So you're going to drop another $250? $250 is a lot of money just to play Super Nintendo on the go...
I remember when the PSP launched... fans all over were saying how the PSP was better than the DS because of superior graphics, and that those superior graphics justified the higher price tag. Now, those same fans whine because they want to play GBA and SNES games on their PSP. Talk about awesome graphics...
I love all the people here that are like "well i don't think i'll upgrade because i can use my gameboy emulator, etc, etc...so what if i cant play games". Why did you buy a bloody PSP if you didn't want to play PSP games on it?
That's pretty funny and I thought the same thing. I love people saying that they have a PSP so they can play with a GameBoy emulator. Guess what people? I also like playing GameBoy games, which is why I bought a GBA.
I'd really like PSP fans to explain to me why it's worth paying the $250 PSP price tag to play games that don't even need an emulator on the $80 GBA. More than 3 times the price, and you get fucked with every new firmware release? Somebody really gotta explain this.
Seriously, with quality services such as iTunes out there, what legitimate reasons do people have to download mass quantities of music they haven't paid for?
Because not every bit of music is available with iTunes... If you're looking for music from American artists, then you'll probably find it there, but don't try finding more "local" music or you'll be deceived.
What I truly hate about iTunes though is that they actually have the music I want, but it's only available on their German store, or on their British store, or even sometimes on their US store, but not on the Canadian store, which I am required to use because I live in Canada (global market my ass).
They have the file I want to pay for, but they won't let me pay for it, so guess what? I'm gonna figure out another way to get it, and that other way might not involve payment.
A game that depicts and rewards as much violence as the GTA series has, has missions where killing cops and civillians gains you status and money, and is generally about the rise to power of a crime lord, and they're worried about a sex scene that porn collectors wouldn't waste the time to download. Geez, priorities are out of whack.
Welcome to America, the land where violence is cool, but don't you dare show a bare nipple on TV...!
Also, the ESRB is a voluntary board, there is no regulation stating that a game has to be rated in order to be sold to the public. Any attempt to deceive the ESRB should be frowned upon by the Video Game development community, but nothing illegal was done.
It's even worse than that...
Their basic premise is that Rockstar intentionally deceived the ESRB in order to 'peddle sexually explicit material to our youth'
... to our youth? To our youth? It's rated Mature (17+), and it's peddling material to our fucking youth?!? I know those elders want to "stay young" as long as they can and want to consider themselves as still in their hip years, but someone who is 17 is anything buy in their "youth".
Every definition of "youth" I can find refers to a period "before maturity". Therefore, if the ESRB considers 17+ to be Mature, Rockstar never tried to do anything to their youth.
We own something.
I am a subset of we.
I also own the something.
Just because you own it in a collective manner doesn't mean you don't own it.
Let's follow your "simple logic"...
We own the road
I am a subset of we
By driving faster than the speed limit (which we voted/accepted as a democracy), you are misusing my property
By using my property in a way I did not permit you to, I should have the ability to make you stop use my property
Guess what... that's exactly what happens when you get your licence revoked!
Just because you are a subset of we doesn't mean you're entitled to do anything you wish with what we own, because I am also a subset of the same we. And the very reason we have cops is to keep what we collectively own safe (theorically).
Well, here in Vancouver, that would mean sunset at about 3:30 PM at the end of it, and kids trying to get home in the dark.
Nope, it's the other way around... the "winter time" wouldn't see the sun set any earlier. It's just that "summer time" would last longer. So next december will be no different than last december, while next november would have the sun set (and rise) *later* than last november.
That way, people will have more natural light and use less artificial light in the evening (and use more of it in the morning... making the whole thing kinda pointless. Good thing we can rely on congress to do pointless stuff...).
Wow... I just love it when people say the stupidest stuff... From the article you pointed :
While most people -- excepting vampires -- favour more daylight
... right... changing the DST will provide you with *more* daylight... it will somehow slow down the earth while the sun is shining, and accelerate it at night...
What's the point of all this? No matter how you mess around with the DST, you won't get a single minute of daylight that you didn't have before.
Firefox extensions are written in XUL, which is inherently cross-platform.
Simple extensions that use only XUL and javascript are inherently cross-platform. However, some extensions can bundle a XPCOM component, which can be compiled C code, tucked in a DLL, which would then be bound to a single platform.
So I whitelist greasemonkey, what next? How do I stop greasemonkey from being a security threat.
