So it appears he's not going *INTO* space, but he's going to brush the surface (enough to check out the stars), hang out up there for about 15 seconds, then fall back down.
VERY smart, considering the trip back from beyond the atmosphere is *tricky*. You have to have the EXACT angle for re-entry. If your angle is too low, you burn up. If it's too high, you bounce off right back into space. This dude is just taking an elevator up, and using gravity for the return trip.
Although I suspect he'll be screaming too much to enjoy the view, but hey - Gutsy if he goes through with it. More power to him!
Hmmmm, it's just a shot in the dark, but I'm guessing Hemos' wife is PROBABLY the one in the wedding dress.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Re:Slashdot slashdots one of their own....
on
Hemos Gets Hitched
·
· Score: 3
I would suggest that you ignore the first image.
Are you kidding? The First Image displays someones excellent fashion sense! (I honestly thought Marc Summers and I were the only two humans who LOVED the look of Sneakers with a Suit. No, really. I'm serious. REALLY!)
What about Linux? The vast majority of computer users--even professionals--want nothing to do with a command line.
Says WHO? The command line offers more power than any GUI out there. For that reason, it's not something that can be given up. To say that the majority of computer people want nothing to do with the command line is idiotic. Many people PREFER the command line.
Witness the earlier success of Windows NT.
I'm assuming that the author is referring to Windows NT 4. Taking that into consideration, Windows NT 4 was successful because it was NT with a Windows 95 interface - that made migration to the 'new' NT easy, thus successful. However, everyone knows NT is a bloated bug-monster.
Although Windows, Inc. makes Office available for Linux, the lack of a first-class unified graphical interface severely hobbles that platform for the majority of would-be users.
I will agree with the basis of this argument. One thing Windows has going for it is continuity. For example, You can be in one application, highlight some text, and hit CTRL+C. Then you can click over to another application, place your cursor, and hit CTRL+V - and vice versa. Plus, all Windows applications look the same, and on their most basic level they function the same. That's one thing the GUIs on Linux and the like severely lack: A unified, CONSISTENT interface.
However, we *are* fast forwarding to the future, so why not assume that such an interface will be available?
People begin to realize that Linux has little to offer that Unix hasn't offered for years,
Hmmm....How about Source Code? Low Price? Peer Review? I can think of LOTS of things that Linux has to offer.
and with Mac OS X's BSD core and Aqua interface running on cheap hardware, the needs of even die-hard geeks are being met. For those in the Open Source movement, Darwin is all they need.
I don't believe for one second that users of Linux or BSD, or other Unices will flock in droves to switch to MacOS just because it's been ported to Intel hardware. The author is WAY too quick to assume this, and bases the whole article around that argument. There are going to be people who use what WORKS for them....and in those cases, it will be Windows, or it will be OpenBSD, or Linux.
There is no such thing as one OS for every application for every person. And I'm sorry, if there WERE, MacOS wouldn't be it.
Ah, the joys of Marketing with a dash of hypocracy. Napster is a Corporation...nothing more.
Napster deals in Digital files. Digital files cost nothing to duplicate in digital form, which obviously isn't the case with T-Shirts. This produces a hole in Offspring's argument.
However...
Offspring could simply say "You're just paying for a plain black/white T-Shirt/hat/sticker, and you get a Free Napster logo with it!"
Or to extend on that idea, they should make some sort of mechanism on the shirts/hats/stickers that allows the logo to be interchanged with OTHER Napster logos that you can trade free of charge! (Or, you can make your OWN Napster logo, and 'Upload' it to your friend's hat.)
It's a shame though....According to the article, the only way to GET the cola is at trade shows, conferences, and the like. No going down to the Gas Station and picking up a copy--ahem, Can. (Although wouldn't that be SO COOL?!)
Your standard 64MB Chip costs $6.00 from Micron. That price is going up about 10 cents. The consumer purchases a 64MB chip for about $126.00. (Based on Simple 64MB EDO 168-pin DIMM)
Now, $6.00 goes into $126.00 21 times. Take $.10 and multiply it by 21, and you get $2.10.
