Like outsourcing patent examiners after the fact that the real patent examiners have failed to do their job and issued a patent for something that had prior art.
If the same behavior - one kid bullying another or saying unkind things - was occurring in a non-electronic medium, we usually would consider it the sort of thing where it's a matter for the kids to settle among themselves, or at most, by the kid's parent talking to the bully or the parent, which then usually stopped it. But now, we're going to add the ISP, school authorities, police and courts into the mix and create a tempest in a teapot.
Brilliant. That's exactly the problem. Well said. Leaving it alone is the best thing for it.
And it's "Down, not Across" (the official motto/catchphrase of alt.sysadmin.recovery).
That was unfortunate hype from the 1.0.2 days. Compare to the x86 instruction set, which is backward compatible, but 486s don't know what to do with the new instructions. Ever notice the i386 bit in many Linux RPMs? Same thing.
Yes, the minor dot releases are typically bug fixes. There were, however, major additions to the language/compiler itself with the 1.5 release. The 1.4.2 release can be thought of as the "last" Java 2 release, which is why I'm suggesting it.
If you're looking for a locked down, certified, guaranteed lowest-common-denominator Linux platform, why not go with Java 1.4.2? Even though (because) it's end-of-lifed, it's not going to change, Sure, it's got language incompatibility issues with 1.5, but it's a well-known item. Test and certify your Java app for LSB on 1.4.2 and you know the platform isn't going to change under you.
A master programmer passed a novice programmer one day. The master noted the novice's preoccupation with a hand-held computer game. ``Excuse me,'' he said, ``may I examine it?''
The novice bolted to attention and handed the device to the master. ``I see that the device claims to have three levels of play: Easy, Medium, and Hard,'' said the master. ``Yet every such device has another level of play, where the device seeks not to conquer the human, nor to be conquered by the human.''
``Pray, great master,'' implored the novice, ``how does one find this mysterious setting?''
The master dropped the device to the ground and crushed it underfoot. And suddenly the novice was enlightened.
Semi-OT I know, but if you haven't seen "Whatever, Martha!", make a point of looking it up. Martha Stewart's daughter and a friend of hers sit and watch old tapes of the Martha Stewart show and make snarky comments - it reminds me exactly of MST3K - think MST3K meets Martha Stewart. It's a scream!
"Who frames labels in a linen closet?"
"Some flamer framed them."
"How does she keep a straight face?"
"She's thinking how much fun it will be to scream at the crew when the segment's over."
If we could use all this technology to make a real direct democracy, we could get rid of this two-party representative democracy. Imagine, government of the people, in real time.
They'll deregulate use of the spectrum, but if you say "blow job" on television, they'll fine you into oblivion. Sounds like they've got their priorities straight.
Yeah. Not to troll here, Xerox PARC came up with lots of neat ideas (the Star and all that, but they never actually SOLD anything to speak of. Real laptops (not luggables or lunchboxes) came in around circa 1987, things like the IBM laptop, and the Toshiba T1000 and that crazy black magnesium thing with the plasma display (what was it called? Grid or something). I used to draw crowds with my T1100+ with the 6 Mhz 8088, monochrome 40x80 LCD display and dual 720k floppies - damn near as powerful as any desktop in its day.
"What's the difference between you and a mallard with a cold?
One's a sick duck and I can't remember how it ends, but your mother's a whore."
HA HA HA HA!
I think the "experience" thing is a straw man - NOBODY's ready to be President of the US until they are. The experience doesn't matter near as much as what the man is made of. As a few examples of "inexperienced" presidents, I'll throw out Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry "the bomb" Truman, John F. Kennedy, and Lyndon Johnson. For "experienced" (at least in the context of this election) we've got Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, the Bushes, and Ronald Reagan - well, 1 out of 6 ain't bad.
As to the "Obama has never run anything" charge, can you name another presidential campaign which has run as smoothly, with less drama, massive staff-churns, leaks, rumors, staffers or surrogates going off-reservation, etc.? This is a well-oiled machine, run with discipline, vision and purpose, and a huge number of ground troops, all on the same page. I think that's pretty impressive.
America's enemies and friends BOTH are rooting for Obama, simply because an unstable America leads to an unstable world. I have no doubt that Obama would incinerate a foreign power, given the provocation, but that's WWII/ColdWar thinking, total war isn't really a viable option. Nations are not the danger today, Iran and North Korea included. If they really did get out of hand, say by firing nuclear missiles at somebody (Israel) we could destroy them utterly, at a whim. What's much harder, and what Obama would be far better than McCain at, is talking to them, in bringing the level of discourse down from a shouting match to a conversation.
I would really really really really like to have an intelligent, thoughtful man, who can see shades of gray, who can weigh alternatives, who is not an ideologue, running the country for a change.
I'm going to vote for Obama because I think that having him in the White House will make the world a better place, a different place, both by his efforts and by his mere presence. On his very best day, all McCain can offer me is the status quo.
Slashdot Mirror
Like outsourcing patent examiners after the fact that the real patent examiners have failed to do their job and issued a patent for something that had prior art.
Whoever modded this "offtopic" needs to turn in their geek card.
Infrared and rangefinder is good, but I want the targeting crosshairs.
Brilliant. That's exactly the problem. Well said.
