Heh. I guess I'm just a jaded California. I'm in Santa Cruz, which is about 30 minutes from Gilroy. When it started shaking, my wife and just I got under the nearest doorway and hoped the monitor wouldn't fall off my desk. 10 seconds later we went back to normal life. My poor manager is from Canada and was apparently a bit more shaken up. =:)
Perfect 'California Moment'(tm): We're sitting there, with the earth shaking back and forth, when someone a few apartments down shouts "ROCK ON!!" and the whole complex busts out cheering and laughing.
While I totally agree with you about the complete idiocy of the post you responded to, I have a question and a couple of comments.
The question is: how could you tell what browser the AC used to post his/her remark? I don't see where that information is shown.
The comments regard your position about the open source world playing catch up. In a nutshell, I think your perception is a bit skewed. I say 'skewed' and not 'wrong' because, yes, there are a lot of Linux tools/games/features that are taken from Windows... which would mean something if that weren't a practice that every participant in the software industry has thrived upon for decades.
I think it can be pretty well demonstrated that everyone takes ideas from everyone else in the industry and in about equal portions, too. I mean, sure, KDE and GNOME have a similar look and feel to Windows. That's a good thing since Windows has a very well put-together (IMHO) interface. On the other hand, let's look at some features of Microsoft OSes that were 'stolen' from other OSes:
GUI (taken from Apple, who got it from Xerox)
Preemptive Multitasking (Unix, VMS, et al)
Process management (same)
Command line shell (same)
etc, etc, etc. You could list practically the entire feature-set of DOS, much of which still exists in modern MS OSes, in this list.
And for a very recent Windows (XP) feature taken from Linux, try Task grouping on the taskbar, which Gnome had while XP was still in development.
This isn't an anti MS flame. I am unashamedly writing this from 2k/IE at work. And though my personal preference is for a *nix environment, I've been pretty happy with their post-NT OSes (embarassing security gaffes aside). I'm just saying that a proponent of any platform accusing another of 'playing catch up' is really just the pot calling the kettle black.
There have been a bunch of threads expressing sentiments like this:
This shows me how many slashdot users are horridly addicted to TV. And so what if it was a spoiler... It's just a poorly done scifi soap opera. IT'S FICTION.
Wait.. Because people care enough about a story, whatever the medium, to be upset when someone carelessly gives away the end, not just of one part of that story, but of a set of popular characters, that means they are "hopelessly addicted" to TV?
What is the deal here with people confusing their opinions of the X-Files, TV or whatever with the appropriateness of other people's reactions. I'm not a big fan of the show either, but I can imagine how upset I would have been if I had been wrapped up in a great book, tv show, play, or whatever and then had someone walk up to me and tell me how it ended. I mean, what is the point of fiction if not to have one ANTICIPATE the end? If you don't appreciate that anticipation, then fine, but that hardly makes someone who can appreciate it as pathetic as you seem to be saying.
SQL92: SELECT... RIGHT OUTER JOIN TBL1.KEY ON TBL2.KEY
---------------- I'm curious about something, then. The only SQL DBs that I have a lot of experience with are MySQL and MS Access. Both of them support a syntax like this:
SELECT... FROM TBL1 RIGHT [OUTER] JOIN TBL2 ON TBL1.key = TBL2.key
My wife and I have matching aircraft-grade titanium wedding rings. If you'll allow me the plug, we got them at
http://artifact.co.nz
which has some really nice stuff. Plus, we can always make jokes about how if we're ever on a giant underwater rig that's being pulled down in to an abyss, we can use them to hold hydraulic doors open. =:)
I realize no one makes ISP's subscribe to the blacklists...
That's not entirely true. For example I used to work at an ISP that was frequently blacklisted because the owner firmly felt that anyone who paid for an account was perfectly free to do anything legal with it, including send spam (which wasn't illegal at the time). So when I moved,the first thing when looking for a new ISP to get service from was to ask if they subscribed to the RBL. If they did, I knew chances were I wouldn't be able to get emails at my old email address reliably.