So in a worst-case scenario (being the company charges you DOUBLE the increase in price) the price of a 64MB DIMM from Simple Technology goes from $126.00 to $130.20. I'd hardly call that skyrocketing. Even if you pay QUADRUPLE the price increase, it's still under $10 more.
See, the typical spammer response to general complaints is "But 94% of internet users WANT to receive junk E-Mail!" Now, this excuse won't work anymore.
User@domain.com receives spam.
User complains to ISP about spam.
User takes approproiate action against spammer.
Spammer cries "But people WANT spam!"
BZZZZT! That's where the excuse dies. If users want spam, there wouldn't be such an outrage against it. Now when this little law goes into effect, and people see the percentages of internet users complaining about spam, Spammers will have to come up with another excuse.
Then in turn, tougher rules will be enacted. This seems like a Good Thing to me. Here's hoping Internet Spam goes the way of Fax Spam.
Number Nine USED To have good OEM relations, until they refused DirectX. That is what crippled them. It's not the fact that they didn't have OEM sales to begin with, because they did.
But failure to design its products in compliance with the then-emerging DirectX software interface from Microsoft Corp. crippled the company's OEM sales.
So yes....You didn't see many OEM cards. That's why.
Isn't it amazing that by not complying with a Microsoft specification, you can go under?
But failure to design its products in compliance with the then-emerging DirectX software interface from Microsoft Corp. crippled the company's OEM sales.
Number Nine had some serious breakthroughs in it's day, three of which were mentioned above. However, simply the lack of early DirectX support doomed the company? Sheesh.
Number Nine is one of the first companies to offer its users drivers certified by Microsoft's Windows Hardware Quality Labs (WHQL). (From Number Nine's site.)
Seems like a case of Too Little, Too late. Number Nine didn't support DirectX early on, and their sales to OEMs started to slip. Later on, they scrambled to gain sales back and in (what seems to be) desperation, they slapped on a WHQL certification.
It's a shame to see a pioneer fail....especially due to something so small.
WARNING: You must be 18 years of age or older to read this comment. If you are not at least 18 years old, you must leave now. Sorry, I'm pretty sure Playboy does NOT qualify as XXX material. Playboy is not just nude women posing in soft glossy pictures...it actually contains (+1 insightful) articles, (+1 interesting) interviews, etc. Plus, the pictorials themselves are generally very tasteful. XXX is usually crap. Do a search for XXX, and I guarantee you won't get anything remotely resembling Playboy. (I take no responsibility for the content you might stumble over by doing this search. Ugh.)
There's one last point about Kerberos that's worth addressing: why did Microsoft bother with it? In previous versions of Windows NT, network authentication was handled by NTLM. Why make a change? How is Kerberos better than NTLM?
There are several answers. First, as you've already seen, Kerberos provides several features that aren't available in NTLM. Delegation and mutual authentication are both available with Kerberos, but neither is possible with NTLM today. Also, Kerberos is typically faster than NTLM, since each NTLM client authentication requires a server to contact a domain controller. In Kerberos, by contrast, a client can supply the same ticket over and over, and the server can use just that ticket to authenticate the user. There's no need for the server to contact a domain controller each time a user needs to be authenticated. And finally, Kerberos is a multivendor standard, so it allows secure interoperability and the potential for single sign-on between the Microsoft world and other vendor environments.
Any way you look it, Kerberos qualifies as progress. It's nice to see this powerful, secure, but long-neglected protocol move into the limelight. After years of languishing in relative obscurity, Kerberos is about to go mainstream.
Kerberos is a multivendor standard, so it allows secure interoperability and the potential for single sign-on between the Microsoft world and other vendor environments.
