Am working on the Colinux X but need to install a bunch of stuff to make it happen...will let you know. I do have a real Linux box but already knew the result and was curious how CL would respond.
Sorry to be way OT here but I wanted to let you know that I ran your sig command on CoLinux (under XP PRo) and my RAM suddenly had nothing in it (LOL -- it rebooted the machine!).
I like your comment because I'm amazed that sexually explicit content is far more regulated than is violent content. I think it's pretty amusing that on just about any night on broadcast TV one can see depictions of recent murders, etc. But a breast or a penis is verbotten!
Hmmm. I'm guessing this is intended as irony. I always thought it was our constitution (and all it's ammendments) that should be protected. Giving up those rights in order to protect ourselves is like blowing up your home to prevent thieves from robbing it (effective but self-defeating).
And in case anybody actually thought you were serious, there were no "...terrorists in Iraq that attacked us on September 11." They were nearly all Saudi.
This has got to be a troll (you definitely got me). "...trivial matters like human rights and the Geneva Convention..." is great. I'm afraid there really are plenty of people in the U.S. who believe this FUD, though.
You *can* do this in Kansas. I visited a client who wanted someone to interpret what Specter had caught her husband at. He'd secretly videotaped the two of them having sex and wanted to know if he'd posted it anywhere. Also, had he been surfing child p0rn? Had he taken any illicit pics of their children?
Her attorney told her it was legal in Kansas.
(All I could see him doing was saving a bunch of free p0rn videos. He'd set the date on the PC back a couple of years so he could say it was all old stuff if he ever got caught -- and he changed the file extensions so nobody could accidently run the movies.)
The cynic in me bubbles to the surface again on this one. Search engine ads are deliberatly made to appear similar to legitimate results. That way, the advertiser has a better chance of getting a hit. I don't think it was that long ago that ads based on search showed up on the right-hand side of the browser window instaed of at the top of the search result list. By placing the ads at the top of the result list, both the advertiser and the search engine co. benefit. More clicks == more $$ for both.
"Ooo, this result is in bold and a different color. It must be most relevant or something."
I don't have a problem with this kind of advertising. I'll only complain if ad results aren't indicated at all.
Why does Blizzard want to enforce their EULA?
on
The Basics of EULAs
·
· Score: 1
Here are a couple of excerpts from Blizzard's EULA (or Terms of Service) from their website:
"...nor may you use any third-party software which is running at the same time as World of Warcraft that accesses files which are part of World of Warcraft, for any reason whatsoever..."
So if my virus scanner kicks off while I'm playing, then I'm in violation. I'm sure they wouldn't really care but this clause exists so they *may* terminate your account if you're up to something nefarious (like examining files for ways to cheat).
"You may not exploit World of Warcraft for any commercial purpose, including, but not limited to, performing "power leveling" services to other users of World of Warcraft for "real" money..."
and
"Remember, at the outset of these Terms of Use, where we discussed how you were "licensed" the right to use World of Warcraft, and that your license was "limited"? Well, here is one of the more important areas where these license limitations come into effect. Note that Blizzard Entertainment either owns, or has exclusively licensed, all of the content which appears in World of Warcraft. Therefore, no one has the right to "sell" Blizzard Entertainment's content, except Blizzard Entertainment! So Blizzard Entertainment does not recognize any property claims outside of World of Warcraft or the purported "sale" in the "real world" of anything related to World of Warcraft. Accordingly, you may not sell items for "real" money or trade items for things of value outside of World of Warcraft."
This seems to be the current portion of the policy that's caused the current stir. I think it may be less about the game experience (players souping up their characters without "earning" the items, etc.) than it is about Blizzard not wanting their product to be a profit source for anyone else. Maybe I'm too cynical, but it's easy to imagine the company as thinking, "Well, we just spent X dollars to create this product and now some chump who's good at the game is going to ride our coattails to the bank? Not if we can stop it."
There are portions of EULA's that I wish weren't there. But I bet game companies would actually face lawsuits from some if they didn't cover their asses as well as they do.
I wonder what portion of users actually experience a "rip-off" from normal EULA's? I know that alot of folks have been burned by agreeing to allow spyware, etc. on their machines, but I haven't really seen any stories about anyone suffering from a game EULA...