I called a local ISP, asked and when they said that they weren't subscribed, I signed up. Well, shortly thereafter I found I couldn't check my mail. I couldn't even bring up my old ISPs web page. A phone call confirmed that the old ISP was up. A traceroute showed that the traffic wasn't stopping at my ISP, but at their upstream, Above.net.
Ok, Here's the kicker. It turns out that not only does above.net use the RBL, their CTO is on the board of the RBL orgainization! Beyond that, they didn't just block email, they were blocking ALL traffic to and from my old ISP. To anyone that didn't already know about them, they simply would not exist on the net.
So my new ISP was telling the truth, they didn't subscribe to the RBL, but their upstream did. I mean, this is an upstream! It services THOUSANDS of users and they are willing to presume to filter our traffic? And when they block all traffic, not just email, it's no longer anti-spam, it's flat-out intimmidation.
Does anyone agree with me that there is simply no excuse for this, and that the one-and-only responsible way to implement these lists is to offer them on a user-level opt-in basis?
The 'download' link only lets you get ISOs for the previous version and says that version 2 is available on CD only. Doesn't the GPL say that they have to make it available for download?
A little bit of trivia for those who are "really hardcore and count Babylon 5":
There is a scene earlyish in the movie where Jeff Bridges is playing a game where you bounce balls off of the cieling to make the floor disapear from under your opponents, his ill-fated opponent is played by none other than Peter Jurasik, aka Londo Mollari from Babylon 5.
There are a few things that I have never seen implemented better than on the Newton. One is, honestly, the size. Having something a little less portable is worth the extra writing space for me. Another is the notepad software that came with NOS. A note/outline-taker and to do list in one program: Simple, elegant, with features I find lacking in PalmOS's note taker (like an outline and checklist function that let me nest items -- invaluable and totally absent in anything I've seen since!) and not inundated withbells and whistles like many of the CE products I've seen. Sure it's nice to be able to sync with Outlook, but that's not what I usually do with it.
NOS and many of its apps had a lot of great features that were strokes of interface-design brilliance, but which never showed up in later PDAs. My only real complaint was the mediocre handwriting recognition (which was still WAY ahead of its time and not much behind the hw apps I've found for CE).
Until then, I wait with baited breath for Apple to wake up and come out of the shadows again with the *new* coolest PDA ever.
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
About 7 months ago I submitted an Ask Slashdot about how I could take action against above.net because of this very thing. I used to work at an ISP that was regularly put on the RBL. When I moved and signed up for an account with another ISP I asked them if they subscribed to the RBL and they said no. Nonetheless, not only could I not get mail from my old ISP I couldn't even see their web page. Traceroutes broke down at above.net so I mailed them. Got one email back saying the they excercised the RBL to its fullest abilities, ie blocking all traffic. All subsequent emails were ignored.
Anyway, my point is that when I sign up for an internet account, I want the internet, not the Paul Vixie approved internet. I'll filter my own spam, thank you. An upstream like above.net using the RBL like that means that to possibly MILLIONS of users whole chunks of the internet just cease to exist. It is wrong, plain and simple.
That, and how come my story wasn't good enough for an Ask Slashdot but then shows up as an editorial 6 months later? =:\ "(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
Am I missing something, or are a lot of people here being really silly talking about "mispronunciations" of words from a book. I understand that somewhere out there there's an "official".wav of Herbert pronouncing Shai Hulud, but is there anything else? Otherwise, what are you folks taking as an authority, the Lynch movie? Yeesh.
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
This is not a troll. Please read the whole thing and tell me what you think. Ok, keeping lists like bugtraq from publishing the fact that $daemon has a vulnerability which allows $bad_thing through $exploitable_function_of_daemon is ridiculous. Obviously, there's just too many legitimate uses for such information, not the least of which being the consumer's ability to make an inteligent, secure choice in which daemons to run.
But what about the actual exploit code? It's considered bad form to start spreading the word about a 'splot without giving the developer a week or so to release a patch first, but there's nothing (currently) prohibiting people doing otherwise, is there? And especially in the case of closed source software, who but the developers would have anything but a destructive use for such an exploit?
