Power Rangers?? Pshaw! That's nothing. Try dropping an anvil from the top of a cliff onto your friend's head while playing that you're in a cartoon. Turns out it does far worse things than just make tweeting birds fly around his head while his tounge sticks out. Man, if only I'd known.
Damn you, Wile E. Coyotee! Because of your corrupting ways I lost a good childhood friend! I thought I was over the pain by now, but I guess I'm not.
Then there was that whole incident after watching Mary Poppins. It turns out that umbrellas don't make effective parachutes after all...
Airports using GPS approaches?? I know aircraft now have GPS navigation, but I thought it was just for cross-country cruising. All airports (large ones used by passenger airlines anyway) each have their own tight-beam beacon beamed right from the end of the runway itself, out at the angle of proper approach. It tells the aircraft to follow the signal backward along the beam to its source and that's the right approach path to take.
(What I never understand about these is that, if my old days playing flight simulators are to be believed, it seems like they are always aimed at a rather low angle such that to follow them in you need to be coming in with signifigant throttle power. The normal unpowered glide path is too steep for the beam. This doesn't seem very safe, because it means you can't glide it in if you have engine failure. You'll have to choose between risking a stall by trying to keep the same shallow descent angle without power, versus having a touchdown short of the runway.)
You could stil have GPS help by helping set up the aim for you (i.e. have a computerized mortar launch tube that says, "My current location is here, and my target is at the following coordinates there, and my computerized map of the area says that 'here' is at an alititude 50 meters higher than 'there'. Therefore I should be aimed at this exact angle and use exactly this much power on the shot.") What makes it impractical to do this in combat is nothing about the mortar itself, but the situations under which it is typically used, in which the target is something you decide upon at the last minute while the battle is raging. This means you don't have pre-planned coordinates for your target handed out the day before during a briefing. This could be different in a terrorist attack where the target is known ahead of time.
If your target was in the middle of a city then you have to workaround buildings some how.
Even the tallest buildings in the world aren't that much of an obsticle to objects that fly at, say, 5,000 feet. Just fly in high, then dive straight down at your target location.
Assuming that the only reasons people would have to switch are the same as the reason you might have had (popups), and therefore if that reason goes away there is no longer any reason left for people to switch, is itself a perfect example of zealotry.
As far as the 1.0, I think you're right. Remember that the target audiece here is PHB's who are used to seeing closed source software, where the push to hurry up and use that "1.0" moniker to get it out to audiences is strong enough that it makes "1.0" equate to "beta" in their minds. A 1.0 of a closed source release is typically equivilent to about a 0.8 of an opensource release.
When they see "1.0" they think "not done yet". They don't know that the opensource community doesn't take "1.0" lightly.
Someone who uses a quote in that fashion is obviously doing it because they agree with it, not because they believe everything famous people say must be true.
Once upon a time it was mandatory that notices be put up informing people if they are being recorded. Has that changed? (I haven't seen one of these new machines yet, so I don't know if they carry a notice.)
unless you *enjoy* paging through ten thousand lines looking for the pertinent part. Info does not have that problem
I do enjoy searchable documentation. Putting it all in one page lets me pull it up and do a "/foo" to find foo, instead of trying to navigate menus in the hope that the person laying out the documentation thinks the same way I do and orginized the menu tree the same way I would (which is almost never the case with stuff written by RMS). The other thing that killed info and kept people using man pages forever was that info still used archaic emacs keys that typical computers don't even *have* on their keyboards. (Go into a topic by typing control-rightbracket??!! Is RMS totally insane??) More recent versions of info have fixed the keymapping idiocy, but not until after the damage was already done and it lost respectability.
If you assume it is stupid to pick harder classes, then you are assuming everyone's goal is laziness. If a person has a goal of learning interesting things, then it is not necessarily stupid to take a hard class. This sounds like an interesting class - the only problem is the grading is poorly thought out.
It matters because it is false to assume that bugs found is a representative percentage of bugs existing. If bugs of type A are more common in one system, and bugs of type B are more common in the other, and your test tends to find a larger percentage of the type A bugs than the type B bugs, then you get an incorrect skewed result when comparing the two.
