if you look on the map, Mink, LA is ~15 miles off I-49, which is a major highway between two of the larger Lousiana cities: Shreveport and Baton Rouge.
surely they have cell phone signals there... why bother with a land line? how are they going to recuperate the capital cost?
i must ask, whenever these things are discussed... do we really need to survive so desparately...? mostly for the sake of surviving...?
i, for one, wouldn't want to survive by myself. if everyone i care about is also wiped out, i don't care to be alive by myself for the sake of being alive...
Re:how about "creationism" crap?
on
Bad Science Awards
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
i think people smarter than me can offer reasons why scientific method is one of the most logical and powerful way for us to test the hypotheses and provide explanations as to how our world works.
i cannot see similar convictions for a method that tells me to read a book and take what it says as an explanation on "faith."
Re:how about "creationism" crap?
on
Bad Science Awards
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
the problem i have with creationism is that it offers no scientific explanation. "how did the world begin?" "God made it." doesn't answer any question. it's simply a substitution. if you believe in "God" then the answer makes "sense." but if you don't believe in "God" then it hasn't answer the question...
physicists are looking for the grand unification theory. ok, here it is, i have the answer: f(x) = G. i can't tell what the function f is or the variables x and G are, but that's the formula and it's the grand unification theory, when f, x and G are suitable defined.
do you believe that i just came up with a GUT? don't you agree that all i did was mask the question and didn't really provide any explanation at all?
Re:how about "creationism" crap?
on
Bad Science Awards
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
> Then you better explain that "science" is only a pragmatic, physical explanation of observed results .
...and religion is not a "pragmatic, physical explanation of observed results.". that's why i said a religious theory (which is what creationsim is) doesn't belong in a science class.
i never said creationism is "wrong." it has its place in the learning/education and this world. just not in a science class.
Re:how about "creationism" crap?
on
Bad Science Awards
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
1) define "God" or at least show me a physical example of it.
2) if you cannot do #1, then give me a suitable definition of "evolve" that applies to non-physical objects but has scientific meaning. (the fact idea of "God" changes over time is not science. that's a anthropology/sociology/religion question.)
3) finally, show me how to test God's physical evolution. tell me under what principles it evolves so that the theory offers some predicative power.
how about "creationism" crap?
on
Bad Science Awards
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
what about all the people insisting on teaching creationism in school as an alternative theory to evolution in biology classes?
repeat after me: creationism (or "intelligent design") is not a scientific theory. it has no predicative power, it offers no real explanation, nor can it be tested.
it belongs in philosophy, religion, psychology and/or sociology classes but not in a science class.
what? geico has no TM over the term "auto insurance." geico, however, has TM over "geico" and they were suing competitors who were using "geico" to trigger google ads for their auto insurance.
the required dose will probably overwhelm any benefit. given the state of radiology and imaging technologies available, as well as scopes and other optical devices around, i wouldn't say surgions are working "almost blind."
there is one instance where the "surgery" is performed almost blind: radiation therapy. therapy machines need to be programmed ahead of time (due to the complexity of the treatment plans) and real-time feed back is still in its infancy. transparent circuits don't make much difference, though, because x-ray will go through it all anyway.:) flat panel x-ray detectors have made a huge difference in replacing film...
right now, real hacking iTMS DRM is for no one's benefit but real's. it is not offering "consumers" any more benefits. here is the reason: online music store isn't really an issue right now.
the barrier to entry for consumers into the world of portable digital music is the music player, NOT the online music store. most people don't care how they might save 10 cents per track when they are faced with the decision of dropping $200+ on a digital player. they will decide which player is the best and if they want to buy music for it online, they will not complain that the said player only works with a limited number of online stores. (because all of them have about the same price, same songs, etc.) (proof: in the article, real says they sold 3 million tracks in 3 weeks they had "49 cent" half price sale. iTMS sells that much in a week and a half at 99 cents.)
iPod is the most popular/profittable player out there - and that is an open market. everyone is free to buy whatever the player they want. they will all work with standard electric outlets, most computers and most popular music formats. real is doing nothing but leeching off of iPod's success while giving not much in tangible benefit to the consumers, not to mention apple. if they really wanted to help the cause for the consumers, instead of hacking iPod DRM, they should be talking to music industry executives so that they can offer music without DRM.
1) iPod doesn't need to be full.
2) mp3 or whatever the format used need not be 128 or 192 kbps. in fact, i can see 80 GB being filled quite easily by classical music enthusiasts who may be able to at least consider using AIFF with such a large capacity.