So my question is this: Supposing there was something like this "treaty" (is the actual text of the draft online anywhere?) which allowed the developer to specify through their software's liscence whether public release of exploit code (as opposed to information regarding the fact of a vulnerability, which should never be withheld) should be allowed? That way open-source projects could have public patches devised and released quickly, through the user base, while closed-source projects wouldn't end up having exploit code published to people who can't write patches and therefore have no constructive use for such an exploit.
Have I missed something or does this sound like a decent argument against having the unlimited "right" to distribute exploit code as opposed to vulnerability information? I'm sure a lot of people will point out that once enough technical information is released about a vulnerability then it won't be long before someone,illegal or not, writes an exploit for it. But without a legal (ie high profile a la bugtraq) way to publish the 'sploit, only the developers and a few crackers end up with it, as opposed to the way it is now where hundreds of script kiddies get instant access upon its being released on bugtraq.
Thoughts?
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
It is a myth that all MAPS does is allow subscribers to filter spam. It is also a myth that the ISPs choose to subscribe.
I Used to work at an ISP which, because it's owner feels that it is wrong for him to dictate what his users can and cannot (within the law) send, gets put on the RBL frequently. When I moved the first thing I asked when I signed up at a new ISP was whether or not they used the RBL they said no. This was great because (a) I need to get my mail from people at the old ISP and (b) I can filter my own Spam, thank you, which I think is the way it should be.
Anyway, the ISP claimed that they didn't use the RBL. However, when I tried to get check my mail, I couldn't reach the old ISP's server. I tried going to their web page and I couldn't web page. I tried traceroutes to their web server, news server, mailserver and a few independant web sites that they hosted. All of them broke down not at my ISP, but at their upstream, Above.net. After several calls to tech support who claimed they had no idea what was causing the problem, I emailed the technical contact for above.net and got a response back simply saying that the RBL allowed them the option to block ALL traffic from a given domain, which they did.
So now this entire chunk of the net, not just email, but ALL COMMUNICATION to my old isp was cut off, as well as access ro all the sites they hosted! A less tech-savvy user would have just concluded that the ISP had gone out of business or something. But as far as anyone who uses any isp that has Above.net as an upstream is concerned, that entire corner of the net DOES NOT EXIST. Is that fair? Is that worth "the fight against SPAM"?
Oh, and if anybody wants to suggest that this is Above.net abusing the RBL, and that the RBL its self has nothing to do with it, the guy I got the email from, who is one of above.net's chief techs, is also on the MAPS board!
I think it's gone too far. Too much abuse and too little choice for the user, or even the ISP. MAPS has become more of a problem than it is a solution. It's like nuking Pueblo Colorado in order to stop the junk (snail) mail problem. In short, it's very, very fanatical and stupid. "(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
IS it just me or wasn't iceman's real name Bobby? Was that coincidence? A bit anachronistic, but fun to think about. Oh, and the girl that walked through a wall in the scene where Wolvie and Prof. X meet: I thought he called her Katie, but it would have made more sense for him to say Kitty (pryde). Did anybody else hear it differently? "(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
1. The author said that only machines which run Outlook and have visual basic scripting enabled are vulnerable. Isn't that only half true? It seems any machine with a mailreader that can do attachments and has vbs scripting enabled in the operating system is vulnerable. You're only more vulnerable if you're running Outlook AND have Outlook is set up to auto-open attachments.
2. Ok, I'm going to be fair and let the windows people state their side before I make too many assumtions: Are there any LEGITIMATE uses for sending vbs scripts as email attachments (especially auto-run attachments) that I don't know about? I mean, obviously if you're part of a group of coders working on a vbs dev project you might want to exchange snippets but is there any reason for the average person to even expect a vb script in his/her email? Is there some widespread business/tech practice that would be disrupted by having excecutable attachments not autorun, or at least result in a warning message, by default in Outlook? "(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
I dunno if this is too late to get a response or not but... WHAT? Matrix... Neuromancer... what? Granted its been a while but beside the idea of AI escaping man's control and people 'jacking in' to something that presents its self as a virtual reality, both of which are common themes in sci-fi, how is the Matrix a ripoff of Neuromancer. They seem totally different stories to me. "(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
"Darryl Musashi" plus rant on sexism in pl
on
X-Files FPS Episode
·
· Score: 1
Was it just me or did the "Darryl Musashi" character seem to anyone else like a hilarious nod to Dennis "Thresh" Fong? I was rolling on the floor with that one. It was one of many times I busted out laughing during the ep but the only one of those where I will credit the writer with maybe intending me to do so. =:)
I also though the whole thing was terribly sexist. Ok, women play FPSs less than men. That's a fact despite some of the best Quake players being female (killcreek, Cornelia, etc). But that line about how Phoebe had to "fight back as a woman" instead of "choking in a haze of testosterone" was ridiculous. I mean if she could code this thing in the first place then her job opportunities elsewhere must be limitless. Was anybody putting a gun to her head forcing her to write an FPS? If she didn't like it, why was she there? It was probrably the worst attempt I've ever seen at making me feel sorry for a character. Besides, her creating a female character is nothing that hasn't been in FPSs out here in the 'real' world for ages (and I'm not just talking about Lara Croft, either).
