War was beginning. Japan: What happen? Mechanic: Somebody set up us the iPod. Operator: We get signal. Japan: What ! Operator: Main screen turn on. Japan: It's You !! Apple: How are you gentlemen !! Apple: All your mp3 player are belong to us. Apple: You are on the way to destruction. Japan: What you say !! Apple: You have no chance to survive make your time. Apple: HA HA HA HA.... Japan: Take off every 'wma' !! Japan: You know what you doing. Japan: Move 'wma'. Japan: For great justice.
Newsflash! The majority of americans don't have hdtvs and quite frankly do not want to pony up $1000+ for a decent one that will commit suicide after 5 years of use! They'd rather stick with their 20 year old RELIABLE tv of ntsc goodness.
So what if the media is HD quality? The likelyhood that the majority of us with older boxes will see no difference, or WORSE quality, than the current generation of dvds. Sure the government (sponsored by the entertainment industries) are going to force us to buy a downsampler/new tv in the next few years but again, not many of us care about this. We just watch tv with whatever device does it best for the longest time.
Not to mention how much utterly useless crap they are going to shove onto a movie. Back in the day, we bought a movie to watch a movie; not see all the useless scenes they decided were not important enough to view. It was all just the feature presentation. Of course this didn't even last long in the VHS era (stupid previews), this whole nonsensical extra bloat on a disc is not needed or wanted most of the time. I say: Keep dvds around and also have the blue rays. DVDs with *JUST THE MOVIE*, and then the blue rays with all the extra crap people can waste more of their money on if they want it.
The only complaint I have about the equation editor in open office is its complete lack of caring about document formatting, but other than that it appears to be vastly superior to microsoft's implementation, at least to my usage of it.
Other than that, it's a lot easier to understand and quicker for me to use than Words. f(x)=x_i{x_y} + 23e^{left [ {{6x+y^i} over sqrt{f(x_{i-1})}} right ]}
Granted that looks rather ugly to someone new to using it, it is a lot easier than having to keep highlighting shit in office and hitting somewhat random buttons. I had a paper that had some rather nasty calculus equations on it, this made things a lot easier, with exception to remembering what bracket groups each thing belonged to.
You don't need a support contract to have the bugs fixed. If there is a bug in the operating system, you have every right to get the problem fixed, as long as the product is still being marketed. While they may not directly talk to you, if you submit a bug report to them, they will likely review it and issue a patch soon if it is a critical bug, or include it within a service pack or the next release of windows. If there is a work around, your problem will likely find its way onto the KB articles.
One doesn't need to go the paid route if you have an honest-to-goodness bug of the operating system (not driver related or software related, w/e to conflicts within microsofts own products/drivers).
I agree that we don't need 23 window managers, but the problem arises that not everyone has a system capable of handling window managers such as KDE or sometimes even gnome. I know- a lot of my friends are quite frankly poor white trash and still have computers from the '97 era. These folks can hardly run windows, so they use fluxbox on their machines to get what little performance they can out of their machines.
I can't use windows because I tweak things too much so I use linux primarily. Sure I use one the 2nd most common window manager, gnome, but there are people who cannot stand the look and feel of gnome, which is almost sickeningly a clone of OS X feel. Don't get me wrong, I like OS X, but there is many aspects where things are too simplistic and make it very difficult to configure (I spend most of my time editing text conf files as well as manually editing things in gconf since they are sacrificing configurability for simplicity. Hell my current look for linux much resembles a mix of OS X and Windows. I cannot reliably force OS X or Windows to have this look and feel without having to use 3rd party tools which often interfere with functionality because they are operating on what I essentially call a hack (hooks in windows, not sure what OS X skinners use).
Point made: Everyone wants their desktop the way THEY want it. This is not possible with just one window manager. Do we need only one window manager? Hell no! The way things would work out, I'd be forced to use KDE and get asked half a million confirmation messages and suffer graphical glytches that are NEVER apparent in gnome, or I would be stuck in the over-minimalistic *box derivatives. What we need is more standards that are span between multiple window managers so they can perform the same tasks but tweaked to whatever dream the window manager intended.
Sure libraries are a pain in the ass in linux, but do not, DO NOT, believe that windows or any other operating system is free of this dependancy hell. You don't see this issue in OS X because they hide the fact that it is installing needed libraries to run applications. You don't see this in windows because it often keeps copies of the libraries either in windows system directories or within the applications run space. Is this possible in linux? Hell yes. Why don't we do it? Oh I know, duplicate libraries wastes space if you ship them with binaries. Course developers could send a binary that *could* work on all systems, but think of all the screaming you'll hear from the gentoo community and the likes? This implies everyone has the same version libaries on every linux system in existance. Hah. Yeah that will never happen. Then there are also having the sources available on the site that needs to use the dependancy. That too could work, except, instead of downloading something big like WINE, now you have to include all the related dependancy sources as well at your site. I don't know about you but that will severely inhibit the process of improving software if all the pages hosting a particular library has their own (most likely outdated) version of the dependancy sources. And because all these library version forks that would occur because of that, just think of the dependancy hell that would happen then.
We could avoid this issue altogether if we had a common method of obtaining sources. If all the packages on say FreshMeat and SourceForge all distributed their code in the same method (and keep the old HTTP way of obtaining source), and have application installers resolve dependancies on-the-fly and compile/install them as needed, this problem will be gone.