From the moment you explicetly whitelisted an extension (which takes more than a single click, see below), it's the extension that has a vulnerability, not the browser, nor the operating system on which it runs.
Last I checked, it took 6 clicks to install an XPI that isn't previously whitelisted :
Click on the link to install the extension, receive a message (yellow bar) saying that site is not whitelisted.
Click on the "Edit Options..." button on the yellow bar, "Allowed Sites" dialog appears.
Click "Allow" to add the website to the list of allowed sites.
Click "Ok" to close the dialog.
Click on the link to install the extension, receive a message requesting confirmation of installation.
Click "Install Now" to confirm installation.
If 6 clicks aren't enough to consider Firefox is doing all it can to prevent automatic-installs, how many more do you need?
Plus, the solution "uninstall it until we fix it" is pretty decent when it comes to security. Think we'll ever hear "Uninstall IE until we fix it" anytime soon?:o)
Of course this assumes consumers have a choice about whether their monitor has this DRM. It may end up being like trying to find a DVD that doesn't have Macrovision capabilities.
New monitors will all have the DRM by default (assuming this thing passes), but many people will still own old monitors. Nowadays, a monitor represents usually about half the price of a complete new computer system (which is computer, monitor, keyboard, mouse and speakers). Many people are aware that they can upgrade their computer without changing the monitor, which halves the price of the upgrade. If Joe User buys a $1000 LCD monitor today, he sure expects to keep it when he upgrades his computer two years from now for Longhorn. He's gonna be really pissed off if Microsoft tells him "Congratulations on your purchase of Microsoft Longhorn. Please note that your monitor is now junk".
Actually, I think TV is the one thing that average Americans do care about. You can take away their civil liberties, you can expand copyrights till the cows come home, but if you fuck with their TV they will rise up (off the couch) and destroy you.
Then we could use a tactic that involves fucking up their TV. With the analog ban that's coming in a few years, who's to say that the digital providers won't use similar means to restrict viewing of certain shows to TV sets that meet security requirements (such has "This TV can't be hooked to a VCR").
Make the analogy. A monitor is similar to a TV. What can happen to one can happen to the other. I know it a stupid and bad analogy, but Joe User won't know the difference. If Joe's TV is threatened, maybe he'll finally act about the monitor.
With all the other simpler features that are being tossed out of Longhorn, I wouldn't worry about this one making the cut.
Careful with that assumptions now... all the cool, important and remotely-technically-advanced features that get cut. Any feature that has the "evil" flag set is given a higher priority level.
However, I will mention this, there is a small segment of the shopping population that didn't care anything about quality at all and bought the cheapest POS in the store. They wanted to spend as little as possible, and they didn't care what they got. I'd put them at perhaps 10% of the market, though.
There also a segment of the shopping population that don't give a crap about quality and just want to have the ability to brag about how they got that super-expensive piece of hardware... and since windows machine tend to cost more than Linux machines, that is what gets bought...
It'll be sooner than that. The next "date bug problem" will likely come at the end of the 32-bit length UNIX Epoch in 2038. As the wikipage mentions however, we should hopefully have shifted up to 64 bits by then, which will give us a quite a bit more time.
Riiiight... we'll all have shifted to 64 bits by then... it's so far away in the future... and we know it in advance...
Just like we knew from the 70's that Y2K would be a problem, but "let's not worry about it, nobody will use those systems then and they'll all have been replaced by correct systems"
There will still be 32 bits systems around in 2037, and another Y2K craze will hit. Luckily for me, it'll happen just a few years before retirement, which will mean big bucks to be made (since I'll be among the "old coders who know C++", everybody having evolved to C# or Java or C++++++ or whatever the next generation language will be). That Y2.037K is actually part of my retirement plan;-)
Come on... even google knows how many suns there are.
True, but I remember I read in some physics book that the very laws of physics made it impossible for a planet to have a stable orbit around 2 suns (it was actually commenting on "is Tattoine real?"). So if we suppose that the Universe obeys the laws of physics, then there won't be any 2-suns-planets out there.
I'm not math wizz (well, yes I am, but not *that* much), but I guess that if they did find a planet with 3 suns, then I guess the laws of physics allow for a stable orbit around 3 suns... I wonder how the seasons cycle over there though...
Hey Aggrajag, maybe you haven't been paying attention. Roughly half of us that did vote, including myself, did not vote for Bush.
Problem is, most of the people who didn't vote (that had a right to vote) probably wouldn't have voted for Bush either. They just got stuck in a "a single vote doesn't change anything" mentality, which led to millions of votes for Kerry or third parties that weren't.
