All they need to do is follow the example set forth in those tomes of knowledge. First you start by putting larger and larger ice cubes into the world's oceans.
When that no longer works (or you run out of ice), you construct a very large mirror in orbit about the Earth which will reflect large amounts of sunlight. Just make sure a piece of space debris doesn't run into it and point it down towards the planet. Ants under a magnifying glass anyone?
Finally, if all else fails, have every robot on the planet point their exhaust vents skyward and at a predetermined signal, furiously vent their gasses to move the planet slightly further away from the Sun.
Last 6 years? The economy has been stagnated long before that. We had declining job growth since roughly 2005 and wages haven't kept pace for nearly 2 decades.
Three things come to mind when I hear someone with the nickname bunnie: either some cute Asian girl showing off on the web, a stripper or a transvestite.
In no situation do I think of a guy when I hear bunnie.
You would think such stuff would be blocked but there are those in government (our current CIO one of them) who think, "The Cloud! The Cloud! It's wonderful!" without any concept of how insecure the Cloud really is.
People at the top read magazines and are told how wonderful such things are without taking a moment to think things through.
This applies to the private sector as well except you don't normally hear about their missteps.
This is just ULA being afraid they will lose their iron rice bowl.
Well duh! Wouldn't you do the same thing? I mean, it's not like the government creates jobs or anything.
For those not getting the sarcasm, one side of the political spectrum repeatedly trots out the mantra that the government does not create jobs, yet, using this situation, quite clearly the government does create jobs or these Congressman wouldn't be trying to prevent layoffs at these companies if they were to lose government business from the space program.
It's because the company broke one of three rules you should never break. Specifically, they let a web designer design their web site or in this case, their job application form.
In an effort to show how relevant they are, how edgy and cool they can be, web designers will throw everything they have at what should be simple projects when in reality, all they need is the kitchen sink.
No point having something simple when you can make it as complex and convoluted as possible. After all, this form isn't about the person who has to fill out the form, it's for web designers to show how much cruft they can throw at the system.
their revenue is collected for them at gun point by the IRS.
Really? I'm sorry, but when was the last time any IRS official pulled a gun on someone and told them to hand over their money.
Oh, I see. You mean like Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, AIG and a whole host of other private companies who told the American taxpayers they will hand over their money so the people who nearly brought down the country's financial institution can still get their bonuses.
Maybe the Federal government is different, but I know for a fact people in state government fired all the time for not doing their job. The only thing it takes is for their non-work to be documented. Once that happens, there is nothing any Union can say about their firing.
But please, continue your rant of how evil government is. After all, the benevolence of the private sector is so well known we sing their praises every day because they never, EVER take advantage of people or stick it to us in their quest for profits.
I know, I know, simplicity is such an ugly word. It would be truly horrible if people had to concentrate on their driving rather than the six-channel, streaming video playing on their dashboard while they blend margaritas.
Thanks to this idea, Microsoft has to spend most of it's resources patching old systems,
If MS is spending most of its resources patching old systems, they're doing something wrong. Most of their resources should be spent on trying to develop new products.
I don't hear car manufacturers whining they have to have parts available for 20 year old cars, and cars cost significantly more than any piece of software (excluding the crap from Oracle and SAP).
And for the record, I do support as well as minor projects (hardware and software) so I'm well aware of what it takes to support products. Considering the amount of time I spend fixing the problems people have with the "latest and greatest", maybe companies should be spending most of their resources on patching and maintaining because they sure aren't getting the shiny new stuff right.
Going back to the car analogy, if car companies said they would no longer support your vehicle AND not allow anyone to provide support, that you MUST buy a new vehicle every 1o years, I can guarantee you wouldn't have the same opinion.
in the discussion about Skype being made to stop working with older versions of OS X and comparing it, Skype, to phone usage, when you can get Microsoft or Apple to have its software work for thirty or forty years like one can with a telephone, you let me know.
Microsoft can stop support all it wants but that doesn't mean people aren't gong to stop using these older versions. People, particularly corporations, will tell them they're sick of constantly being forced to "upgrade" when there is nothing wrong physically or security wise with the browser they have, and have every new iteration be worse than the last as far as functionality is concerned.
If you can't make security updates for a product which is more simple than the current version, you shouldn't be in the business of making software.
You know, with such informative writing, you really shouldn't be posting on here. You brought cold, hard facts to this thread, something completely unknown to most users on here.
But he had every right to attach his computer to that network. MIT has (or had?) a free and open network.
No he, nor anyone, does not. This was a specific network closet which he entered at night, in dark clothes and then attempted to hide the laptop under a box. That is not something anyone who has rights to a network would do. Ever.
Aaron, however, wrote a script that would download all 4 million in rapid succession.
So then you're admitting he deliberately violated the terms of agreement he signed.