Actually, from what I've seen, The Microsoft 'version' of Kerberos doesn't allow interoperability "between" Microsoft and other vendors....it only allows operability from Microsoft OUT to other vendors, and not IN. (This was plugged into their crappy 'enhancements' to Kerberos.)
After years of languishing in relative obscurity, Kerberos is about to go mainstream.
What? There are two points to be made here. 1.) Kerberos was never really in obscurity. It was a widely used protocol, and was CREATED for the purpose of authentication. NTLM was a piece of crap, and Microsoft admits that now. 2.) Because Kerberos is being woven into Windows, THAT makes it mainstream? Oh please, give me a break. What's funny, is that Microsoft states that "Any way you look at it, Kerberos qualifies as progress.", yet their implementation (If you can call it that) takes a step backward by locking out functionality. Progress? Nah...
What I find funny, is the word 'hack' actually had/has another meaning, even before the computer term arose to it's current status.
MIT is famous for it's constant barrage of practical jokes around campus. These usually range from putting a police car on the top of one of the buildings to Smiley Faces placed at strategic points. These jokes are referred to as 'hacks', and to my knowledge, always have been.
There's some pretty creative stuff in there, and most of the hacks follow a strict "Code of Ethics" guideline, and usually anything that violates the code wouldn't be considered a hack. (A tip of the hat to the CORRECT usage of the word.)
The page gets it right when it says: "Note that this has nothing to do with computer (or phone) hacking (which we call "cracking")."
they could change the name from Atlantis to Enterprise.
Why would NASA want a shuttle named 'Enterprise' when they already *have* one?
NASA's first Shuttle was the Enterprise (OV-101). It was an experimental orbiter, and was used in various atmospheric flight tests in the 1970's. Unfortunately, it was retired before it ever flew in space but it did provide valuable information during it's lifetime. (The first shuttle that made it into space was Columbia, in 1981. Enterprise last flew on October 26, 1977.)
You can find a really nice picture of the Enterprise here.
Well, I use my Everex Freestyle to help with my job (it keeps those movie times in check), the Cassiopeia and Mobilon are my development machines. (SH3 and MIPS)
Mostly, I like checking out each different platform.
99% of people come from one of these seven women? Man, they must have been huge sluts!:)
Not really. 150,000 years ago we could assume the lifespan for a woman was about 40-45 years on average. Let's assume one generation is 40 years. Now we know these seven women had kids. For this example, let's assume each woman had 2 kids in their lifetime - one male, one female.
So, from seven women we now have 14 children - 7 boys and 7 girls. Now, let's assume that only half of the 14 of the kids ever had kids of their own. Continue this pattern through 3750 generations (40 year lifespan into 150,000 years) and you come to a really big number. (Get this number by doing 3750^7. You come to something like 1.04284286499e+25.)
For the life of me, I can't contemplate any legal use for Napster. The only thing I can think of would be to download songs you already own on CD, but that's just too impractical to be useful. There are plenty of rippers out there that make it really easy to rip your songs into mp3 - and it's a hell of a lot faster than downloading it over a 56k Modem.
From the Napster Website: Imagine...an application that takes the hassle out of searching for MP3s. No more broken links, no more slow downloads, and no more busy, disorganized FTP sites. With Napster, you can locate and download your favorite music in MP3 format from one convenient, easy-to-use interface.
Come On! Websites that carry mp3s are guaranteed to have porn and warez banners tagging along. FTP sites are NOT how the recording artists envisioned their music being distributed. It seems to me that Napster is saying "Hey! Instead of getting frustrated with all of those *unreliable* illegal sources, we have your #1 RELIABLE illegal source!"
Sorry folks, but not all copyrights are bad. Everyone is saying something to the effect of "Hey, these guys are making TONS of money!" "I'd buy CDs if they weren't so overpriced!"
The first quote implies that because the artist made a lot of money, that gives the person the right to steal copyrighted material. Please...That's self interest bullshit.