I personally think the./configure and make installers are a bit out of date. Sure they help build applications fine, but they do not address how to obtain missing libraries, or even dumb it down for the lesser technocrats. That and I don't really care that I am missing XXXXXX library with absolutely no hint on where to obtain them. Right now I use Ubuntu, mainly out of the convience provided by the
Expressing the problems to the public will actually get them fixed. Why do you think bugs get fixed in Windows? Trust me- it's not Microsoft's good will. It's the customers bitching at them to fix the problems. Likewise happens with open source, except if you have the expertise to do it, fix it yourself and commit the patch. If the maintainers like it, everyone else who has hit your problems will feel the joy of someone fixing a common annoyance. If you can't fix it yourself, submit the idea to the forums or mailing list that is associated with the problem. Someone might fix it for you.
However, if you are just going to sit there and bitch to yourself about the problem but do nothing about it, that includes not even informing people that there is in fact a problem, you have no right to complain. You didn't try.
Proprietary (but for Linux): I bitched for months to ATI repeatedly to get them to get suspend/resume to at least work a little and to make the video card stop sapping the power of my laptop like a vampire. ATI 8.10.16: Initial suspend and resume support and power management. Huzzah!
Generally on larger files it becomes increasingly difficult to have the same file size AND md5 hash. On most repositories, md5 being cracked will have little effect since it doesn't actually matter much about whether or not the file is exactly what it says it is if you are getting it from a secure repository. IANAC, but I figure it would be a lot more difficult to generate hashes at a quick rate and match the correct filesize.
File verification is more or less just a way to determine whether or not the file became corrupted from between the server and your computer, so again no worries. If the file was already poisoned on the server, I can almost guarentee that the md5 will reflect the md5 of the poisoned file, and not a specially crafted poisoned file.
There is an extension to firefox that allows embedded ActiveX. However, this will likely NEVER be part of the default install because security and ActiveX usually aren't the best of pals.
Don't know if they have the Firefox ActiveX builds for 1.5 builds yet.
Gotta love those useful ActiveX components like the Genuine Windows Authentication and Windows Update.
Are you slow? Instead of focusing on the fact that I said the internet often referred as the world wide web, how about you read the rest of my post before making a comment? Oh wait this is/.
Yes I know that the internet is a collection of LANs, WANs, etc, of computers that have a remote uplink to each other via (generally) a common communication protocol. I made that very clear so why the explaination? You're no expert. Stop trying to make yourself sound like one.
World Wide Web was coined to describe the appearance of the interconnectivity of the internet well before the HTTP/HTML equivilant term became prevailant. I do not use today's term "world wide web" to refer to the overabundance of HTTP servers. Why? Because it is a subset of what the internet is, and does not actually describe WHAT the internet is. World Wide Web (or Web if you restrict it to local country only) describes how the links of computers (NOT HTML LINKS SINCE YOU WILL OBVIOUSLY GET CONFUSED, IM TALKING ACTUAL PIPELINE CONNECTIONS), if graphed would closely resembles something of a spider web.
While you may differentiate different levels of the internet based on the network stack, your reasoning that my definition was wrong because I SPECIFICIALLY said "uses the *web*". Guess what? They are USING the web, the underlying network infrastructure to communicate with each other, not implementing it. They are *STILL* application level. So I was not misusing the definition. The World Wide Web is not an application, therefore is NOT an application level definition.
Oh by the way, you can encode references or encapsulate most protocols in almost any other protocol (stateless encapsulating connection based protocols are hard, but are doable). It is not much of a highlight of HTTP.
Thus ends today's episode of "Debunking The Supposed Expert". I really tried to keep this non-inflammatory, but some folks just have to be asses.
The Internet, often refered to the World Wide Web, is a description on how all the remote computers in the world (that is, not remotely isolated) are connected to each other. While "World Wide Web" recently (well, say after 1995) has become a term synonomous with HTTP services due to the popularization of the Netscape browser (and furthermore by the browser we often love to hate). I am not certain how www.* came into existance for addressing computer names, but it was probably just a cool idea, and somehow it stuck (the fad that would never die).
P2P *uses* the web, just like every other protocol that is on the internet. The funnier thing is that a lot of p2p software actually mimics the HTTP protocol (mainly during handshaking) which makes applications such as Ethereal have a somewhat difficult time differentiating between the two.
So no, I wasn't misusing terms, I was just a different subset than you.
There is no such thing as "preventive suing". You must allow the act to be committed before it can be taken to court. What happened was not that they lawyers were late, it was the RIAA/MPAA/others that were slow to realize that their business model was going to be compromised by p2p; something isn't a threat until its big and in your face. Of course, they were and still are blind to why they've been experiencing a weakened bottom line.
Else there'd be a lot of people being sued for piracy at your 18th birthday since "Well, we figure you'll pirate SOMETIME in the future if you haven't already."
subnote: The RIAA does not take into account that consumer spending was shifted after the stock market's y2k-bubble burst. Therefore their entire belief that 'p2p is the devil and is causing us to lose money' is moot because they were going to lose anyways- people could not afford to spend as much money (if at all) as they used to on CDs/other merchandise. Therefore they would have experienced a relatively same fall in their overall bottom line, which then they would have found something else to convieniently blame it on. I know many people who lost at least 30% of their yearly income because of the y2k-burst and no longer could afford to buy cds or any other useless crap.
