Bittorrent isn't necessary or even the best way for that, too centralised. Any good virus will let you link everyone together in a net and certainly running arbitrary executables over this net has been done, there's no reason updates couldn't be done like this. All the pieces are there, but most virus writers don't use even pretty basic techniques. On the whole, they're not that good programmers.
Of course it will have bugs, it's new. That's why it needs widespread use, yes marked as experimental or similar, to get them. Linux 2.6.0 was a lot less stable than reiser4 is now.
Tell me again what value yahoo provides? For the life of me, I can't figure it out. They are what--a link index of out of date links? Free email? While I like that they send me clicks, I can not understand why they can generate such traffic to be a major internet site.
They combine everything you want in one place. Google is getting that way, but at the start they were a pure search engine. Yahoo gives you news, mail, chat, your own webspace/blog, music streaming and collaborative filtering, their own messenger service and chatrooms, frequently-changing information that you want to check repeatedly in the same place (music charts, sports league tables, television listings, a selection of cartoons,...), and of course directory and search if they don't have what you want. On a typical day my internet use consists of checking my email, chatting on irc, reading a few webcomics, some bashquotes, slashdot, k5 and plastic, and then possibly looking something up via wikipedia and/or google. For a typical user I'd add blogging and watching some streamed videos to that. You can do basically all of that (without always those specific sites, but yahoo's versions do the same thing, or at least try to) from yahoo, without going anywhere else, possibly only needing a single page if you set up your personalised homepage properly. The value they provide is in being a one stop shop where you can do everything you want to on the internet.
It's being kept out for insane political reasons. There are too big egos here, probably hans as well as the kernel developers, but they're the noticeable ones. I'm starting to think the kernel devs don't care about the users.
While I tend to agree with you that any viable cell that may become a human being must be treated with the same respect a fully developed one demands, I would not force other people to live under my beliefs.
An unborn child can hardly stand up for itself. Would you say we shouldn't try and stop parents killing their 10-year-olds?
It is curious many people (don't know your position about this) who object to abortion never do so about death penalty.
While I'm personally very anti-death-penalty, a child is almost the definition of innocence. You can't compare wanting to stop people killing their children - which is how most anti-abortion people I've spoken with see what they're doing, I'm not saying they're right or wrong - to wanting to stop criminals who have killed other people being killed.
True not taking a doctor with you would leave more room for others, but would you really go on an 18 month journey without a doctor? Why not take the surgeon along who has can not only heal but deal with other biological studies.(Plants, human behavior, etc)
With the amount it's costing and so forth, I'd want the very best scientists going along. As long as they're able to get there, all else is secondary. And as another reply said, a surgeon who isn't a specialist in your area, which is the best we can usually hope for, will probably do better with these robots than without them.
I didn't read the article, but if we're going to send people to mars we're looking at probably an 18-month round trip, minimum. So we need to be able to have them perform surgery in case of an emergency, and having a surgeon onboard would be one less valuable berth.
Something Lucas should have read. Roughly, "the work is not the work I would write today, but it must stand as it is". But he puts it far more equolently.
Calling it UTC keeps the French happy and was instrumental in persuading them to accept it (there was a competing standard based on iirc Paris). Other than that I don't think there's any difference.
Wheras this way they just ensure both me and my friend get warez copies.
I actually legally purchased civ3 - and then got a warez version because it throws a "a debugger has been detected" when I try and play it in wine. Pay money to get a less functional piece of software - why do they think people will want to do this?
Perhaps it is because more people are familiar with C++ than Python, and by writing the AI and other game rules in C++ the Civ 4 team has made modders job easier.
For something as complex as civ4 it would be easier to learn python and then use that to modify it than modifying it when written in c++.
The power is via solar panels, but there's no way to clean them - once they get coated in enough muck that you can't get useful power out of them then that's it. I think they were surprised by how much the wind acted to blow the dust off, or something like that.
Since these systems have no advantage whatsoever over non-anonymous systems like Bittorrent except when being used to distribute material illegally, it will be easy to get such a change to the law made.
No, they also have an advantage when distributing stuff legitimately that you don't want people to know about, like fetish porn.
I've always been disappointed when upgrading wine - some things will be fixed, but other things that were working perfectly well with the older version will now be broken. Does the change in versioning mark an end to that? Here's hoping...
Does this mean I can use the Slashdot logo any way that I see fit and it's ok with the taco?
No, but if you made a parody/satire site you'd be well within your rights to use it. Taco might get pissed off but there wouldn't be anything he could do to stop you.
Besides, they definitely aren't satirizing the seal itself. If they were, they'd probably be okay. But they're using the real seal.
They're satirising the presidency as a whole. By your argument you could say someone satirising a logo was using the real pixel at (0,0) and not satirising it, the real pixel at (0,1), and so on, and so not allowed to use any of the pixels they do.
Nor are true landlords, automotive assembly-line workers, and grocers. What a sad world we live in, though, where a "true" artist can't find fellow pure brethren to provide him food, housing, and transport without that awful reliance on the monetary system.
It doesn't matter whether your landlord or grocer is just doing it for the pay, they can still do just as good a job. Art is different.
For one, it's a clear testament that they are talented and savvy enough to command a premium for their work.
Unfortunately it seems to be more reflective of the latter than the former.
For another, it shows they're dedicated enough to make their trade front-and-center in their life, not just a side job.
Professional artists don't seem to be any more devoted than others. Quite often the more successful they are the less of their time they devote to their art.
There would still be enough money around... in other people's wallets. How, exactly, do you propose that this money magically get to the artist's wallet? Don't forget, as well, the high prices you'll often see on artistic supplies, in any medium, from the fact that pro-level artistic endeavors are a fringe activity.