Basically, my point is this: Brining up issues like media violence is great, but contriving a plot around the misrepresentation of a genre to do it isn't. Oh, and then there's Duchovny's line at the end: "If the taste of victory is sweet, then the taste of virtual victory certainly isn't sweet 'n low. And the bullets aren't made of sugar, either". Gibson needs to have his wrting priveleges revoked for that one alone.
Ok. I'm done now. "(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
Nobody's talking about copying DVDs and then lending out the originals. It's about being able to interface with the hardware you buy in whatever way you want. You can copy DVDs without a decoder. The only thing the css stuff does is keep you from playing them with anything but an mpaa licenced and approved player, which is crap.
The only cartoon that I would put on par with, and to be honest if it had stayed on it might have (I say *might* have surpassed it, was "Family Guy". Anybody catch that one?
There is one. KhA0s Linux. Despite the silly name (53k00r1733/\/\4k35 U 3r337) it looks like it will be pretty cool if it ever flies and is definitely being built with security in mind. Crypto filesystem and other nifties are on their list of features. They are looking for help, too. Lemme see if I can find a url...
But what was Harrison Ford thinking? I mean, even back then he'd already done more quality work than the entire cast combined except for Peter Cushing.
Would you care to explain the problem you have with that comment instead of just insulting the poster? He was talking about the future. Future Generation (more powerfull) palm + wireless net connection + good networking OS == portable web server, no traditional computer nescesary. What in that speculation is not forseeable in the future?
Slashdot Mirror
Because 7(dec) == 31(hex)!!
Hmm. Either I'm totally misunderstanding you, or that's wrong.
7 in decimal == 7 in hex.
49 in decimal == 31 in hex.
Heh. I guess I'm just a jaded California. I'm in Santa Cruz, which is about 30 minutes from Gilroy. When it started shaking, my wife and just I got under the nearest doorway and hoped the monitor wouldn't fall off my desk. 10 seconds later we went back to normal life. My poor manager is from Canada and was apparently a bit more shaken up. =:)
Perfect 'California Moment'(tm): We're sitting there, with the earth shaking back and forth, when someone a few apartments down shouts "ROCK ON!!" and the whole complex busts out cheering and laughing.
The question is: how could you tell what browser the AC used to post his/her remark? I don't see where that information is shown.
The comments regard your position about the open source world playing catch up. In a nutshell, I think your perception is a bit skewed. I say 'skewed' and not 'wrong' because, yes, there are a lot of Linux tools/games/features that are taken from Windows... which would mean something if that weren't a practice that every participant in the software industry has thrived upon for decades.
I think it can be pretty well demonstrated that everyone takes ideas from everyone else in the industry and in about equal portions, too. I mean, sure, KDE and GNOME have a similar look and feel to Windows. That's a good thing since Windows has a very well put-together (IMHO) interface. On the other hand, let's look at some features of Microsoft OSes that were 'stolen' from other OSes:
And for a very recent Windows (XP) feature taken from Linux, try Task grouping on the taskbar, which Gnome had while XP was still in development.
This isn't an anti MS flame. I am unashamedly writing this from 2k/IE at work. And though my personal preference is for a *nix environment, I've been pretty happy with their post-NT OSes (embarassing security gaffes aside). I'm just saying that a proponent of any platform accusing another of 'playing catch up' is really just the pot calling the kettle black.