The second quote is amazingly stupid. People buy CDs because they enjoy the music on them. They are purchasing the CD and in turn, showing support for the artist who recorded it. $15 is not a lot to spend on music you can freely listen to whenever you want, and wherever you want. (And for those of you who buy full albums for ONE song then turn around and complain.....STOP COMPLAINING. Head over to the CD Singles rack, and buy the song you like for $2.99. If that's too much to spend, listen to the radio.)
Slashdot Mirror
VERY smart, considering the trip back from beyond the atmosphere is *tricky*. You have to have the EXACT angle for re-entry. If your angle is too low, you burn up. If it's too high, you bounce off right back into space. This dude is just taking an elevator up, and using gravity for the return trip.
Although I suspect he'll be screaming too much to enjoy the view, but hey - Gutsy if he goes through with it. More power to him!
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Doesn't ANYONE know how weddings work? That's her father. He's giving away the bride.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Hmmmm, it's just a shot in the dark, but I'm guessing Hemos' wife is PROBABLY the one in the wedding dress.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Are you kidding? The First Image displays someones excellent fashion sense! (I honestly thought Marc Summers and I were the only two humans who LOVED the look of Sneakers with a Suit. No, really. I'm serious. REALLY!)
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Oops!
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
:)
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Says WHO? The command line offers more power than any GUI out there. For that reason, it's not something that can be given up. To say that the majority of computer people want nothing to do with the command line is idiotic. Many people PREFER the command line.
Witness the earlier success of Windows NT.
I'm assuming that the author is referring to Windows NT 4. Taking that into consideration, Windows NT 4 was successful because it was NT with a Windows 95 interface - that made migration to the 'new' NT easy, thus successful. However, everyone knows NT is a bloated bug-monster.
Although Windows, Inc. makes Office available for Linux, the lack of a first-class unified graphical interface severely hobbles that platform for the majority of would-be users.
I will agree with the basis of this argument. One thing Windows has going for it is continuity. For example, You can be in one application, highlight some text, and hit CTRL+C. Then you can click over to another application, place your cursor, and hit CTRL+V - and vice versa. Plus, all Windows applications look the same, and on their most basic level they function the same. That's one thing the GUIs on Linux and the like severely lack: A unified, CONSISTENT interface.
However, we *are* fast forwarding to the future, so why not assume that such an interface will be available?
People begin to realize that Linux has little to offer that Unix hasn't offered for years,
Hmmm....How about Source Code? Low Price? Peer Review? I can think of LOTS of things that Linux has to offer.
and with Mac OS X's BSD core and Aqua interface running on cheap hardware, the needs of even die-hard geeks are being met. For those in the Open Source movement, Darwin is all they need.
I don't believe for one second that users of Linux or BSD, or other Unices will flock in droves to switch to MacOS just because it's been ported to Intel hardware. The author is WAY too quick to assume this, and bases the whole article around that argument. There are going to be people who use what WORKS for them....and in those cases, it will be Windows, or it will be OpenBSD, or Linux.
There is no such thing as one OS for every application for every person. And I'm sorry, if there WERE, MacOS wouldn't be it.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
:)
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Napster deals in Digital files. Digital files cost nothing to duplicate in digital form, which obviously isn't the case with T-Shirts. This produces a hole in Offspring's argument.
However...
Offspring could simply say "You're just paying for a plain black/white T-Shirt/hat/sticker, and you get a Free Napster logo with it!"
Or to extend on that idea, they should make some sort of mechanism on the shirts/hats/stickers that allows the logo to be interchanged with OTHER Napster logos that you can trade free of charge! (Or, you can make your OWN Napster logo, and 'Upload' it to your friend's hat.)
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
openCola(TM) is a Cola style softdrink that will be produced and distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
That just sounds so messed up, it just might work!
The FAQ is here: http://steelbridge.com/softdrink.html
It's a shame though....According to the article, the only way to GET the cola is at trade shows, conferences, and the like. No going down to the Gas Station and picking up a copy--ahem, Can. (Although wouldn't that be SO COOL?!)