Table of Contents from main Page
on
In the Year 2020
·
· Score: -1
The 2020 Global Landscape
Mapping the Global Future
What Would an Asian Face on Globalization Look Like?
What Could Derail Globalization?
Biotechnology: Panacea and Weapon
The Status of Women in 2020
Risks to Chinese Economic Growth
India vs. China: Long-Term Prospects
Asia: The Cockpit for Global Change?
Global Aging and Migration
Could Europe Become A Superpower?
The Geopolitics of Gas
Eurasian Countries: Going Their Separate Ways?
Climate Change and Its Implications Through 2020
Latin America in 2020: Will Globalization Cause the Region to Split?
Organized Crime
Cyber Warfare?
How Can Sub-Saharan Africa Move Forward?
International Institutions in Crisis
The Rules of War: Entering "No Man's Land"
Post-Combat Environments Pose the Biggest Challenge
Is the United States' Technological Prowess at Risk?
How the World Sees the United States
It's actually quite tiring to try to make rational arguments to "believers" who seem to lack the ability to recognize what, to me, are pretty straight-forward logical arguments.
Here's a simple description of evolution in progress over the last hundred years:
A while ago, some guy discovered that penicillin (sp?) killed a lot of bacteria quite effectively -- as a result the medical community (and the human population taken as a whole) received the benefits of antibiotics. Well antibiotics are incabable of killing every bacterium in a given host -- especially if the entire percribed course isn't taken). The result is that those bacterium with an existing resistance (not immunity -- just enough better able to withstand the assault that they don't die) to the treatment are the ones that survive to create progeny. They pass their resistance on to their "children". Those children are then subjected (possibly in a different host) to another treatment, maybe even of a different antibiotic, and the cycle repeats. Ultimately, this produces a strain of, say, staphlococcus (sp?) that laughs at penicillin (sp?), and since species are simply our classification of organisms based on certain characteristics -- presto! a new species of bacteria. Get it?
DNA, the agent of heredity (as much a theory as evolution is, I might add), is subject to occasional changes in the order of the nucleotides that make up it's structure -- errors in replication or mutagens that cause one of the nucleotides to be replaced by another have been shown to occur regularly but only sometimes have any effect on the organism. Of course we know that DNA codes for the creation of protiens and if the change in the order of nucleotides is sufficient than the type of protien is different enough to affect the function of a critical action (like the ability to deal with penecillin (sp?)).
Simple enough right?
I'd be delighted to hear a well reasoned argument that describes how we now have resistant strains of bacteria that relies on intelligent design instead. Maybe God *wants* us to get gangrene so he just creates a new variety while we wern't looking and tricks us meanwhile by allowing observed bacteria as they evolve in a laboratory?
I know that ID really means that life is too complex to have arrisin (sp?) by chance but rather required an Inteligence to allow it to happen -- but that is untestable, unrepeatable, and un-observable, and make no predictions about future observations -- so it isn't science and has no place except in philosophy or religeon classes.
Nicely put. I guess I was more interested in the corporate culture of usery. Outrageous rates for SMS are a part of that culture and, ultimately, I believe this kind of practice helps the initial bottom line but is short-sighted and punishing to the economy in general. Thanks for the correction on SMS as a part of the carrier's cost.
This mobile phone stuff is the same kind of problem as folks who get in too deep with credit cards. It's easy to think "it's their problem and they're idiots for not recognizing that products and services co$t!" Unfortunately, the end result is often higher costs for everyone. When individuals default on loans, rates for the rest go up. The US government seems to ascribe to the culture of living beyond its means too. Usery is alive and well and sometimes awefully hard to discern.
An Axiom of Hiring
on
Defining Google
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
There are two basic categories of workers: the smart/stupid categorization, and the lazy/productive categorization. Combining the two produces four basic types: 1) Smart and Lazy (the worker wont get alot done but also wont cause any serious trouble).
2) Smart and Productive (these are the people you want -- and it might take nine interviews to find them).
3) Stupid and Lazy (again, no real problem except a drain on your bottom line).
4) Stupid and Productive (this is the worst person to hire -- they work tirelessly to destroy your company).