3) if you have 200 to 300 CDs, which isn't all that rare, that's already over $2,000 in investment you've made and will give you over 2,000 songs. it's surprising how much investment over the years we've made in various things. CDs are one of them. video games are another. (Think of how many titles you own... multiple by $20 a pop, add $200 for the console/accessories...)
4) off topic, but considering the U.S. centric nature of/., you may want to reserve "." to designate the decimal point and not the 1,000 separator.:P
what does branding deals have anything to do with monopoly? this is like pepsi/coke/bud having an exclusive deal to be sold at certain schools/arenas/stadiums. or for abc to broadcast monday night football.
AOL has been running their ads for how long now? how long have they been sending out CDs? and how long have they been bleeding their subscribers? advertisers aren't always that quick to pull the trigger, unless they are flat out broke... and spamming costs a lot less than producing CDs or TV spots. even if people stopped buying spam advertised items at this moment, i imagine spamming to continue for quite some time.
>As long as people are willing to pay for herbal Viagra, cheap mortgages, etc. based on spam, so too will spam annoy the rest of us.
not quite. spam will exist as long there are advertisers who believe there are people who are willing to pay for junk stuff based on spam. advertizing - all it takes is the belief that it's doing something, at least until the money runs dry.
if a student can run safari as an alternative, then he/she must be using a Mac. not to defend IE, but isn't IE for Mac less dangerous than IE for Windows? if he/she has already ditched Windows, does he/she need to ditch IE too?
i completely agree. we have an ancient VAX system at work, which requires me to change my password every 4 months and any password previously used is not accepted. and the password must be between 6 to 8 letters long.
at first, i gave it an honest password. however, i ran out of easy to remember passwords, so i resorted back to a string of 6 numbers. i had no choice - there's only a finite number of things i can remember as passwords.
i realize this is an extreme and (hopefully) outdated case. clearly, whoever designed this protocol didn't do real-world testing, but thought naively that requiring change of passwords so often, with no duplicates allowed and must be within a very narrow range of characters, would be improving security.
>...if you don't mind missing potentially important emails.
exactly. if this method is an option for you and you don't want to get pissed off at spam, simply don't check your email for a few days... you'll forget all about spam after a while.
of course, when you check the email after a few days, you'll have greater number of spam to go through and get even more pissed.
now you are supplying reasons why you think the article is horrible. that was my point. if you just post "no vorbis, no flac, lame article," then that just sounds like a vorbis zealot being snobbish, doesn't it?
>There's more than mp3, Microsoft and Apple. This is a horrible article.
..and there's more than just the lack of mention of your favorite format to determine the qualify of the article.
i RTFA and i thought it was pretty good. the greg guy sounds like he has an agenda to push (touting napster/rhapsody subscription model or zen being more intuitive than iPod) but otherwise, it was a fairly entertaining read. lack of one detail about a format is no basis to dismiss the entire article as horrible, which is what you are doing since you supplied no other details in your post.
my point is, the application didn't make the exploitable hole. OS had the exploitable hole to begin with and the application happened to use it. now, shouldn't the OS maker shoulder at least some of the responsibility for the hole itself instead of saying "oh, you shouldn't have exploited our hole, it's your fault for doing that, we are going to close it now, so tough luck to you."?
i'm not asking you to take my side - so don't get defensive, like "WFT? my point still stands." all i ask is that you see my point of view. i hope this make my point a little clearer. i see your point. do you see mine?
Slashdot Mirror
surely they have cell phone signals there... why bother with a land line? how are they going to recuperate the capital cost?
i, for one, wouldn't want to survive by myself. if everyone i care about is also wiped out, i don't care to be alive by myself for the sake of being alive...
i cannot see similar convictions for a method that tells me to read a book and take what it says as an explanation on "faith."
physicists are looking for the grand unification theory. ok, here it is, i have the answer: f(x) = G. i can't tell what the function f is or the variables x and G are, but that's the formula and it's the grand unification theory, when f, x and G are suitable defined.
do you believe that i just came up with a GUT? don't you agree that all i did was mask the question and didn't really provide any explanation at all?
i never said creationism is "wrong." it has its place in the learning/education and this world. just not in a science class.
1) define "God" or at least show me a physical example of it.
2) if you cannot do #1, then give me a suitable definition of "evolve" that applies to non-physical objects but has scientific meaning. (the fact idea of "God" changes over time is not science. that's a anthropology/sociology/religion question.)