My
There have been a bunch of threads expressing sentiments like this:
This shows me how many slashdot users are horridly addicted to TV. And so what if it was a spoiler... It's just a poorly done scifi soap opera. IT'S FICTION.
Wait.. Because people care enough about a story, whatever the medium, to be upset when someone carelessly gives away the end, not just of one part of that story, but of a set of popular characters, that means they are "hopelessly addicted" to TV?
What is the deal here with people confusing their opinions of the X-Files, TV or whatever with the appropriateness of other people's reactions. I'm not a big fan of the show either, but I can imagine how upset I would have been if I had been wrapped up in a great book, tv show, play, or whatever and then had someone walk up to me and tell me how it ended. I mean, what is the point of fiction if not to have one ANTICIPATE the end? If you don't appreciate that anticipation, then fine, but that hardly makes someone who can appreciate it as pathetic as you seem to be saying.
SQL89: SELECT ... WHERE TBL1.KEY=TBL2.KEY(+)
... RIGHT OUTER JOIN TBL1.KEY ON TBL2.KEY
... FROM TBL1 RIGHT [OUTER] JOIN TBL2 ON TBL1.key = TBL2.key
SQL92: SELECT
----------------
I'm curious about something, then. The only SQL DBs that I have a lot of experience with are MySQL and MS Access. Both of them support a syntax like this:
SELECT
What standard is that?
--Brad
My wife and I have matching aircraft-grade titanium wedding rings. If you'll allow me the plug, we got them at
http://artifact.co.nz
which has some really nice stuff. Plus, we can always make jokes about how if we're ever on a giant underwater rig that's being pulled down in to an abyss, we can use them to hold hydraulic doors open. =:)
I realize no one makes ISP's subscribe to the blacklists...
That's not entirely true. For example I used to work at an ISP that was frequently blacklisted because the owner firmly felt that anyone who paid for an account was perfectly free to do anything legal with it, including send spam (which wasn't illegal at the time). So when I moved,the first thing when looking for a new ISP to get service from was to ask if they subscribed to the RBL. If they did, I knew chances were I wouldn't be able to get emails at my old email address reliably.
I called a local ISP, asked and when they said that they weren't subscribed, I signed up. Well, shortly thereafter I found I couldn't check my mail. I couldn't even bring up my old ISPs web page. A phone call confirmed that the old ISP was up. A traceroute showed that the traffic wasn't stopping at my ISP, but at their upstream, Above.net.
Ok, Here's the kicker. It turns out that not only does above.net use the RBL, their CTO is on the board of the RBL orgainization! Beyond that, they didn't just block email, they were blocking ALL traffic to and from my old ISP. To anyone that didn't already know about them, they simply would not exist on the net.
So my new ISP was telling the truth, they didn't subscribe to the RBL, but their upstream did. I mean, this is an upstream! It services THOUSANDS of users and they are willing to presume to filter our traffic? And when they block all traffic, not just email, it's no longer anti-spam, it's flat-out intimmidation.
Does anyone agree with me that there is simply no excuse for this, and that the one-and-only responsible way to implement these lists is to offer them on a user-level opt-in basis?
The 'download' link only lets you get ISOs for the previous version and says that version 2 is available on CD only. Doesn't the GPL say that they have to make it available for download?
There is a scene earlyish in the movie where Jeff Bridges is playing a game where you bounce balls off of the cieling to make the floor disapear from under your opponents, his ill-fated opponent is played by none other than Peter Jurasik, aka Londo Mollari from Babylon 5.
There are a few things that I have never seen implemented better than on the Newton. One is, honestly, the size. Having something a little less portable is worth the extra writing space for me. Another is the notepad software that came with NOS. A note/outline-taker and to do list in one program: Simple, elegant, with features I find lacking in PalmOS's note taker (like an outline and checklist function that let me nest items -- invaluable and totally absent in anything I've seen since!) and not inundated withbells and whistles like many of the CE products I've seen. Sure it's nice to be able to sync with Outlook, but that's not what I usually do with it.