He was making a point that Nielson ratings are irrelevant for ad revenue purposes
1. A question was asked, and I answered it. 2. Neilson ratings are directly relevant for ad revenue. They are the primary deciding factor in how expensive it is to buy airtime for an advertisement.
1 - Some items are damn inconvenient to wait for mail-order delivery. ("Honey, we're out of garbage bags - time to order new ones! Ask them to ship via UPS this time...")
2 - Some items are too cheap to order via mail order (pay $4 shipping for a $2 item).
So, no I don't think brick-and-mortar stores will become a thing of the past, and that's not what my post was talking about. I do, however, think that the internet will become so ubiquitous (especially after ipv6 is accepted so that there are enough addresses for every appliance in the world), such that you will still be using it, even in a brick-and-mortar store you walk in to.
Assuming you aren't just making this up, it still isn't referring to the problem at hand, which is the person doing the sentincing being ignorant of what the sentincing will actually mean, not the person being sentenced being ignorant of it.
The problem is that the sentencing is made in ignorance of the fact that its severity will increase in the future while the duration of the sentencing is still in effect. A sentence that was MEANT to be severe should be severe. But a sentence that was only meant to be moderate should not.
Sure, the back-end may be entirly network based, but the CUSTOMER is not using that backend.
I disagree. If I use a terminal attached to a computer, ala 1970's mainframe style, I'm still using the computer. That an intermediary exists doesn't change things much. If you swipe your card in a card reader attached to a computer, you've just used the computer. Given the treatment of the Kevin Mitnick sentencing, the law agrees with me (unfortunately).
Google runs on Apache. Therefore most internet users use open source software every day. This is the same kind of thing.
If those pirated copies are full scans that contain the ads, then what's the difference between taping them off the air (legal) versus off the internet (not legal)? If the ads pay for the content, then it does not matter what means are used to send them to you.
The entire model of the media industry is broken anyway. Neilson Ratings are not accurate and people don't pay attention to the commercials anyway even during live broadcasts. They switch channels or hit the mute or leave the room. The whole system is based on getting advertisers to believe the lie that their ads are reaching our eyeballs. At some point it's going to have to break and be replaced with something else. I'm just afraid that in the process, a lot of good technology is going to be killed by legal action.
According to the dictionary, "arrest" just means "to stop", and the meaning of being taken into custody is just one of the narrower meanings of it. Being stopped by police would be an arrest as well under the more generic meaning. Under the most generic meaning, you can even have a "cardiac Arrest", and that doesn't mean your heart was taken down the the police station and put behind bars.
Accepting that it is okay to enact an excessive punishment beyond the scope of a crime in one case is a slippery slope. Where does such a practice end? I don't want to see someone lose a driver's license for, say, jaywalking. Or have a hand chopped off for stealing a dollar, or be classed as a terrorist because they taught someone how to decrypt a DVD.
Yeah, but everyone, no matter how clueless, understands what it means to drive. Everyone knows what it means to harass. But an awful lot of people don't actually understand what the phrase "the internet" refers to, and don't understand how ubiquitous it really is. In 1995 it wouldn't have been a problem to live without internet. Today it is still possible, but it is a bit limiting. A few years down the road I predict it will be next to impossible to avoid the internet and still be an active member of civilization. Avoiding the internet is going to mean never using a bank, never paying for anything with any means besides cash, never using a store, never having the ability to make remote contact (have to come to your house to talk to you since telephone service will merge with internet service.)
The internet is a lot more than "that thar web thingy", and it is becoming more so with each passing year.
There is something "magic" about the internet that makes it different - it is not an end-infrastructure in itself - it's an enabling infrastructure that other infrastructures are built on top of, and more and more necessary infrastructures of society are moving onto it.
Eventually "you can't use the internet" will be like "You can't use electricity."
Slashdot Mirror
Power Rangers?? Pshaw! That's nothing. Try dropping an anvil from the top of a cliff onto your friend's head while playing that you're in a cartoon. Turns out it does far worse things than just make tweeting birds fly around his head while his tounge sticks out. Man, if only I'd known.