3) finally, show me how to test God's physical evolution. tell me under what principles it evolves so that the theory offers some predicative power.
repeat after me: creationism (or "intelligent design") is not a scientific theory. it has no predicative power, it offers no real explanation, nor can it be tested.
it belongs in philosophy, religion, psychology and/or sociology classes but not in a science class.
it's not as stupid as you make it out to be.
there is one instance where the "surgery" is performed almost blind: radiation therapy. therapy machines need to be programmed ahead of time (due to the complexity of the treatment plans) and real-time feed back is still in its infancy. transparent circuits don't make much difference, though, because x-ray will go through it all anyway. :) flat panel x-ray detectors have made a huge difference in replacing film...
the barrier to entry for consumers into the world of portable digital music is the music player, NOT the online music store. most people don't care how they might save 10 cents per track when they are faced with the decision of dropping $200+ on a digital player. they will decide which player is the best and if they want to buy music for it online, they will not complain that the said player only works with a limited number of online stores. (because all of them have about the same price, same songs, etc.) (proof: in the article, real says they sold 3 million tracks in 3 weeks they had "49 cent" half price sale. iTMS sells that much in a week and a half at 99 cents.)
iPod is the most popular/profittable player out there - and that is an open market. everyone is free to buy whatever the player they want. they will all work with standard electric outlets, most computers and most popular music formats. real is doing nothing but leeching off of iPod's success while giving not much in tangible benefit to the consumers, not to mention apple. if they really wanted to help the cause for the consumers, instead of hacking iPod DRM, they should be talking to music industry executives so that they can offer music without DRM.
1) iPod doesn't need to be full. /., you may want to reserve "." to designate the decimal point and not the 1,000 separator. :P
2) mp3 or whatever the format used need not be 128 or 192 kbps. in fact, i can see 80 GB being filled quite easily by classical music enthusiasts who may be able to at least consider using AIFF with such a large capacity.
3) if you have 200 to 300 CDs, which isn't all that rare, that's already over $2,000 in investment you've made and will give you over 2,000 songs. it's surprising how much investment over the years we've made in various things. CDs are one of them. video games are another. (Think of how many titles you own... multiple by $20 a pop, add $200 for the console/accessories...)
4) off topic, but considering the U.S. centric nature of
what does branding deals have anything to do with monopoly? this is like pepsi/coke/bud having an exclusive deal to be sold at certain schools/arenas/stadiums. or for abc to broadcast monday night football.
AOL has been running their ads for how long now? how long have they been sending out CDs? and how long have they been bleeding their subscribers? advertisers aren't always that quick to pull the trigger, unless they are flat out broke... and spamming costs a lot less than producing CDs or TV spots. even if people stopped buying spam advertised items at this moment, i imagine spamming to continue for quite some time.
not quite. spam will exist as long there are advertisers who believe there are people who are willing to pay for junk stuff based on spam. advertizing - all it takes is the belief that it's doing something, at least until the money runs dry.
right in the front page of www.itunes.com, referring to iTunes:
The best digital jukebox, with the #1 music download store inside.
http://www.apple.com/support/ibook/faq/
did you just get laid off by cisco? :P
if a student can run safari as an alternative, then he/she must be using a Mac. not to defend IE, but isn't IE for Mac less dangerous than IE for Windows? if he/she has already ditched Windows, does he/she need to ditch IE too?
at first, i gave it an honest password. however, i ran out of easy to remember passwords, so i resorted back to a string of 6 numbers. i had no choice - there's only a finite number of things i can remember as passwords.
i realize this is an extreme and (hopefully) outdated case. clearly, whoever designed this protocol didn't do real-world testing, but thought naively that requiring change of passwords so often, with no duplicates allowed and must be within a very narrow range of characters, would be improving security.
in 'colour'? really? it didn't work for me... is that only for U.K. and Aussie models? ;)
exactly. if this method is an option for you and you don't want to get pissed off at spam, simply don't check your email for a few days... you'll forget all about spam after a while.
of course, when you check the email after a few days, you'll have greater number of spam to go through and get even more pissed.
i'd like to call it the "serenity now!" method. :P
now you are supplying reasons why you think the article is horrible. that was my point. if you just post "no vorbis, no flac, lame article," then that just sounds like a vorbis zealot being snobbish, doesn't it?
mac os x 10.3.6... running safari 1.2.4 (the latest build.)
i RTFA and i thought it was pretty good. the greg guy sounds like he has an agenda to push (touting napster/rhapsody subscription model or zen being more intuitive than iPod) but otherwise, it was a fairly entertaining read. lack of one detail about a format is no basis to dismiss the entire article as horrible, which is what you are doing since you supplied no other details in your post.
i'm not asking you to take my side - so don't get defensive, like "WFT? my point still stands." all i ask is that you see my point of view. i hope this make my point a little clearer. i see your point. do you see mine?