I'd suggest people spend the money currently spent on copies of works by a few big successful artists on commissioned stuff by smaller artists (well, whichever artists fit how much money they have). It would mean no more millionaires through their art, but might actually mean more for the median artist.
Slashdot Mirror
Everything runs in circles. I remember the days when the main way you infected things was having another disk (hard or floppy) in while you booted.
Aliasing from the monitor refresh that's resonating with something?
Bittorrent isn't necessary or even the best way for that, too centralised. Any good virus will let you link everyone together in a net and certainly running arbitrary executables over this net has been done, there's no reason updates couldn't be done like this. All the pieces are there, but most virus writers don't use even pretty basic techniques. On the whole, they're not that good programmers.
Of course it will have bugs, it's new. That's why it needs widespread use, yes marked as experimental or similar, to get them. Linux 2.6.0 was a lot less stable than reiser4 is now.
They combine everything you want in one place. Google is getting that way, but at the start they were a pure search engine. Yahoo gives you news, mail, chat, your own webspace/blog, music streaming and collaborative filtering, their own messenger service and chatrooms, frequently-changing information that you want to check repeatedly in the same place (music charts, sports league tables, television listings, a selection of cartoons,...), and of course directory and search if they don't have what you want. On a typical day my internet use consists of checking my email, chatting on irc, reading a few webcomics, some bashquotes, slashdot, k5 and plastic, and then possibly looking something up via wikipedia and/or google. For a typical user I'd add blogging and watching some streamed videos to that. You can do basically all of that (without always those specific sites, but yahoo's versions do the same thing, or at least try to) from yahoo, without going anywhere else, possibly only needing a single page if you set up your personalised homepage properly. The value they provide is in being a one stop shop where you can do everything you want to on the internet.
It's being kept out for insane political reasons. There are too big egos here, probably hans as well as the kernel developers, but they're the noticeable ones. I'm starting to think the kernel devs don't care about the users.
Not a good idea to be announcing that around here.
They're traditionally strict on their licensing (remember mortal kombat with the blood removed?), and only want high-quality games released.
An unborn child can hardly stand up for itself. Would you say we shouldn't try and stop parents killing their 10-year-olds?
It is curious many people (don't know your position about this) who object to abortion never do so about death penalty.
While I'm personally very anti-death-penalty, a child is almost the definition of innocence. You can't compare wanting to stop people killing their children - which is how most anti-abortion people I've spoken with see what they're doing, I'm not saying they're right or wrong - to wanting to stop criminals who have killed other people being killed.
With the amount it's costing and so forth, I'd want the very best scientists going along. As long as they're able to get there, all else is secondary. And as another reply said, a surgeon who isn't a specialist in your area, which is the best we can usually hope for, will probably do better with these robots than without them.
I didn't read the article, but if we're going to send people to mars we're looking at probably an 18-month round trip, minimum. So we need to be able to have them perform surgery in case of an emergency, and having a surgeon onboard would be one less valuable berth.
Something Lucas should have read. Roughly, "the work is not the work I would write today, but it must stand as it is". But he puts it far more equolently.
Calling it UTC keeps the French happy and was instrumental in persuading them to accept it (there was a competing standard based on iirc Paris). Other than that I don't think there's any difference.
No true geek would use anything but UTC, wherever you are.
I actually legally purchased civ3 - and then got a warez version because it throws a "a debugger has been detected" when I try and play it in wine. Pay money to get a less functional piece of software - why do they think people will want to do this?
My real gripe is that I can't play it under wine. Simple as that. I'm not paying for something crippled so that I can't use it with my OS of choice.
For something as complex as civ4 it would be easier to learn python and then use that to modify it than modifying it when written in c++.
Lol, have you ever used COO? OOo is slow, yes, but I think even it would be defeated by that.
The power is via solar panels, but there's no way to clean them - once they get coated in enough muck that you can't get useful power out of them then that's it. I think they were surprised by how much the wind acted to blow the dust off, or something like that.
No, they also have an advantage when distributing stuff legitimately that you don't want people to know about, like fetish porn.
I've always been disappointed when upgrading wine - some things will be fixed, but other things that were working perfectly well with the older version will now be broken. Does the change in versioning mark an end to that? Here's hoping...
When any organisation does this against a parody site, you see us making a fuss (remember that walmart foundation one recently?)
No, but if you made a parody/satire site you'd be well within your rights to use it. Taco might get pissed off but there wouldn't be anything he could do to stop you.
They're satirising the presidency as a whole. By your argument you could say someone satirising a logo was using the real pixel at (0,0) and not satirising it, the real pixel at (0,1), and so on, and so not allowed to use any of the pixels they do.
It doesn't matter whether your landlord or grocer is just doing it for the pay, they can still do just as good a job. Art is different.
For one, it's a clear testament that they are talented and savvy enough to command a premium for their work.
Unfortunately it seems to be more reflective of the latter than the former.
For another, it shows they're dedicated enough to make their trade front-and-center in their life, not just a side job.
Professional artists don't seem to be any more devoted than others. Quite often the more successful they are the less of their time they devote to their art.
There would still be enough money around... in other people's wallets. How, exactly, do you propose that this money magically get to the artist's wallet? Don't forget, as well, the high prices you'll often see on artistic supplies, in any medium, from the fact that pro-level artistic endeavors are a fringe activity.
I'd suggest people spend the money currently spent on copies of works by a few big successful artists on commissioned stuff by smaller artists (well, whichever artists fit how much money they have). It would mean no more millionaires through their art, but might actually mean more for the median artist.