Damn you, Wile E. Coyotee! Because of your corrupting ways I lost a good childhood friend! I thought I was over the pain by now, but I guess I'm not.
Then there was that whole incident after watching Mary Poppins. It turns out that umbrellas don't make effective parachutes after all...
The context in effect when I replied was about all stores in general, not just these specific kiosks.
Airports using GPS approaches?? I know aircraft now have GPS navigation, but I thought it was just for cross-country cruising. All airports (large ones used by passenger airlines anyway) each have their own tight-beam beacon beamed right from the end of the runway itself, out at the angle of proper approach. It tells the aircraft to follow the signal backward along the beam to its source and that's the right approach path to take.
(What I never understand about these is that, if my old days playing flight simulators are to be believed, it seems like they are always aimed at a rather low angle such that to follow them in you need to be coming in with signifigant throttle power. The normal unpowered glide path is too steep for the beam. This doesn't seem very safe, because it means you can't glide it in if you have engine failure. You'll have to choose between risking a stall by trying to keep the same shallow descent angle without power, versus having a touchdown short of the runway.)
You could stil have GPS help by helping set up the aim for you (i.e. have a computerized mortar launch tube that says, "My current location is here, and my target is at the following coordinates there, and my computerized map of the area says that 'here' is at an alititude 50 meters higher than 'there'. Therefore I should be aimed at this exact angle and use exactly this much power on the shot.") What makes it impractical to do this in combat is nothing about the mortar itself, but the situations under which it is typically used, in which the target is something you decide upon at the last minute while the battle is raging. This means you don't have pre-planned coordinates for your target handed out the day before during a briefing. This could be different in a terrorist attack where the target is known ahead of time.
If your target was in the middle of a city then you have to workaround buildings some how.
Even the tallest buildings in the world aren't that much of an obsticle to objects that fly at, say, 5,000 feet. Just fly in high, then dive straight down at your target location.
That, like the requirement to learn to use a slide rule to be an effective engineer, will eventually dissapear.
Assuming that the only reasons people would have to switch are the same as the reason you might have had (popups), and therefore if that reason goes away there is no longer any reason left for people to switch, is itself a perfect example of zealotry.
Hypocrite.
As far as the 1.0, I think you're right. Remember that the target audiece here is PHB's who are used to seeing closed source software, where the push to hurry up and use that "1.0" moniker to get it out to audiences is strong enough that it makes "1.0" equate to "beta" in their minds. A 1.0 of a closed source release is typically equivilent to about a 0.8 of an opensource release.
When they see "1.0" they think "not done yet". They don't know that the opensource community doesn't take "1.0" lightly.
Someone who uses a quote in that fashion is obviously doing it because they agree with it, not because they believe everything famous people say must be true.
Once upon a time it was mandatory that notices be put up informing people if they are being recorded. Has that changed? (I haven't seen one of these new machines yet, so I don't know if they carry a notice.)
Strange, the cash in my pocket doesn't have my address on it.
unless you *enjoy* paging through ten thousand lines looking for the pertinent part. Info does not have that problem
I do enjoy searchable documentation. Putting it all in one page lets me pull it up and do a "/foo" to find foo, instead of trying to navigate menus in the hope that the person laying out the documentation thinks the same way I do and orginized the menu tree the same way I would (which is almost never the case with stuff written by RMS). The other thing that killed info and kept people using man pages forever was that info still used archaic emacs keys that typical computers don't even *have* on their keyboards. (Go into a topic by typing control-rightbracket??!! Is RMS totally insane??) More recent versions of info have fixed the keymapping idiocy, but not until after the damage was already done and it lost respectability.
If you assume it is stupid to pick harder classes, then you are assuming everyone's goal is laziness. If a person has a goal of learning interesting things, then it is not necessarily stupid to take a hard class. This sounds like an interesting class - the only problem is the grading is poorly thought out.
It matters because it is false to assume that bugs found is a representative percentage of bugs existing. If bugs of type A are more common in one system, and bugs of type B are more common in the other, and your test tends to find a larger percentage of the type A bugs than the type B bugs, then you get an incorrect skewed result when comparing the two.