Democracy is about people having the power to change things (from the Greek "demo" meaning people, and "cracy" meaning power, power of the people). When the people stay home and don't care about voting, then they don't deserve democracy.
Or forced change from without?
This isn't just something a third party Band-Aid will fix.
However, neither the United Nations, nor al-Queda are doing it for me. If there are any extraplanetary governments out there, I'm interested.
Face it. Today's generation (people raised in the 70's and up) were told that the future would be much easier with robots doing everything and that we wouldn't have to work much. That led to general apathy. I mean, why bother if we're going to invent a robot to do it next week. People then became sheeps and now usually go for the path of least resistance. They don't dare thinking on their own anymore, it's too exhausting. If the gov says so and so is good, they the people will believe it and reelect it.
Americans weren't always like that though, and I believe they should go back to what they used to be: People that stood for their beliefs and took the means necessary to achieve what they wanted. In 1776, they got pissed off at the English government, so they rebelled and overthrew the government. Today is 2005, people are just as pissed off of their current government. Why don't you rebel and actually try to change things? Is it just because it's so much easier to lie in front of the TV and just let life go by? Come on people, wake up. The government is supposed to work for you, doing what you want. If it doesn't, do something about it.
I just wonder what all those colleges, universities, etc. do as we have so low level of critically thinking people. For example, everyone knows that Bush mishandled war in Iraq. Yet, we got lot of HIGH educated people who will protect him at all cost.
Not quite sure, but the way I see it, most of the educated people didn't vote for Bush. It seems to be the less-educated that are more prone to wanting gun-justice and to appreciate Mr Cowboy Bush.
Actually, with only a few exceptions, the more educated you are, the less likely you are to believe all the crap that Bush says. The problem is, no matter how intelligent and educated one voter is, there will always be 2 uneducated voters beside him that think Saddam is responsible for 9/11.
It looks like you just reworded "the U.S. went to Iraq for oil." B.S. If they went there for oil, why am I still paying outrageous prices for gas?
I will assume that you are living in the US. What's the price for a gallon of gas in the US? $2.29 a gallon according to Gas Price Watch.
Ever wondered how much people all around the world pay for their gas? How about you take a look. And that doesn't even list Canada, which is so close to the U.S., yet we pay about $3.14 (USD) per gallon. Wanna try moving to Europe where the gallon costs on average more than 4 bucks, and in many cases more than 5 bucks?
Quit your whining, you are getting your gas at a very low price.
Someone once said, that any website on the Internet can be reached within 18(?) hops from any other site...
Nope... my own website (to which I won't provide the URL since the server isn't/. proof) only has internal links... so if you get on my website, you won't get out, no matter how many hops you do;-)
Since most websites are copyrighted, then linking to a website would in itself be infringing.
That has got to be the worst piece of crap I've read today.
Websites are copyrighted indeed, but they are available for public view (unless password protected), and the linking redirects the user to the original website, which the copyright holder intends people to see.
This guy was linking to files that were infrigning. The copyright holder never intended the file to be available on that particular server. The guy who put it on the server knew that and willingly made the file available nonetheless. The guy who linked to the other guy's server also knew that and willingly linked to it.
A website being copyrighted doesn't mean nobody should be available to see it. If the copyright holder put it up for public view, then it's ok. If someone else put it up for public view without the copyright holder's permission, then it's a problem. If someone knows that such a website is up without the copyright holder's permission, and then links to it willingly, it's also a problem.
Using this logic, anyone who has ever published instructions on how to build a bomb can be held liable for last week's subway bombings in London. After all, it is obvious that they are facilitating terrorism.
If it can be demonstrated that whoever built the bombs used last week learned it from someone, then that someone could/should be held liable too.
Someone who pays somebody to kill is guilty of murder even though he never touched a weapon and never harmed anyone. The same goes for knowingly hyperlinking to illegal material (lesser crime, not even a crime per se, but "having someone else do the dirty work for you" isn't any more legal).
Slashdot Mirror
I remember when the PSP launched... fans all over were saying how the PSP was better than the DS because of superior graphics, and that those superior graphics justified the higher price tag. Now, those same fans whine because they want to play GBA and SNES games on their PSP. Talk about awesome graphics...
That's pretty funny and I thought the same thing. I love people saying that they have a PSP so they can play with a GameBoy emulator. Guess what people? I also like playing GameBoy games, which is why I bought a GBA.