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Head over to http://auctions.msn.com.
Enter 'Windows 98' in the search field.
Browse the results.
Here are a few of the ones I found:
Microsoft Windows 98 Upgrade 2nd Edition Retail Box - $89.99
Windows 98 Second Edition + Boot Disk - $15.00
New Sealed Windows 98 Cd (Unregistered) - $32.00
Those are on the first search page. Now All I searched for was 'Windows 98', who knows how many Windows 95, 3.1, or NTs are hidden in there.
So we're not allowed to buy Microsoft software via auction websites.......unless it's MICROSOFT'S auction website? Fuck you, Microsoft.
Chalk up more evidence for the DoJ.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Your standard 64MB Chip costs $6.00 from Micron. That price is going up about 10 cents. The consumer purchases a 64MB chip for about $126.00. (Based on Simple 64MB EDO 168-pin DIMM)
Now, $6.00 goes into $126.00 21 times. Take $.10 and multiply it by 21, and you get $2.10.
So in a worst-case scenario (being the company charges you DOUBLE the increase in price) the price of a 64MB DIMM from Simple Technology goes from $126.00 to $130.20. I'd hardly call that skyrocketing. Even if you pay QUADRUPLE the price increase, it's still under $10 more.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
User@domain.com receives spam.
User complains to ISP about spam.
User takes approproiate action against spammer.
Spammer cries "But people WANT spam!"
BZZZZT! That's where the excuse dies. If users want spam, there wouldn't be such an outrage against it. Now when this little law goes into effect, and people see the percentages of internet users complaining about spam, Spammers will have to come up with another excuse.
Then in turn, tougher rules will be enacted. This seems like a Good Thing to me. Here's hoping Internet Spam goes the way of Fax Spam.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Number Nine has good OEM Sales.
Microsoft releases DirectX.
Number Nine declines DirectX support.
OEM sales subsequently fall.
:(
Number Nine USED To have good OEM relations, until they refused DirectX. That is what crippled them. It's not the fact that they didn't have OEM sales to begin with, because they did.
It's all moot anyway...They're dead now.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
But failure to design its products in compliance with the then-emerging DirectX software interface from Microsoft Corp. crippled the company's OEM sales.
So yes....You didn't see many OEM cards. That's why.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
But failure to design its products in compliance with the then-emerging DirectX software interface from Microsoft Corp. crippled the company's OEM sales.
Number Nine had some serious breakthroughs in it's day, three of which were mentioned above. However, simply the lack of early DirectX support doomed the company? Sheesh.
Number Nine is one of the first companies to offer its users drivers certified by Microsoft's Windows Hardware Quality Labs (WHQL). (From Number Nine's site.)
Seems like a case of Too Little, Too late. Number Nine didn't support DirectX early on, and their sales to OEMs started to slip. Later on, they scrambled to gain sales back and in (what seems to be) desperation, they slapped on a WHQL certification.
It's a shame to see a pioneer fail....especially due to something so small.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
There are several answers. First, as you've already seen, Kerberos provides several features that aren't available in NTLM. Delegation and mutual authentication are both available with Kerberos, but neither is possible with NTLM today. Also, Kerberos is typically faster than NTLM, since each NTLM client authentication requires a server to contact a domain controller. In Kerberos, by contrast, a client can supply the same ticket over and over, and the server can use just that ticket to authenticate the user. There's no need for the server to contact a domain controller each time a user needs to be authenticated. And finally, Kerberos is a multivendor standard, so it allows secure interoperability and the potential for single sign-on between the Microsoft world and other vendor environments.
Any way you look it, Kerberos qualifies as progress. It's nice to see this powerful, secure, but long-neglected protocol move into the limelight. After years of languishing in relative obscurity, Kerberos is about to go mainstream.
This is from the above referenced URL at http://www.microsoft.com/msj/defaulttop.asp?page=
Kerberos is a multivendor standard, so it allows secure interoperability and the potential for single sign-on between the Microsoft world and other vendor environments.