The only thing "wrong" that he did was violate JSTOR's terms of service. Yes, if everyone did that the system would collapse. What he did amounts to bad manners.
Putting quotes around the word wrong doesn't make the word somehow less important. He was wrong, period, in what he did. The reason for the TOS is exactly what you said, the system would collapse. In fact, that is exactly what JSTOR was seeing. In his attempt to "free information" he was destroying the very thing he was using.
As someone further up said, those high number of years was bogus. It would never have happened. But then this whole thing would be moot if Aaron didn't break the law, now wouldn't it? Or are we once again to completely ignore one's personal responsibility in all this?
And these (some of them at least) are the same folks who signed off on the mark-to-market figures and related matters for Goldman Sachs, BofA and the rest of the folks who caused our financial system to collapse in 2007-2008.
Well, better off until you realise how much its costing you to toss them in the clink, of course...
Then just shoot them. I'll be glad to pay for the cost of the bullet. It's a win-win for everyone. Another criminal off the street and the taxpayer doesn't have to pay to coddle them by keeping them in jail.
It's the inflation in play here, just like in the economy, the units of measurement are being stretched now, so the same mass measured in different units gives a nominally different answer
A better example would be the sizing of women's clothes. What is now a size 4 used to be a size 6 a few years ago but because women are getting fatter, the sizes had to change to make people feel good about themselves.*
* Men don't have to worry as much because their sizes are measured in inches.
Slashdot Mirror
All they need to do is follow the example set forth in those tomes of knowledge. First you start by putting larger and larger ice cubes into the world's oceans.
When that no longer works (or you run out of ice), you construct a very large mirror in orbit about the Earth which will reflect large amounts of sunlight. Just make sure a piece of space debris doesn't run into it and point it down towards the planet. Ants under a magnifying glass anyone?
Finally, if all else fails, have every robot on the planet point their exhaust vents skyward and at a predetermined signal, furiously vent their gasses to move the planet slightly further away from the Sun.
Simple really.
Last time I checked, the government doesn't earn money. Taxpayers do.
The government, at all levels, does earn some money in the form of usage fees such as national/state parks or land they lease to ranchers.
It's no different than paying money to rent out a place for your wedding.
Last 6 years? The economy has been stagnated long before that. We had declining job growth since roughly 2005 and wages haven't kept pace for nearly 2 decades.
Three things come to mind when I hear someone with the nickname bunnie: either some cute Asian girl showing off on the web, a stripper or a transvestite.
In no situation do I think of a guy when I hear bunnie.
Just sayin.
You would think such stuff would be blocked but there are those in government (our current CIO one of them) who think, "The Cloud! The Cloud! It's wonderful!" without any concept of how insecure the Cloud really is.
People at the top read magazines and are told how wonderful such things are without taking a moment to think things through.
This applies to the private sector as well except you don't normally hear about their missteps.
I can see the searches now:
"What does a black person look like?"
"What does an Asian person look like?"
"What does someone from Mississippi look like?"
This is just ULA being afraid they will lose their iron rice bowl.
Well duh! Wouldn't you do the same thing? I mean, it's not like the government creates jobs or anything.
For those not getting the sarcasm, one side of the political spectrum repeatedly trots out the mantra that the government does not create jobs, yet, using this situation, quite clearly the government does create jobs or these Congressman wouldn't be trying to prevent layoffs at these companies if they were to lose government business from the space program.
It's because the company broke one of three rules you should never break. Specifically, they let a web designer design their web site or in this case, their job application form.
In an effort to show how relevant they are, how edgy and cool they can be, web designers will throw everything they have at what should be simple projects when in reality, all they need is the kitchen sink.
No point having something simple when you can make it as complex and convoluted as possible. After all, this form isn't about the person who has to fill out the form, it's for web designers to show how much cruft they can throw at the system.
their revenue is collected for them at gun point by the IRS.
Really? I'm sorry, but when was the last time any IRS official pulled a gun on someone and told them to hand over their money.
Oh, I see. You mean like Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, AIG and a whole host of other private companies who told the American taxpayers they will hand over their money so the people who nearly brought down the country's financial institution can still get their bonuses.
Maybe the Federal government is different, but I know for a fact people in state government fired all the time for not doing their job. The only thing it takes is for their non-work to be documented. Once that happens, there is nothing any Union can say about their firing.
But please, continue your rant of how evil government is. After all, the benevolence of the private sector is so well known we sing their praises every day because they never, EVER take advantage of people or stick it to us in their quest for profits.
Don't put this crap in cars in the first place.
I know, I know, simplicity is such an ugly word. It would be truly horrible if people had to concentrate on their driving rather than the six-channel, streaming video playing on their dashboard while they blend margaritas.