I'd really like PSP fans to explain to me why it's worth paying the $250 PSP price tag to play games that don't even need an emulator on the $80 GBA. More than 3 times the price, and you get fucked with every new firmware release? Somebody really gotta explain this.
Because not every bit of music is available with iTunes... If you're looking for music from American artists, then you'll probably find it there, but don't try finding more "local" music or you'll be deceived.
What I truly hate about iTunes though is that they actually have the music I want, but it's only available on their German store, or on their British store, or even sometimes on their US store, but not on the Canadian store, which I am required to use because I live in Canada (global market my ass).
They have the file I want to pay for, but they won't let me pay for it, so guess what? I'm gonna figure out another way to get it, and that other way might not involve payment.
Welcome to America, the land where violence is cool, but don't you dare show a bare nipple on TV...!
It's even worse than that...
Their basic premise is that Rockstar intentionally deceived the ESRB in order to 'peddle sexually explicit material to our youth'
Every definition of "youth" I can find refers to a period "before maturity". Therefore, if the ESRB considers 17+ to be Mature, Rockstar never tried to do anything to their youth.
GAWD!!!
We own something. I am a subset of we. I also own the something.
Just because you own it in a collective manner doesn't mean you don't own it.
Let's follow your "simple logic"...
We own the road
I am a subset of we
By driving faster than the speed limit (which we voted/accepted as a democracy), you are misusing my property
By using my property in a way I did not permit you to, I should have the ability to make you stop use my property
Guess what... that's exactly what happens when you get your licence revoked!
Just because you are a subset of we doesn't mean you're entitled to do anything you wish with what we own, because I am also a subset of the same we. And the very reason we have cops is to keep what we collectively own safe (theorically).
Nope, it's the other way around... the "winter time" wouldn't see the sun set any earlier. It's just that "summer time" would last longer. So next december will be no different than last december, while next november would have the sun set (and rise) *later* than last november.
That way, people will have more natural light and use less artificial light in the evening (and use more of it in the morning... making the whole thing kinda pointless. Good thing we can rely on congress to do pointless stuff...).
While most people -- excepting vampires -- favour more daylight
What's the point of all this? No matter how you mess around with the DST, you won't get a single minute of daylight that you didn't have before.
Simple extensions that use only XUL and javascript are inherently cross-platform. However, some extensions can bundle a XPCOM component, which can be compiled C code, tucked in a DLL, which would then be bound to a single platform.
From the moment you explicetly whitelisted an extension (which takes more than a single click, see below), it's the extension that has a vulnerability, not the browser, nor the operating system on which it runs.
Last I checked, it took 6 clicks to install an XPI that isn't previously whitelisted :
If 6 clicks aren't enough to consider Firefox is doing all it can to prevent automatic-installs, how many more do you need?
Plus, the solution "uninstall it until we fix it" is pretty decent when it comes to security. Think we'll ever hear "Uninstall IE until we fix it" anytime soon? :o)
The hidden cost behind a floppy is the time it takes to copy a megabyte to and from the floppy...
New monitors will all have the DRM by default (assuming this thing passes), but many people will still own old monitors. Nowadays, a monitor represents usually about half the price of a complete new computer system (which is computer, monitor, keyboard, mouse and speakers). Many people are aware that they can upgrade their computer without changing the monitor, which halves the price of the upgrade. If Joe User buys a $1000 LCD monitor today, he sure expects to keep it when he upgrades his computer two years from now for Longhorn. He's gonna be really pissed off if Microsoft tells him "Congratulations on your purchase of Microsoft Longhorn. Please note that your monitor is now junk".
Then we could use a tactic that involves fucking up their TV. With the analog ban that's coming in a few years, who's to say that the digital providers won't use similar means to restrict viewing of certain shows to TV sets that meet security requirements (such has "This TV can't be hooked to a VCR").
Make the analogy. A monitor is similar to a TV. What can happen to one can happen to the other. I know it a stupid and bad analogy, but Joe User won't know the difference. If Joe's TV is threatened, maybe he'll finally act about the monitor.
Careful with that assumptions now... all the cool, important and remotely-technically-advanced features that get cut. Any feature that has the "evil" flag set is given a higher priority level.
There also a segment of the shopping population that don't give a crap about quality and just want to have the ability to brag about how they got that super-expensive piece of hardware... and since windows machine tend to cost more than Linux machines, that is what gets bought...
Riiiight... we'll all have shifted to 64 bits by then... it's so far away in the future... and we know it in advance...