Stealing trade secrets isn't a criminal offense. Stealing your countries secrets and giving it to another is a criminal offense.
Trade secrets are just what they imply: secrets. Nothing legally binding unless you are under a non-disclosure agreement. That's why they won't let the average joe worker know all the parts of a product like Coca-Cola.
Patents/Trademarks/Copyrights, those are all things that can be punishable by law since they are government sponsored monopolies over whatever the hell they are trying to protect while they are in effect.
Scientific theory begins with an observation, and then creates a hypothesis to explain the observation. Darwin's Evolution theory tries to explain that we humans evolved from creatures that had traits similiar to ours that were passed down from offspring. To help explain this Natural Selection was introduced to show that some bad traits will occur and because of that, they will have a lesser chance of survival in the wild. The opposite is considered true as well, the better the traits the better chance of survival. You know you've heard this many times, but since you have taken the non-falsifiable path, it must be mentioned.
Newton also observed something too, and after many years of testing, the scientific theory of Gravity has been generally accepted as a law. Granted law and theory mean relatively the same thing in the science realm, it was and still is a theory. Can the law of gravity be falsified? Sure, just find a test that makes the tests invalid! (By the way, it is really damn hard to make a test that proves gravity is false.)
Same thing applies with evolution. We have collected evidence for a very long time, and, although incomplete, the evidence we have collected so far says that the observation recorded and explained by Darwin is correct. However, that does not mean that Evolution is guarenteed to be the explaination for the rest of eternity, it just means that: We have data, we're following his procedures, and according to his tests, his hypothesis is true. We're following scientific theory to the tick, so what if we haven't found a way to falsify it? Be a scientist and actually TRY to falsify it, rather than just claiming it is false.
Now the problem with ID is, it basically says "God did this, and this is why it is so", yet it provides absolutely no way of testing, nor anyway of falsifying it. According to almost every religion, god is always right, so if you say "god made it so", how can you falsify it? Also how can you test it? Where's the observation of when god decided it was going to be that way? Why did god do it that way? What was god thinking when the decision was made? For what purpose does this creation exist for? There are too many questions that cannot be answered, and absolutely no way of following scientific theory. Therefore: ID can't be considered scientific and cannot be taught in a science class.
No I am not religious, but I do believe in at least one god because there is no conclusive explaination to why the universe exists and why I am here.
If Microsoft backs out of South Korea, it does not mean that current internet cafes will have to remove windows from their machines, rather, new internet cafes will just pirate windows like the rest of the world does.
If the corporation has no presence in a country, pirating of that corporations goods has very little consequence.
No, I do not use windows, although I can buy a license for both 32bit and 64bit for $4.
1. First off the average body temperature for a person is 98.6 degrees. There will always be variance due to the fact that not everyone is the same. However the protein structures within the human body generally operate at peak performance at 98.6 degrees. Variance is allowed however.
2. Fevers are a defense the body uses to essentially cook the bacteria out of you since bacteria often works well at the same body temperature, the increased body temperature gives the immune system a slight advantage over the bacteria, enough to control the infection (usually) however fevers are WELL known to kill people because the internal body temperature has risen well beyond what the body is capable of handling.
3. Marathon runners and clubbers body temperatures, although risen, are not far from the average body temperature. Running will make you feel hotter because the surface temperature of your skin is closer resembling that of what your organs are normally accustomed to due to the increased blood flow under the skin.
4. How hot does it take to kill an average person? Usually near ~104 degrees body temperature. How cold does it take to kill an average Person? Usually near ~90 degrees body temperature. Your statement holds no value because: 1. Water conducts heat readily and stores kinetic energy at a relatively high level per mol. Rain will reduce your body temperature at a faster rate than air alone can. 2. You are disregarding the fact that human bodies produce heat.
5. Sure overheating is bad, but so is underheating it. The temperature outside does not matter, if it was 120F outside and it did not raise your body temperature, it will likely not malaffect you. However, prolonged exposer to the shifting temperature can cause your internal temperature to change which is the main problem.
6. It is well known that people's will to live, stress, overall health, nuitrition, and other factors affect how well the immune system functions. Just because some random editorial says "this is it" does NOT mean it is the complete truth, if it is at all truthful.
7. Your editorial specifies that Antarctic people do not get colds often except when germ-laden people visit: Duh. That environment is not the ideal environment for bacteria that affects humans. Bacteria there have adapted to cold temperatures, so when they come in contact with humans, it would be essentially the same as us living inside a room that was constantly on fire.
Cold tubs if it is not affecting your average body temperature, it will NOT have much affect to the immune system, if any at all.
Viruses can attack you at any time since they generally perform fine in relatively extreme temperatures (depending on the virus strain). The flu is irrelavent.
This editorial is speaking in hypotheticals, sign he/she is not a valid source. So you will say "well you are too". I'm basing my stuff on logical fact: The immune system is built on proteins that operate most efficently at normal body temperature (generally 98.6F). Shifting from their will decrease the effectiveness of any/all proteins within the immune system cells causing it to perform less effectively, therefore causing a potential weakening in the immune system. This increases the risk of infection/sickness if the other bacteria/virus is not afflicted by the temperature change. This is basic biology here.
Not on hand at the moment, I can probably look this up later when I have some time. However I do remember this topic being covered repeatedly throughout any classes that involve pathophysiology.