Slashdot Mirror
Am working on the Colinux X but need to install a bunch of stuff to make it happen...will let you know. I do have a real Linux box but already knew the result and was curious how CL would respond.
is the link to the Kansas law concerning tax stamps for illegal drugs...
Sorry to be way OT here but I wanted to let you know that I ran your sig command on CoLinux (under XP PRo) and my RAM suddenly had nothing in it (LOL -- it rebooted the machine!).
I like your comment because I'm amazed that sexually explicit content is far more regulated than is violent content. I think it's pretty amusing that on just about any night on broadcast TV one can see depictions of recent murders, etc. But a breast or a penis is verbotten!
Hmmm. I'm guessing this is intended as irony. I always thought it was our constitution (and all it's ammendments) that should be protected. Giving up those rights in order to protect ourselves is like blowing up your home to prevent thieves from robbing it (effective but self-defeating).
And in case anybody actually thought you were serious, there were no "...terrorists in Iraq that attacked us on September 11." They were nearly all Saudi.
This has got to be a troll (you definitely got me). "...trivial matters like human rights and the Geneva Convention..." is great. I'm afraid there really are plenty of people in the U.S. who believe this FUD, though.
You *can* do this in Kansas. I visited a client who wanted someone to interpret what Specter had caught her husband at. He'd secretly videotaped the two of them having sex and wanted to know if he'd posted it anywhere. Also, had he been surfing child p0rn? Had he taken any illicit pics of their children?
Her attorney told her it was legal in Kansas.
(All I could see him doing was saving a bunch of free p0rn videos. He'd set the date on the PC back a couple of years so he could say it was all old stuff if he ever got caught -- and he changed the file extensions so nobody could accidently run the movies.)
The cynic in me bubbles to the surface again on this one. Search engine ads are deliberatly made to appear similar to legitimate results. That way, the advertiser has a better chance of getting a hit. I don't think it was that long ago that ads based on search showed up on the right-hand side of the browser window instaed of at the top of the search result list. By placing the ads at the top of the result list, both the advertiser and the search engine co. benefit. More clicks == more $$ for both.
"Ooo, this result is in bold and a different color. It must be most relevant or something."
I don't have a problem with this kind of advertising. I'll only complain if ad results aren't indicated at all.
Here are a couple of excerpts from Blizzard's EULA (or Terms of Service) from their website:
"...nor may you use any third-party software which is running at the same time as World of Warcraft that accesses files which are part of World of Warcraft, for any reason whatsoever..."
So if my virus scanner kicks off while I'm playing, then I'm in violation. I'm sure they wouldn't really care but this clause exists so they *may* terminate your account if you're up to something nefarious (like examining files for ways to cheat).
"You may not exploit World of Warcraft for any commercial purpose, including, but not limited to, performing "power leveling" services to other users of World of Warcraft for "real" money..."
and
"Remember, at the outset of these Terms of Use, where we discussed how you were "licensed" the right to use World of Warcraft, and that your license was "limited"? Well, here is one of the more important areas where these license limitations come into effect. Note that Blizzard Entertainment either owns, or has exclusively licensed, all of the content which appears in World of Warcraft. Therefore, no one has the right to "sell" Blizzard Entertainment's content, except Blizzard Entertainment! So Blizzard Entertainment does not recognize any property claims outside of World of Warcraft or the purported "sale" in the "real world" of anything related to World of Warcraft. Accordingly, you may not sell items for "real" money or trade items for things of value outside of World of Warcraft."
This seems to be the current portion of the policy that's caused the current stir. I think it may be less about the game experience (players souping up their characters without "earning" the items, etc.) than it is about Blizzard not wanting their product to be a profit source for anyone else. Maybe I'm too cynical, but it's easy to imagine the company as thinking, "Well, we just spent X dollars to create this product and now some chump who's good at the game is going to ride our coattails to the bank? Not if we can stop it."
There are portions of EULA's that I wish weren't there. But I bet game companies would actually face lawsuits from some if they didn't cover their asses as well as they do.
I wonder what portion of users actually experience a "rip-off" from normal EULA's? I know that alot of folks have been burned by agreeing to allow spyware, etc. on their machines, but I haven't really seen any stories about anyone suffering from a game EULA...