Actually, from what I've seen, The Microsoft 'version' of Kerberos doesn't allow interoperability "between" Microsoft and other vendors....it only allows operability from Microsoft OUT to other vendors, and not IN. (This was plugged into their crappy 'enhancements' to Kerberos.)
After years of languishing in relative obscurity, Kerberos is about to go mainstream.
What? There are two points to be made here. 1.) Kerberos was never really in obscurity. It was a widely used protocol, and was CREATED for the purpose of authentication. NTLM was a piece of crap, and Microsoft admits that now. 2.) Because Kerberos is being woven into Windows, THAT makes it mainstream? Oh please, give me a break. What's funny, is that Microsoft states that "Any way you look at it, Kerberos qualifies as progress.", yet their implementation (If you can call it that) takes a step backward by locking out functionality. Progress? Nah...
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
MIT is famous for it's constant barrage of practical jokes around campus. These usually range from putting a police car on the top of one of the buildings to Smiley Faces placed at strategic points. These jokes are referred to as 'hacks', and to my knowledge, always have been.
The MIT Hack Gallery is here:
http://hacks.mit.edu/Gallery.html
There's some pretty creative stuff in there, and most of the hacks follow a strict "Code of Ethics" guideline, and usually anything that violates the code wouldn't be considered a hack. (A tip of the hat to the CORRECT usage of the word.)
The page gets it right when it says:
"Note that this has nothing to do with computer (or phone) hacking (which we call "cracking")."
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Why would NASA want a shuttle named 'Enterprise' when they already *have* one?
NASA's first Shuttle was the Enterprise (OV-101). It was an experimental orbiter, and was used in various atmospheric flight tests in the 1970's. Unfortunately, it was retired before it ever flew in space but it did provide valuable information during it's lifetime. (The first shuttle that made it into space was Columbia, in 1981. Enterprise last flew on October 26, 1977.)
You can find a really nice picture of the Enterprise here.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Mostly, I like checking out each different platform.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Fact is, I still suck at math. Oh well.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Not really. 150,000 years ago we could assume the lifespan for a woman was about 40-45 years on average. Let's assume one generation is 40 years. Now we know these seven women had kids. For this example, let's assume each woman had 2 kids in their lifetime - one male, one female.
So, from seven women we now have 14 children - 7 boys and 7 girls. Now, let's assume that only half of the 14 of the kids ever had kids of their own. Continue this pattern through 3750 generations (40 year lifespan into 150,000 years) and you come to a really big number. (Get this number by doing 3750^7. You come to something like 1.04284286499e+25.)
That's a lot of people.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
From the Napster Website:
Imagine...an application that takes the hassle out of searching for MP3s. No more broken links, no more slow downloads, and no more busy, disorganized FTP sites. With Napster, you can locate and download your favorite music in MP3 format from one convenient, easy-to-use interface.
Come On! Websites that carry mp3s are guaranteed to have porn and warez banners tagging along. FTP sites are NOT how the recording artists envisioned their music being distributed. It seems to me that Napster is saying "Hey! Instead of getting frustrated with all of those *unreliable* illegal sources, we have your #1 RELIABLE illegal source!"
Sorry folks, but not all copyrights are bad. Everyone is saying something to the effect of "Hey, these guys are making TONS of money!" "I'd buy CDs if they weren't so overpriced!"
The first quote implies that because the artist made a lot of money, that gives the person the right to steal copyrighted material. Please...That's self interest bullshit.
The second quote is amazingly stupid. People buy CDs because they enjoy the music on them. They are purchasing the CD and in turn, showing support for the artist who recorded it. $15 is not a lot to spend on music you can freely listen to whenever you want, and wherever you want. (And for those of you who buy full albums for ONE song then turn around and complain.....STOP COMPLAINING. Head over to the CD Singles rack, and buy the song you like for $2.99. If that's too much to spend, listen to the radio.)
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?