But with that test, I'm going to apply some (somewhat sane) ideas to it. In an ideal bacterial world I suppose your first argument would be true, however, bacteria is also malaffected by cold weather. That and also the people living within those regions have been exposed to those common breeds of bacteria so they have developed some resistance to them. Warmer regions have generally better living conditions for bacteria (as well as us), but again, we often have some resistance to bacteria that is common around us.
To minimize variables, they likely tested these people from different climates within their own climate (else they are exposing them to foreign bacteria which would toss out the validity of the test), and because they did not expose them to a particularly powerful bacteria, they didn't get sick. That doesn't mean that they were not being infected, it was just that their immune system was capable of defending themselves, even within the weakened state. However, the third group who was exposed to the foreign bacteria caused infection because the bacteria was indeed foreign and the immune system wasn't as apt to stop the infection for what could be completely different reasons.
The problem with any tests that occur about this is: 1. Immune reactions to foreign bacteria is not static between all test patients. 2. The amount that temperature shifts affects a person's immune system is patient dependant. 3. Not everyone has the same immunity/resistances. I'm not saying it is invalid, it just makes it difficult to prove.
Just like they say about Vitamin C when you're sick or how coffee causes cancer, take it with a grain of salt. Everyone's bodies are different, not everything they say will apply to you.
Disable Messenger and then: start -> run: msmsgs (or whatever the executables name is)
Whats this? I thought I disabled it! Nice 'uninstallation'. Only true ways to make it not work is use Group Policy or delete the files directly by hand, and that should NEVER have to be done when you say "remove software X".
... So you are trying to say that we the people should not elect the president at all and it should be completely done by the judicial and legislative branches? Last time I knew that wasn't US Government 101. Course that really isn't relevant to what I was talking about.
Electoral College was not designed for that, it was designed to have the relatively weakly populated states be able to compete with larger states in the elections. More specifically, in origin, it was to satisfy Rhode Island vs New York and Virginia. As I mentioned, initially it was a good idea. It gave Rhode Island a voice in the election instead of being shut out by the larger states. Times have changed though. There are a lot more states than there originally was, and most of them are not large players like California and New York. Collectively these states have the power to nullify New York or California's vote because they are working as a group. Why should a large group of minorly populated states dictate what the rest of the US is going to do? This is what happens when an election is won by having control over the bible belt.
Electoral college = whatever rep count + 2 senate count. Smaller states have less reps, therefore having lesser electoral college, however have the 2 senate counts guarenteed.
One or two states doing this has virtually no effect on the overall election, however, en masse, they will have more power than they should have (due to the points guarenteed by the senate).
All the electoral college needs is that part removed then it will work fine again, but until then the presidential candidates will abuse the system by parading the bible belt for the majority of their time until they gain the majority of 'control' (more or less).
A cold is a combination of several hundred (to thousands) common bacterias, not often viruses, that you are exposed to. Your immune system is generally good at stopping these sorts of invaders within the first 2 layers of defense (skin + defense that lives within/near skin tissue), but this can be overwhelmed.
However, the human body was designed to operate at 98.6 degrees. Shifting temperature can cause the body to either slightly overshoot this, or drop below it. When this happens the immune system is temporarily weakened. Bacteria or viruses can take advantage of this weaker state (generally by reproducing faster than the immune system can destroy) and cause sickness.
Most of the time you will not notice this, the cellular death is too low to trigger adverse body-wide symptoms. However when it truely starts to get out of hand and the 3rd level of defense starts to kick in, you will generally start to feel sick.
Shifts in temperature CAN cause you to catch a cold, hence the name. Cold temps weaken the immune system. Weak immune system = weaker bacteria/virus can invade easier. Invasion = sick. That sums it up methinks. Feel free to insert common sense where needed.
The will of the people may be a fickle thing but they are abusing the current system. The old system, the electoral college, was created so that small states should have a greater piece of power to choose who gets to be president (if I remember correctly, it was initially created to satisfy states such as Rhode Island) because they didn't have the population density to compete with the larger states. This system works great if there are few small states, however, the entire Bible Belt has a relatively low population density compared to those of coastal states. And this is where the problem arrises. They have a disproportional amount of power when all those states combine their power. When combined they have the power to compete with California and New York in the elections, but have essentially 1/50th or less population.
Because they generally vote as a solid group they are essentially acting as 1 state with disproportionate power. This is why the current system is broken. The will of the people may be fickle but a democratic election is BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE. We are not all part of the bible belt, we are not all part of the metropolitan areas. We should have the vote system as it should have been in the first place: popular vote.
Check your program files directory, Messenger is not uninstalled but mearly registry-disabled. If I remember correctly, the same falls for Outlook, Internet Explorer, and windows media player as well.
Point is, you really aren't removing these parts of windows, which is the point of uninstalling software.
And to make matters worse, Microsoft has winlogon.exe (or another system process, I can't remember) file locking their directories to prevent deletion. Sysinternals Process Explorer is capable of removing the file locks allowing for the deletion of their folders, but that should NEVER had needed to be done anyways. These things like all other things should be removed when I say "GO AWAY M$ CRAP".
Slashdot Mirror
War was beginning. ....
Japan: What happen?
Mechanic: Somebody set up us the iPod.
Operator: We get signal.
Japan: What !
Operator: Main screen turn on.