NOS and many of its apps had a lot of great features that were strokes of interface-design brilliance, but which never showed up in later PDAs. My only real complaint was the mediocre handwriting recognition (which was still WAY ahead of its time and not much behind the hw apps I've found for CE). Until then, I wait with baited breath for Apple to wake up and come out of the shadows again with the *new* coolest PDA ever.
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
Anyway, my point is that when I sign up for an internet account, I want the internet, not the Paul Vixie approved internet. I'll filter my own spam, thank you. An upstream like above.net using the RBL like that means that to possibly MILLIONS of users whole chunks of the internet just cease to exist. It is wrong, plain and simple.
That, and how come my story wasn't good enough for an Ask Slashdot but then shows up as an editorial 6 months later? =:\
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
Am I missing something, or are a lot of people here being really silly talking about "mispronunciations" of words from a book. I understand that somewhere out there there's an "official" .wav of Herbert pronouncing Shai Hulud, but is there anything else? Otherwise, what are you folks taking as an authority, the Lynch movie? Yeesh.
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
This is not a troll. Please read the whole thing and tell me what you think. Ok, keeping lists like bugtraq from publishing the fact that $daemon has a vulnerability which allows $bad_thing through $exploitable_function_of_daemon is ridiculous. Obviously, there's just too many legitimate uses for such information, not the least of which being the consumer's ability to make an inteligent, secure choice in which daemons to run.
But what about the actual exploit code? It's considered bad form to start spreading the word about a 'splot without giving the developer a week or so to release a patch first, but there's nothing (currently) prohibiting people doing otherwise, is there? And especially in the case of closed source software, who but the developers would have anything but a destructive use for such an exploit?
So my question is this: Supposing there was something like this "treaty" (is the actual text of the draft online anywhere?) which allowed the developer to specify through their software's liscence whether public release of exploit code (as opposed to information regarding the fact of a vulnerability, which should never be withheld) should be allowed? That way open-source projects could have public patches devised and released quickly, through the user base, while closed-source projects wouldn't end up having exploit code published to people who can't write patches and therefore have no constructive use for such an exploit.
Have I missed something or does this sound like a decent argument against having the unlimited "right" to distribute exploit code as opposed to vulnerability information? I'm sure a lot of people will point out that once enough technical information is released about a vulnerability then it won't be long before someone,illegal or not, writes an exploit for it. But without a legal (ie high profile a la bugtraq) way to publish the 'sploit, only the developers and a few crackers end up with it, as opposed to the way it is now where hundreds of script kiddies get instant access upon its being released on bugtraq.
Thoughts?
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
I Used to work at an ISP which, because it's owner feels that it is wrong for him to dictate what his users can and cannot (within the law) send, gets put on the RBL frequently. When I moved the first thing I asked when I signed up at a new ISP was whether or not they used the RBL they said no. This was great because (a) I need to get my mail from people at the old ISP and (b) I can filter my own Spam, thank you, which I think is the way it should be.
Anyway, the ISP claimed that they didn't use the RBL. However, when I tried to get check my mail, I couldn't reach the old ISP's server. I tried going to their web page and I couldn't web page. I tried traceroutes to their web server, news server, mailserver and a few independant web sites that they hosted. All of them broke down not at my ISP, but at their upstream, Above.net. After several calls to tech support who claimed they had no idea what was causing the problem, I emailed the technical contact for above.net and got a response back simply saying that the RBL allowed them the option to block ALL traffic from a given domain, which they did.
So now this entire chunk of the net, not just email, but ALL COMMUNICATION to my old isp was cut off, as well as access ro all the sites they hosted! A less tech-savvy user would have just concluded that the ISP had gone out of business or something. But as far as anyone who uses any isp that has Above.net as an upstream is concerned, that entire corner of the net DOES NOT EXIST. Is that fair? Is that worth "the fight against SPAM"?
Oh, and if anybody wants to suggest that this is Above.net abusing the RBL, and that the RBL its self has nothing to do with it, the guy I got the email from, who is one of above.net's chief techs, is also on the MAPS board!
I think it's gone too far. Too much abuse and too little choice for the user, or even the ISP. MAPS has become more of a problem than it is a solution. It's like nuking Pueblo Colorado in order to stop the junk (snail) mail problem. In short, it's very, very fanatical and stupid.