Leaving it alone is the best thing for it.
And it's "Down, not Across" (the official motto/catchphrase of alt.sysadmin.recovery).
The Moties had used asteroid bombardment in 1974.
3 Taco Bell burritos and a six-pack of Old Milwaukee. Devastation on a cosmological scale.
That was unfortunate hype from the 1.0.2 days. Compare to the x86 instruction set, which is backward compatible, but 486s don't know what to do with the new instructions. Ever notice the i386 bit in many Linux RPMs? Same thing.
Yes, the minor dot releases are typically bug fixes. There were, however, major additions to the language/compiler itself with the 1.5 release. The 1.4.2 release can be thought of as the "last" Java 2 release, which is why I'm suggesting it.
If you're looking for a locked down, certified, guaranteed lowest-common-denominator Linux platform, why not go with Java 1.4.2? Even though (because) it's end-of-lifed, it's not going to change, Sure, it's got language incompatibility issues with 1.5, but it's a well-known item. Test and certify your Java app for LSB on 1.4.2 and you know the platform isn't going to change under you.
I cannot wait to listen to the first "Bangalore, we have a problem" support call...
A master programmer passed a novice programmer one day. The master noted the novice's preoccupation with a hand-held computer game. ``Excuse me,'' he said, ``may I examine it?''
The novice bolted to attention and handed the device to the master. ``I see that the device claims to have three levels of play: Easy, Medium, and Hard,'' said the master. ``Yet every such device has another level of play, where the device seeks not to conquer the human, nor to be conquered by the human.''
``Pray, great master,'' implored the novice, ``how does one find this mysterious setting?''
The master dropped the device to the ground and crushed it underfoot. And suddenly the novice was enlightened.
Semi-OT I know, but if you haven't seen "Whatever, Martha!", make a point of looking it up. Martha Stewart's daughter and a friend of hers sit and watch old tapes of the Martha Stewart show and make snarky comments - it reminds me exactly of MST3K - think MST3K meets Martha Stewart. It's a scream!
"Who frames labels in a linen closet?"
"Some flamer framed them."
"How does she keep a straight face?"
"She's thinking how much fun it will be to scream at the crew when the segment's over."
etc.
That made me LOL, my Best Beloved.
This makes me so mad I just wanna shoot someone in the face.
If we could use all this technology to make a real direct democracy, we could get rid of this two-party representative democracy. Imagine, government of the people, in real time.
No. Borders are the things on s and s.
They'll deregulate use of the spectrum, but if you say "blow job" on television, they'll fine you into oblivion. Sounds like they've got their priorities straight.
Yerite. Tell 'em what happened when you typed "fuck you" in command mode.
That's a good
point. I remem
ber reading
posts from peop
le who had them
on BBSs and Bix
back then.
Yeah. Not to troll here, Xerox PARC came up with lots of neat ideas (the Star and all that, but they never actually SOLD anything to speak of. Real laptops (not luggables or lunchboxes) came in around circa 1987, things like the IBM laptop, and the Toshiba T1000 and that crazy black magnesium thing with the plasma display (what was it called? Grid or something). I used to draw crowds with my T1100+ with the 6 Mhz 8088, monochrome 40x80 LCD display and dual 720k floppies - damn near as powerful as any desktop in its day.
"What's the difference between you and a mallard with a cold?
One's a sick duck and I can't remember how it ends, but your mother's a whore."
HA HA HA HA!
HULK SMASH!!!
I think the "experience" thing is a straw man - NOBODY's ready to be President of the US until they are. The experience doesn't matter near as much as what the man is made of. As a few examples of "inexperienced" presidents, I'll throw out Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry "the bomb" Truman, John F. Kennedy, and Lyndon Johnson. For "experienced" (at least in the context of this election) we've got Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, the Bushes, and Ronald Reagan - well, 1 out of 6 ain't bad.
As to the "Obama has never run anything" charge, can you name another presidential campaign which has run as smoothly, with less drama, massive staff-churns, leaks, rumors, staffers or surrogates going off-reservation, etc.? This is a well-oiled machine, run with discipline, vision and purpose, and a huge number of ground troops, all on the same page. I think that's pretty impressive.
America's enemies and friends BOTH are rooting for Obama, simply because an unstable America leads to an unstable world. I have no doubt that Obama would incinerate a foreign power, given the provocation, but that's WWII/ColdWar thinking, total war isn't really a viable option. Nations are not the danger today, Iran and North Korea included. If they really did get out of hand, say by firing nuclear missiles at somebody (Israel) we could destroy them utterly, at a whim. What's much harder, and what Obama would be far better than McCain at, is talking to them, in bringing the level of discourse down from a shouting match to a conversation.
I would really really really really like to have an intelligent, thoughtful man, who can see shades of gray, who can weigh alternatives, who is not an ideologue, running the country for a change.
I'm going to vote for Obama because I think that having him in the White House will make the world a better place, a different place, both by his efforts and by his mere presence. On his very best day, all McCain can offer me is the status quo.
HTTP and JavaScript on TCP/IP over IPV4 is "not the best it could be"?
Wow, I'm fascinated by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Actually, that's a Jerry Pournelle quote about AT&T, and it was "Hot Dead Chicken".