Japan: It's You !!
Apple: How are you gentlemen !!
Apple: All your mp3 player are belong to us.
Apple: You are on the way to destruction.
Japan: What you say !!
Apple: You have no chance to survive make your time.
Apple: HA HA HA HA
Japan: Take off every 'wma' !!
Japan: You know what you doing.
Japan: Move 'wma'.
Japan: For great justice.
Newsflash!
The majority of americans don't have hdtvs and quite frankly do not want to pony up $1000+ for a decent one that will commit suicide after 5 years of use! They'd rather stick with their 20 year old RELIABLE tv of ntsc goodness.
So what if the media is HD quality? The likelyhood that the majority of us with older boxes will see no difference, or WORSE quality, than the current generation of dvds. Sure the government (sponsored by the entertainment industries) are going to force us to buy a downsampler/new tv in the next few years but again, not many of us care about this. We just watch tv with whatever device does it best for the longest time.
Not to mention how much utterly useless crap they are going to shove onto a movie. Back in the day, we bought a movie to watch a movie; not see all the useless scenes they decided were not important enough to view. It was all just the feature presentation. Of course this didn't even last long in the VHS era (stupid previews), this whole nonsensical extra bloat on a disc is not needed or wanted most of the time. I say: Keep dvds around and also have the blue rays. DVDs with *JUST THE MOVIE*, and then the blue rays with all the extra crap people can waste more of their money on if they want it.
The only complaint I have about the equation editor in open office is its complete lack of caring about document formatting, but other than that it appears to be vastly superior to microsoft's implementation, at least to my usage of it.
Other than that, it's a lot easier to understand and quicker for me to use than Words.
f(x)=x_i{x_y} + 23e^{left [ {{6x+y^i} over sqrt{f(x_{i-1})}} right ]}
Granted that looks rather ugly to someone new to using it, it is a lot easier than having to keep highlighting shit in office and hitting somewhat random buttons. I had a paper that had some rather nasty calculus equations on it, this made things a lot easier, with exception to remembering what bracket groups each thing belonged to.
You don't need a support contract to have the bugs fixed. If there is a bug in the operating system, you have every right to get the problem fixed, as long as the product is still being marketed. While they may not directly talk to you, if you submit a bug report to them, they will likely review it and issue a patch soon if it is a critical bug, or include it within a service pack or the next release of windows. If there is a work around, your problem will likely find its way onto the KB articles.
One doesn't need to go the paid route if you have an honest-to-goodness bug of the operating system (not driver related or software related, w/e to conflicts within microsofts own products/drivers).
I agree that we don't need 23 window managers, but the problem arises that not everyone has a system capable of handling window managers such as KDE or sometimes even gnome. I know- a lot of my friends are quite frankly poor white trash and still have computers from the '97 era. These folks can hardly run windows, so they use fluxbox on their machines to get what little performance they can out of their machines.
./configure and make installers are a bit out of date. Sure they help build applications fine, but they do not address how to obtain missing libraries, or even dumb it down for the lesser technocrats. That and I don't really care that I am missing XXXXXX library with absolutely no hint on where to obtain them. Right now I use Ubuntu, mainly out of the convience provided by the
I can't use windows because I tweak things too much so I use linux primarily. Sure I use one the 2nd most common window manager, gnome, but there are people who cannot stand the look and feel of gnome, which is almost sickeningly a clone of OS X feel. Don't get me wrong, I like OS X, but there is many aspects where things are too simplistic and make it very difficult to configure (I spend most of my time editing text conf files as well as manually editing things in gconf since they are sacrificing configurability for simplicity. Hell my current look for linux much resembles a mix of OS X and Windows. I cannot reliably force OS X or Windows to have this look and feel without having to use 3rd party tools which often interfere with functionality because they are operating on what I essentially call a hack (hooks in windows, not sure what OS X skinners use).
Point made: Everyone wants their desktop the way THEY want it. This is not possible with just one window manager. Do we need only one window manager? Hell no! The way things would work out, I'd be forced to use KDE and get asked half a million confirmation messages and suffer graphical glytches that are NEVER apparent in gnome, or I would be stuck in the over-minimalistic *box derivatives. What we need is more standards that are span between multiple window managers so they can perform the same tasks but tweaked to whatever dream the window manager intended.
Sure libraries are a pain in the ass in linux, but do not, DO NOT, believe that windows or any other operating system is free of this dependancy hell. You don't see this issue in OS X because they hide the fact that it is installing needed libraries to run applications. You don't see this in windows because it often keeps copies of the libraries either in windows system directories or within the applications run space. Is this possible in linux? Hell yes. Why don't we do it? Oh I know, duplicate libraries wastes space if you ship them with binaries. Course developers could send a binary that *could* work on all systems, but think of all the screaming you'll hear from the gentoo community and the likes? This implies everyone has the same version libaries on every linux system in existance. Hah. Yeah that will never happen. Then there are also having the sources available on the site that needs to use the dependancy. That too could work, except, instead of downloading something big like WINE, now you have to include all the related dependancy sources as well at your site. I don't know about you but that will severely inhibit the process of improving software if all the pages hosting a particular library has their own (most likely outdated) version of the dependancy sources. And because all these library version forks that would occur because of that, just think of the dependancy hell that would happen then.