Just like we knew from the 70's that Y2K would be a problem, but "let's not worry about it, nobody will use those systems then and they'll all have been replaced by correct systems"
There will still be 32 bits systems around in 2037, and another Y2K craze will hit. Luckily for me, it'll happen just a few years before retirement, which will mean big bucks to be made (since I'll be among the "old coders who know C++", everybody having evolved to C# or Java or C++++++ or whatever the next generation language will be). That Y2.037K is actually part of my retirement plan ;-)
So long suckers!!! :-P
True, but I remember I read in some physics book that the very laws of physics made it impossible for a planet to have a stable orbit around 2 suns (it was actually commenting on "is Tattoine real?"). So if we suppose that the Universe obeys the laws of physics, then there won't be any 2-suns-planets out there.
I'm not math wizz (well, yes I am, but not *that* much), but I guess that if they did find a planet with 3 suns, then I guess the laws of physics allow for a stable orbit around 3 suns... I wonder how the seasons cycle over there though...
Problem is, most of the people who didn't vote (that had a right to vote) probably wouldn't have voted for Bush either. They just got stuck in a "a single vote doesn't change anything" mentality, which led to millions of votes for Kerry or third parties that weren't.
Democracy is about people having the power to change things (from the Greek "demo" meaning people, and "cracy" meaning power, power of the people). When the people stay home and don't care about voting, then they don't deserve democracy.
However, neither the United Nations, nor al-Queda are doing it for me. If there are any extraplanetary governments out there, I'm interested.
Face it. Today's generation (people raised in the 70's and up) were told that the future would be much easier with robots doing everything and that we wouldn't have to work much. That led to general apathy. I mean, why bother if we're going to invent a robot to do it next week. People then became sheeps and now usually go for the path of least resistance. They don't dare thinking on their own anymore, it's too exhausting. If the gov says so and so is good, they the people will believe it and reelect it.
Americans weren't always like that though, and I believe they should go back to what they used to be: People that stood for their beliefs and took the means necessary to achieve what they wanted. In 1776, they got pissed off at the English government, so they rebelled and overthrew the government. Today is 2005, people are just as pissed off of their current government. Why don't you rebel and actually try to change things? Is it just because it's so much easier to lie in front of the TV and just let life go by? Come on people, wake up. The government is supposed to work for you, doing what you want. If it doesn't, do something about it.
Not quite sure, but the way I see it, most of the educated people didn't vote for Bush. It seems to be the less-educated that are more prone to wanting gun-justice and to appreciate Mr Cowboy Bush.
Actually, with only a few exceptions, the more educated you are, the less likely you are to believe all the crap that Bush says. The problem is, no matter how intelligent and educated one voter is, there will always be 2 uneducated voters beside him that think Saddam is responsible for 9/11.
I will assume that you are living in the US. What's the price for a gallon of gas in the US? $2.29 a gallon according to Gas Price Watch.
Ever wondered how much people all around the world pay for their gas? How about you take a look. And that doesn't even list Canada, which is so close to the U.S., yet we pay about $3.14 (USD) per gallon. Wanna try moving to Europe where the gallon costs on average more than 4 bucks, and in many cases more than 5 bucks?
Quit your whining, you are getting your gas at a very low price.
Nope... my own website (to which I won't provide the URL since the server isn't /. proof) only has internal links... so if you get on my website, you won't get out, no matter how many hops you do ;-)
That has got to be the worst piece of crap I've read today.
Websites are copyrighted indeed, but they are available for public view (unless password protected), and the linking redirects the user to the original website, which the copyright holder intends people to see.
This guy was linking to files that were infrigning. The copyright holder never intended the file to be available on that particular server. The guy who put it on the server knew that and willingly made the file available nonetheless. The guy who linked to the other guy's server also knew that and willingly linked to it.
A website being copyrighted doesn't mean nobody should be available to see it. If the copyright holder put it up for public view, then it's ok. If someone else put it up for public view without the copyright holder's permission, then it's a problem. If someone knows that such a website is up without the copyright holder's permission, and then links to it willingly, it's also a problem.
Copyright doesn't mean it's illegal to view.
If it can be demonstrated that whoever built the bombs used last week learned it from someone, then that someone could/should be held liable too.
Someone who pays somebody to kill is guilty of murder even though he never touched a weapon and never harmed anyone. The same goes for knowingly hyperlinking to illegal material (lesser crime, not even a crime per se, but "having someone else do the dirty work for you" isn't any more legal).