Thanks to this idea, Microsoft has to spend most of it's resources patching old systems,
If MS is spending most of its resources patching old systems, they're doing something wrong. Most of their resources should be spent on trying to develop new products.
I don't hear car manufacturers whining they have to have parts available for 20 year old cars, and cars cost significantly more than any piece of software (excluding the crap from Oracle and SAP).
And for the record, I do support as well as minor projects (hardware and software) so I'm well aware of what it takes to support products. Considering the amount of time I spend fixing the problems people have with the "latest and greatest", maybe companies should be spending most of their resources on patching and maintaining because they sure aren't getting the shiny new stuff right.
Going back to the car analogy, if car companies said they would no longer support your vehicle AND not allow anyone to provide support, that you MUST buy a new vehicle every 1o years, I can guarantee you wouldn't have the same opinion.
in the discussion about Skype being made to stop working with older versions of OS X and comparing it, Skype, to phone usage, when you can get Microsoft or Apple to have its software work for thirty or forty years like one can with a telephone, you let me know.
Microsoft can stop support all it wants but that doesn't mean people aren't gong to stop using these older versions. People, particularly corporations, will tell them they're sick of constantly being forced to "upgrade" when there is nothing wrong physically or security wise with the browser they have, and have every new iteration be worse than the last as far as functionality is concerned.
If you can't make security updates for a product which is more simple than the current version, you shouldn't be in the business of making software.
You know, with such informative writing, you really shouldn't be posting on here. You brought cold, hard facts to this thread, something completely unknown to most users on here.
But if Skype has ambitions to replace ordinary telephony, it needs to adopt some of the same attitudes.
Just because Verizon forces people to "upgrade" to fiber from copper, doesn't mean the person's forty year old phone stops working.
Let me know when Microsoft or Apple can say that.
But he had every right to attach his computer to that network. MIT has (or had?) a free and open network.
No he, nor anyone, does not. This was a specific network closet which he entered at night, in dark clothes and then attempted to hide the laptop under a box. That is not something anyone who has rights to a network would do. Ever.
Aaron, however, wrote a script that would download all 4 million in rapid succession.
So then you're admitting he deliberately violated the terms of agreement he signed.
The only thing "wrong" that he did was violate JSTOR's terms of service. Yes, if everyone did that the system would collapse. What he did amounts to bad manners.
Putting quotes around the word wrong doesn't make the word somehow less important. He was wrong, period, in what he did. The reason for the TOS is exactly what you said, the system would collapse. In fact, that is exactly what JSTOR was seeing. In his attempt to "free information" he was destroying the very thing he was using.
As someone further up said, those high number of years was bogus. It would never have happened. But then this whole thing would be moot if Aaron didn't break the law, now wouldn't it? Or are we once again to completely ignore one's personal responsibility in all this?
Aaron Scwartz deliberately installed his own equipment, deliberately hidden under a cardboard box, in a place he had no right to be in.
The fact he had a JSTOR account is irrelevant. He put his equipment on someone else's network in an attempt to bypass the normal JSTOR requirements.
Stop making him out to be a hero. If you think what he did was fine, I'll be sure to do the same thing to the company you work for.
Which ever one is in Las Vegas.
And these (some of them at least) are the same folks who signed off on the mark-to-market figures and related matters for Goldman Sachs, BofA and the rest of the folks who caused our financial system to collapse in 2007-2008.
See a pattern?
Who said anything about removing due process? If the folks who stole the car are duly convicted by the evidence, then we can shoot them.
They obviously don't care about abiding by the basic rules of society so why should the taxpayers have to pay to keep them around?
Well, better off until you realise how much its costing you to toss them in the clink, of course...
Then just shoot them. I'll be glad to pay for the cost of the bullet. It's a win-win for everyone. Another criminal off the street and the taxpayer doesn't have to pay to coddle them by keeping them in jail.
I still have the entire first series on video tape and part of the second.
Favorite part, by far, is their battle inside Planet Gamolon. Nothing better than watching it at night, lights off, volume to 11.
Not advisable if you are prone to epileptic seizures.
I wonder why he never thought to duct tape the beer can to the steering wheel and drink from a straw.
Probably because when he made sharp a turn the beer would spill out.
Don't you mean cross Ebola with the common cold?
Oh right, that would be a terrible, terrible thing.
The problem? Just as in the UK, the US employees weren't getting paid.
Who needs to get paid? Everyone knows software is free and there is no cost associated with creating it.
Silly rabbits, thinking they should get paid for their work.
It's the inflation in play here, just like in the economy, the units of measurement are being stretched now, so the same mass measured in different units gives a nominally different answer
A better example would be the sizing of women's clothes. What is now a size 4 used to be a size 6 a few years ago but because women are getting fatter, the sizes had to change to make people feel good about themselves.*
* Men don't have to worry as much because their sizes are measured in inches.