We could avoid this issue altogether if we had a common method of obtaining sources. If all the packages on say FreshMeat and SourceForge all distributed their code in the same method (and keep the old HTTP way of obtaining source), and have application installers resolve dependancies on-the-fly and compile/install them as needed, this problem will be gone.
I personally think the
Expressing the problems to the public will actually get them fixed. Why do you think bugs get fixed in Windows? Trust me- it's not Microsoft's good will. It's the customers bitching at them to fix the problems. Likewise happens with open source, except if you have the expertise to do it, fix it yourself and commit the patch. If the maintainers like it, everyone else who has hit your problems will feel the joy of someone fixing a common annoyance. If you can't fix it yourself, submit the idea to the forums or mailing list that is associated with the problem. Someone might fix it for you.
However, if you are just going to sit there and bitch to yourself about the problem but do nothing about it, that includes not even informing people that there is in fact a problem, you have no right to complain. You didn't try.
Proprietary (but for Linux):
I bitched for months to ATI repeatedly to get them to get suspend/resume to at least work a little and to make the video card stop sapping the power of my laptop like a vampire.
ATI 8.10.16: Initial suspend and resume support and power management. Huzzah!
Generally on larger files it becomes increasingly difficult to have the same file size AND md5 hash. On most repositories, md5 being cracked will have little effect since it doesn't actually matter much about whether or not the file is exactly what it says it is if you are getting it from a secure repository. IANAC, but I figure it would be a lot more difficult to generate hashes at a quick rate and match the correct filesize.
File verification is more or less just a way to determine whether or not the file became corrupted from between the server and your computer, so again no worries. If the file was already poisoned on the server, I can almost guarentee that the md5 will reflect the md5 of the poisoned file, and not a specially crafted poisoned file.
There is an extension to firefox that allows embedded ActiveX.
However, this will likely NEVER be part of the default install because security and ActiveX usually aren't the best of pals.
Don't know if they have the Firefox ActiveX builds for 1.5 builds yet.
Gotta love those useful ActiveX components like the Genuine Windows Authentication and Windows Update.
Make a boolean to that you check to see if the boolean has already been set.
Yay circles!
Are you slow? Instead of focusing on the fact that I said the internet often referred as the world wide web, how about you read the rest of my post before making a comment? Oh wait this is /.
Yes I know that the internet is a collection of LANs, WANs, etc, of computers that have a remote uplink to each other via (generally) a common communication protocol. I made that very clear so why the explaination? You're no expert. Stop trying to make yourself sound like one.
World Wide Web was coined to describe the appearance of the interconnectivity of the internet well before the HTTP/HTML equivilant term became prevailant. I do not use today's term "world wide web" to refer to the overabundance of HTTP servers. Why? Because it is a subset of what the internet is, and does not actually describe WHAT the internet is. World Wide Web (or Web if you restrict it to local country only) describes how the links of computers (NOT HTML LINKS SINCE YOU WILL OBVIOUSLY GET CONFUSED, IM TALKING ACTUAL PIPELINE CONNECTIONS), if graphed would closely resembles something of a spider web.
While you may differentiate different levels of the internet based on the network stack, your reasoning that my definition was wrong because I SPECIFICIALLY said "uses the *web*". Guess what? They are USING the web, the underlying network infrastructure to communicate with each other, not implementing it. They are *STILL* application level. So I was not misusing the definition. The World Wide Web is not an application, therefore is NOT an application level definition.
Oh by the way, you can encode references or encapsulate most protocols in almost any other protocol (stateless encapsulating connection based protocols are hard, but are doable). It is not much of a highlight of HTTP.
Thus ends today's episode of "Debunking The Supposed Expert". I really tried to keep this non-inflammatory, but some folks just have to be asses.
Injunctions are prevention of doing something or forcing them to do something, with penalties if they don't comply with the court order. Not suing.
The Internet, often refered to the World Wide Web, is a description on how all the remote computers in the world (that is, not remotely isolated) are connected to each other. While "World Wide Web" recently (well, say after 1995) has become a term synonomous with HTTP services due to the popularization of the Netscape browser (and furthermore by the browser we often love to hate). I am not certain how www.* came into existance for addressing computer names, but it was probably just a cool idea, and somehow it stuck (the fad that would never die).
P2P *uses* the web, just like every other protocol that is on the internet. The funnier thing is that a lot of p2p software actually mimics the HTTP protocol (mainly during handshaking) which makes applications such as Ethereal have a somewhat difficult time differentiating between the two.
So no, I wasn't misusing terms, I was just a different subset than you.
There is no such thing as "preventive suing". You must allow the act to be committed before it can be taken to court. What happened was not that they lawyers were late, it was the RIAA/MPAA/others that were slow to realize that their business model was going to be compromised by p2p; something isn't a threat until its big and in your face. Of course, they were and still are blind to why they've been experiencing a weakened bottom line.
Else there'd be a lot of people being sued for piracy at your 18th birthday since "Well, we figure you'll pirate SOMETIME in the future if you haven't already."
subnote: The RIAA does not take into account that consumer spending was shifted after the stock market's y2k-bubble burst. Therefore their entire belief that 'p2p is the devil and is causing us to lose money' is moot because they were going to lose anyways- people could not afford to spend as much money (if at all) as they used to on CDs/other merchandise. Therefore they would have experienced a relatively same fall in their overall bottom line, which then they would have found something else to convieniently blame it on. I know many people who lost at least 30% of their yearly income because of the y2k-burst and no longer could afford to buy cds or any other useless crap.