Amen. Well written. Thanks. Loved the Orwell reference too. I guess Fox News is the Ministry of Truth.
Here
The 2020 Global Landscape
Mapping the Global Future
What Would an Asian Face on Globalization Look Like?
What Could Derail Globalization?
Biotechnology: Panacea and Weapon
The Status of Women in 2020
Risks to Chinese Economic Growth
India vs. China: Long-Term Prospects
Asia: The Cockpit for Global Change?
Global Aging and Migration
Could Europe Become A Superpower?
The Geopolitics of Gas
Eurasian Countries: Going Their Separate Ways?
Climate Change and Its Implications Through 2020
Latin America in 2020: Will Globalization Cause the Region to Split?
Organized Crime
Cyber Warfare?
How Can Sub-Saharan Africa Move Forward?
International Institutions in Crisis
The Rules of War: Entering "No Man's Land"
Post-Combat Environments Pose the Biggest Challenge
Is the United States' Technological Prowess at Risk?
How the World Sees the United States
It's actually quite tiring to try to make rational arguments to "believers" who seem to lack the ability to recognize what, to me, are pretty straight-forward logical arguments.
Here's a simple description of evolution in progress over the last hundred years:
A while ago, some guy discovered that penicillin (sp?) killed a lot of bacteria quite effectively -- as a result the medical community (and the human population taken as a whole) received the benefits of antibiotics. Well antibiotics are incabable of killing every bacterium in a given host -- especially if the entire percribed course isn't taken). The result is that those bacterium with an existing resistance (not immunity -- just enough better able to withstand the assault that they don't die) to the treatment are the ones that survive to create progeny. They pass their resistance on to their "children". Those children are then subjected (possibly in a different host) to another treatment, maybe even of a different antibiotic, and the cycle repeats. Ultimately, this produces a strain of, say, staphlococcus (sp?) that laughs at penicillin (sp?), and since species are simply our classification of organisms based on certain characteristics -- presto! a new species of bacteria. Get it?
DNA, the agent of heredity (as much a theory as evolution is, I might add), is subject to occasional changes in the order of the nucleotides that make up it's structure -- errors in replication or mutagens that cause one of the nucleotides to be replaced by another have been shown to occur regularly but only sometimes have any effect on the organism. Of course we know that DNA codes for the creation of protiens and if the change in the order of nucleotides is sufficient than the type of protien is different enough to affect the function of a critical action (like the ability to deal with penecillin (sp?)).
Simple enough right?
I'd be delighted to hear a well reasoned argument that describes how we now have resistant strains of bacteria that relies on intelligent design instead. Maybe God *wants* us to get gangrene so he just creates a new variety while we wern't looking and tricks us meanwhile by allowing observed bacteria as they evolve in a laboratory?
I know that ID really means that life is too complex to have arrisin (sp?) by chance but rather required an Inteligence to allow it to happen -- but that is untestable, unrepeatable, and un-observable, and make no predictions about future observations -- so it isn't science and has no place except in philosophy or religeon classes.
Nicely put. I guess I was more interested in the corporate culture of usery. Outrageous rates for SMS are a part of that culture and, ultimately, I believe this kind of practice helps the initial bottom line but is short-sighted and punishing to the economy in general. Thanks for the correction on SMS as a part of the carrier's cost.
This mobile phone stuff is the same kind of problem as folks who get in too deep with credit cards. It's easy to think "it's their problem and they're idiots for not recognizing that products and services co$t!" Unfortunately, the end result is often higher costs for everyone. When individuals default on loans, rates for the rest go up. The US government seems to ascribe to the culture of living beyond its means too. Usery is alive and well and sometimes awefully hard to discern.
There are two basic categories of workers: the smart/stupid categorization, and the lazy/productive categorization. Combining the two produces four basic types:
1) Smart and Lazy (the worker wont get alot done but also wont cause any serious trouble).
2) Smart and Productive (these are the people you want -- and it might take nine interviews to find them).
3) Stupid and Lazy (again, no real problem except a drain on your bottom line).
4) Stupid and Productive (this is the worst person to hire -- they work tirelessly to destroy your company).