He was making a point that Nielson ratings are irrelevant for ad revenue purposes
1. A question was asked, and I answered it.
2. Neilson ratings are directly relevant for ad revenue. They are the primary deciding factor in how expensive it is to buy airtime for an advertisement.
1 - Some items are damn inconvenient to wait for mail-order delivery. ("Honey, we're out of garbage bags - time to order new ones! Ask them to ship via UPS this time...")
2 - Some items are too cheap to order via mail order (pay $4 shipping for a $2 item).
So, no I don't think brick-and-mortar stores will become a thing of the past, and that's not what my post was talking about. I do, however, think that the internet will become so ubiquitous (especially after ipv6 is accepted so that there are enough addresses for every appliance in the world), such that you will still be using it, even in a brick-and-mortar store you walk in to.
Assuming you aren't just making this up, it still isn't referring to the problem at hand, which is the person doing the sentincing being ignorant of what the sentincing will actually mean, not the person being sentenced being ignorant of it.
The problem is that the sentencing is made in ignorance of the fact that its severity will increase in the future while the duration of the sentencing is still in effect. A sentence that was MEANT to be severe should be severe. But a sentence that was only meant to be moderate should not.
Sure, the back-end may be entirly network based, but the CUSTOMER is not using that backend.
I disagree. If I use a terminal attached to a computer, ala 1970's mainframe style, I'm still using the computer. That an intermediary exists doesn't change things much. If you swipe your card in a card reader attached to a computer, you've just used the computer. Given the treatment of the Kevin Mitnick sentencing, the law agrees with me (unfortunately).
Google runs on Apache. Therefore most internet users use open source software every day. This is the same kind of thing.
Who cares if the Nielson ratings actually have statistical significance.
They drive which shows stay and which ones get cancelled. If a show you like is cancelled based on this incorrect data, that's enough reason to care.
If those pirated copies are full scans that contain the ads, then what's the difference between taping them off the air (legal) versus off the internet (not legal)? If the ads pay for the content, then it does not matter what means are used to send them to you.
The entire model of the media industry is broken anyway. Neilson Ratings are not accurate and people don't pay attention to the commercials anyway even during live broadcasts. They switch channels or hit the mute or leave the room. The whole system is based on getting advertisers to believe the lie that their ads are reaching our eyeballs. At some point it's going to have to break and be replaced with something else. I'm just afraid that in the process, a lot of good technology is going to be killed by legal action.
According to the dictionary, "arrest" just means "to stop", and the meaning of being taken into custody is just one of the narrower meanings of it. Being stopped by police would be an arrest as well under the more generic meaning. Under the most generic meaning, you can even have a "cardiac Arrest", and that doesn't mean your heart was taken down the the police station and put behind bars.
Accepting that it is okay to enact an excessive punishment beyond the scope of a crime in one case is a slippery slope. Where does such a practice end? I don't want to see someone lose a driver's license for, say, jaywalking. Or have a hand chopped off for stealing a dollar, or be classed as a terrorist because they taught someone how to decrypt a DVD.
"make a phone call without intent to communicate".
That describes every telemarketing call I've ever heard.
Yeah, but everyone, no matter how clueless, understands what it means to drive. Everyone knows what it means to harass. But an awful lot of people don't actually understand what the phrase "the internet" refers to, and don't understand how ubiquitous it really is. In 1995 it wouldn't have been a problem to live without internet. Today it is still possible, but it is a bit limiting. A few years down the road I predict it will be next to impossible to avoid the internet and still be an active member of civilization. Avoiding the internet is going to mean never using a bank, never paying for anything with any means besides cash, never using a store, never having the ability to make remote contact (have to come to your house to talk to you since telephone service will merge with internet service.)
The internet is a lot more than "that thar web thingy", and it is becoming more so with each passing year.
There is something "magic" about the internet that makes it different - it is not an end-infrastructure in itself - it's an enabling infrastructure that other infrastructures are built on top of, and more and more necessary infrastructures of society are moving onto it.
Eventually "you can't use the internet" will be like "You can't use electricity."