Stealing trade secrets isn't a criminal offense.
Stealing your countries secrets and giving it to another is a criminal offense.
Trade secrets are just what they imply: secrets. Nothing legally binding unless you are under a non-disclosure agreement. That's why they won't let the average joe worker know all the parts of a product like Coca-Cola.
Patents/Trademarks/Copyrights, those are all things that can be punishable by law since they are government sponsored monopolies over whatever the hell they are trying to protect while they are in effect.
Just thought I'd point that out.
Scientific theory begins with an observation, and then creates a hypothesis to explain the observation. Darwin's Evolution theory tries to explain that we humans evolved from creatures that had traits similiar to ours that were passed down from offspring. To help explain this Natural Selection was introduced to show that some bad traits will occur and because of that, they will have a lesser chance of survival in the wild. The opposite is considered true as well, the better the traits the better chance of survival. You know you've heard this many times, but since you have taken the non-falsifiable path, it must be mentioned.
Newton also observed something too, and after many years of testing, the scientific theory of Gravity has been generally accepted as a law. Granted law and theory mean relatively the same thing in the science realm, it was and still is a theory. Can the law of gravity be falsified? Sure, just find a test that makes the tests invalid! (By the way, it is really damn hard to make a test that proves gravity is false.)
Same thing applies with evolution. We have collected evidence for a very long time, and, although incomplete, the evidence we have collected so far says that the observation recorded and explained by Darwin is correct. However, that does not mean that Evolution is guarenteed to be the explaination for the rest of eternity, it just means that: We have data, we're following his procedures, and according to his tests, his hypothesis is true. We're following scientific theory to the tick, so what if we haven't found a way to falsify it? Be a scientist and actually TRY to falsify it, rather than just claiming it is false.
Now the problem with ID is, it basically says "God did this, and this is why it is so", yet it provides absolutely no way of testing, nor anyway of falsifying it. According to almost every religion, god is always right, so if you say "god made it so", how can you falsify it? Also how can you test it? Where's the observation of when god decided it was going to be that way? Why did god do it that way? What was god thinking when the decision was made? For what purpose does this creation exist for? There are too many questions that cannot be answered, and absolutely no way of following scientific theory. Therefore: ID can't be considered scientific and cannot be taught in a science class.
No I am not religious, but I do believe in at least one god because there is no conclusive explaination to why the universe exists and why I am here.
If Microsoft backs out of South Korea, it does not mean that current internet cafes will have to remove windows from their machines, rather, new internet cafes will just pirate windows like the rest of the world does.
If the corporation has no presence in a country, pirating of that corporations goods has very little consequence.
No, I do not use windows, although I can buy a license for both 32bit and 64bit for $4.
Read my other post AC.
I will not repeat for the sake of a troll.
1. First off the average body temperature for a person is 98.6 degrees. There will always be variance due to the fact that not everyone is the same. However the protein structures within the human body generally operate at peak performance at 98.6 degrees. Variance is allowed however.
2. Fevers are a defense the body uses to essentially cook the bacteria out of you since bacteria often works well at the same body temperature, the increased body temperature gives the immune system a slight advantage over the bacteria, enough to control the infection (usually) however fevers are WELL known to kill people because the internal body temperature has risen well beyond what the body is capable of handling.
3. Marathon runners and clubbers body temperatures, although risen, are not far from the average body temperature. Running will make you feel hotter because the surface temperature of your skin is closer resembling that of what your organs are normally accustomed to due to the increased blood flow under the skin.
4. How hot does it take to kill an average person? Usually near ~104 degrees body temperature. How cold does it take to kill an average Person? Usually near ~90 degrees body temperature. Your statement holds no value because: 1. Water conducts heat readily and stores kinetic energy at a relatively high level per mol. Rain will reduce your body temperature at a faster rate than air alone can. 2. You are disregarding the fact that human bodies produce heat.
5. Sure overheating is bad, but so is underheating it. The temperature outside does not matter, if it was 120F outside and it did not raise your body temperature, it will likely not malaffect you. However, prolonged exposer to the shifting temperature can cause your internal temperature to change which is the main problem.
6. It is well known that people's will to live, stress, overall health, nuitrition, and other factors affect how well the immune system functions. Just because some random editorial says "this is it" does NOT mean it is the complete truth, if it is at all truthful.
7. Your editorial specifies that Antarctic people do not get colds often except when germ-laden people visit: Duh. That environment is not the ideal environment for bacteria that affects humans. Bacteria there have adapted to cold temperatures, so when they come in contact with humans, it would be essentially the same as us living inside a room that was constantly on fire.
Cold tubs if it is not affecting your average body temperature, it will NOT have much affect to the immune system, if any at all.
Viruses can attack you at any time since they generally perform fine in relatively extreme temperatures (depending on the virus strain). The flu is irrelavent.
This editorial is speaking in hypotheticals, sign he/she is not a valid source. So you will say "well you are too". I'm basing my stuff on logical fact: The immune system is built on proteins that operate most efficently at normal body temperature (generally 98.6F). Shifting from their will decrease the effectiveness of any/all proteins within the immune system cells causing it to perform less effectively, therefore causing a potential weakening in the immune system. This increases the risk of infection/sickness if the other bacteria/virus is not afflicted by the temperature change. This is basic biology here.