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
IS it just me or wasn't iceman's real name Bobby? Was that coincidence? A bit anachronistic, but fun to think about. Oh, and the girl that walked through a wall in the scene where Wolvie and Prof. X meet: I thought he called her Katie, but it would have made more sense for him to say Kitty (pryde). Did anybody else hear it differently?
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
1. The author said that only machines which run Outlook and have visual basic scripting enabled are vulnerable. Isn't that only half true? It seems any machine with a mailreader that can do attachments and has vbs scripting enabled in the operating system is vulnerable. You're only more vulnerable if you're running Outlook AND have Outlook is set up to auto-open attachments.
2. Ok, I'm going to be fair and let the windows people state their side before I make too many assumtions: Are there any LEGITIMATE uses for sending vbs scripts as email attachments (especially auto-run attachments) that I don't know about? I mean, obviously if you're part of a group of coders working on a vbs dev project you might want to exchange snippets but is there any reason for the average person to even expect a vb script in his/her email? Is there some widespread business/tech practice that would be disrupted by having excecutable attachments not autorun, or at least result in a warning message, by default in Outlook?
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
re: "real people don't talk that way"
Well said. =:)
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
I dunno if this is too late to get a response or not but... WHAT? Matrix... Neuromancer... what? Granted its been a while but beside the idea of AI escaping man's control and people 'jacking in' to something that presents its self as a virtual reality, both of which are common themes in sci-fi, how is the Matrix a ripoff of Neuromancer. They seem totally different stories to me.
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
Was it just me or did the "Darryl Musashi" character seem to anyone else like a hilarious nod to Dennis "Thresh" Fong? I was rolling on the floor with that one. It was one of many times I busted out laughing during the ep but the only one of those where I will credit the writer with maybe intending me to do so. =:)
I also though the whole thing was terribly sexist. Ok, women play FPSs less than men. That's a fact despite some of the best Quake players being female (killcreek, Cornelia, etc). But that line about how Phoebe had to "fight back as a woman" instead of "choking in a haze of testosterone" was ridiculous. I mean if she could code this thing in the first place then her job opportunities elsewhere must be limitless. Was anybody putting a gun to her head forcing her to write an FPS? If she didn't like it, why was she there? It was probrably the worst attempt I've ever seen at making me feel sorry for a character. Besides, her creating a female character is nothing that hasn't been in FPSs out here in the 'real' world for ages (and I'm not just talking about Lara Croft, either).
Basically, my point is this: Brining up issues like media violence is great, but contriving a plot around the misrepresentation of a genre to do it isn't. Oh, and then there's Duchovny's line at the end:
"If the taste of victory is sweet, then the taste of virtual victory certainly isn't sweet 'n low. And the bullets aren't made of sugar, either".
Gibson needs to have his wrting priveleges revoked for that one alone.
Ok. I'm done now.
"(no knowledge of subject matter) + (crack cocaine) = (journalism!)"
This is all beside the point.
Nobody's talking about copying DVDs and then lending out the originals. It's about being able to interface with the hardware you buy in whatever way you want. You can copy DVDs without a decoder. The only thing the css stuff does is keep you from playing them with anything but an mpaa licenced and approved player, which is crap.
See opendvd.org
The only cartoon that I would put on par with, and to be honest if it had stayed on it might have (I say *might* have surpassed it, was "Family Guy". Anybody catch that one?
Yes, but could theybe used for dating? =:)
There is one. KhA0s Linux. Despite the silly name (53k00r1733 /\/\4k35 U 3r337) it looks like it will be pretty cool if it ever flies and is definitely being built with security in mind. Crypto filesystem and other nifties are on their list of features. They are looking for help, too.
Lemme see if I can find a url...
Ah. Here it is.
Enjoy!
But what was Harrison Ford thinking? I mean, even back then he'd already done more quality work than the entire cast combined except for Peter Cushing.
Umm... What about Alec Guiness(sp)???
Would you care to explain the problem you have with that comment instead of just insulting the poster? He was talking about the future.
Future Generation (more powerfull) palm + wireless net connection + good networking OS == portable web server, no traditional computer nescesary. What in that speculation is not forseeable in the future?