to argue that M$ needs to be free to innovate, and not forced to stick to some crappy open standard.
This SHOULD happen.
It's a Mitzvah that this befalls Cisco. As previously mentioned here, they have no trouble ruining the lives of those who attempt to help make a more secure world by improving their product.
A pox on their house.
It is allowed that hackers make worms that exploit Cisco hardware and disrupt the businesses of those who stupidly subsidize such misanthropic activities.
I think the big deal is that he did TCP/IP before anybody else. He was the first.
Since then there are all sorts of protocols that fix flaws in TCP/IP. There are even protocols implemented in languages (not C) amenable to machine proofs of correctness. That's Ensemble (originally developed at Cornell)
However, I suspect the main problem is getting those rolled out -- given that TCP/IP is jammed in the kernel, and given that we don't use exokernels or something similar that would allow for radical experimentation with network protocols, we'll be using TCP/IP forever.
People who can't secure their computer shouldn't connect it to the internet.
What little negative feedback that these people get is good for all of us -- the zombies are a threat to us all, if only due to a DDOS.
Yeah, I'm happy that Mac users have to reboot and suffer their share of problems. They've chosen to hand their security over to Apple. It is important that they suffer some consequences now and then.
I guess I wouldn't be such a crab if running a BSD box wasn't so irritating.