Not on hand at the moment, I can probably look this up later when I have some time. However I do remember this topic being covered repeatedly throughout any classes that involve pathophysiology.
But with that test, I'm going to apply some (somewhat sane) ideas to it. In an ideal bacterial world I suppose your first argument would be true, however, bacteria is also malaffected by cold weather. That and also the people living within those regions have been exposed to those common breeds of bacteria so they have developed some resistance to them. Warmer regions have generally better living conditions for bacteria (as well as us), but again, we often have some resistance to bacteria that is common around us.
To minimize variables, they likely tested these people from different climates within their own climate (else they are exposing them to foreign bacteria which would toss out the validity of the test), and because they did not expose them to a particularly powerful bacteria, they didn't get sick. That doesn't mean that they were not being infected, it was just that their immune system was capable of defending themselves, even within the weakened state. However, the third group who was exposed to the foreign bacteria caused infection because the bacteria was indeed foreign and the immune system wasn't as apt to stop the infection for what could be completely different reasons.
The problem with any tests that occur about this is: 1. Immune reactions to foreign bacteria is not static between all test patients. 2. The amount that temperature shifts affects a person's immune system is patient dependant. 3. Not everyone has the same immunity/resistances. I'm not saying it is invalid, it just makes it difficult to prove.
Just like they say about Vitamin C when you're sick or how coffee causes cancer, take it with a grain of salt. Everyone's bodies are different, not everything they say will apply to you.
Disable Messenger and then: start -> run: msmsgs (or whatever the executables name is)
Whats this? I thought I disabled it! Nice 'uninstallation'. Only true ways to make it not work is use Group Policy or delete the files directly by hand, and that should NEVER have to be done when you say "remove software X".
... So you are trying to say that we the people should not elect the president at all and it should be completely done by the judicial and legislative branches? Last time I knew that wasn't US Government 101. Course that really isn't relevant to what I was talking about.
Electoral College was not designed for that, it was designed to have the relatively weakly populated states be able to compete with larger states in the elections. More specifically, in origin, it was to satisfy Rhode Island vs New York and Virginia. As I mentioned, initially it was a good idea. It gave Rhode Island a voice in the election instead of being shut out by the larger states. Times have changed though. There are a lot more states than there originally was, and most of them are not large players like California and New York. Collectively these states have the power to nullify New York or California's vote because they are working as a group. Why should a large group of minorly populated states dictate what the rest of the US is going to do? This is what happens when an election is won by having control over the bible belt.
Electoral college = whatever rep count + 2 senate count.
Smaller states have less reps, therefore having lesser electoral college, however have the 2 senate counts guarenteed.
One or two states doing this has virtually no effect on the overall election, however, en masse, they will have more power than they should have (due to the points guarenteed by the senate).
All the electoral college needs is that part removed then it will work fine again, but until then the presidential candidates will abuse the system by parading the bible belt for the majority of their time until they gain the majority of 'control' (more or less).
A cold is a combination of several hundred (to thousands) common bacterias, not often viruses, that you are exposed to. Your immune system is generally good at stopping these sorts of invaders within the first 2 layers of defense (skin + defense that lives within/near skin tissue), but this can be overwhelmed.
However, the human body was designed to operate at 98.6 degrees. Shifting temperature can cause the body to either slightly overshoot this, or drop below it. When this happens the immune system is temporarily weakened. Bacteria or viruses can take advantage of this weaker state (generally by reproducing faster than the immune system can destroy) and cause sickness.
Most of the time you will not notice this, the cellular death is too low to trigger adverse body-wide symptoms. However when it truely starts to get out of hand and the 3rd level of defense starts to kick in, you will generally start to feel sick.
Shifts in temperature CAN cause you to catch a cold, hence the name. Cold temps weaken the immune system. Weak immune system = weaker bacteria/virus can invade easier. Invasion = sick. That sums it up methinks. Feel free to insert common sense where needed.
The will of the people may be a fickle thing but they are abusing the current system. The old system, the electoral college, was created so that small states should have a greater piece of power to choose who gets to be president (if I remember correctly, it was initially created to satisfy states such as Rhode Island) because they didn't have the population density to compete with the larger states. This system works great if there are few small states, however, the entire Bible Belt has a relatively low population density compared to those of coastal states. And this is where the problem arrises. They have a disproportional amount of power when all those states combine their power. When combined they have the power to compete with California and New York in the elections, but have essentially 1/50th or less population.
Because they generally vote as a solid group they are essentially acting as 1 state with disproportionate power. This is why the current system is broken. The will of the people may be fickle but a democratic election is BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE. We are not all part of the bible belt, we are not all part of the metropolitan areas. We should have the vote system as it should have been in the first place: popular vote.
Check your program files directory, Messenger is not uninstalled but mearly registry-disabled.
If I remember correctly, the same falls for Outlook, Internet Explorer, and windows media player as well.
Point is, you really aren't removing these parts of windows, which is the point of uninstalling software.
And to make matters worse, Microsoft has winlogon.exe (or another system process, I can't remember) file locking their directories to prevent deletion. Sysinternals Process Explorer is capable of removing the file locks allowing for the deletion of their folders, but that should NEVER had needed to be done anyways. These things like all other things should be removed when I say "GO AWAY M$ CRAP".