Religious extremism come in many flavors folks, and if we are not careful, we are going to lose our edge.
Have you ever considered militant Buddhism? Its compatible with evolution and quantum physics and if you kill anyone that disagrees with you they you can say "Well um... They'll just come back in the next life anyways..."
(OK. Just kidding about the killing part... Buddhism has rules against that at least as in far as inflicting suffering on others)
They forget about people who dont have a computer or inet access to download an mp3. And when your out and about, 1.99 or so for a ringtone is a nice impluse buy.
Hrm... But my high end Toshiba cell phone cost more than a barebones PC and I pay SprintPCS more a month than I do Comcast.
Sony is such a big company - the PS3 guys have absolutely nothing to do with the recent audio-cd issues.
Of course not. Its the people above them that are the problematic persons.
The Sony Playstation people I have spoken to / met (both online and in real person) all seemed nice and down-to-earth - not evil, moneygrabbing monsters.
There are nice people that work for telemarketing and companies that border line in fraud. I don't have anything against them either and I'm not going to chastise them for trying to make a living.
The 2 issues don't need to be mixed, imho.
If my money indirectly or directly supports their profit margin then yes it does.
Secondly, how do you not know that DRM technology from another department will be used on the PS3?
Sure the nice guy geeks in PS3 won't include DRM, but what if the upper management or VP says they will use it? I remember a few kickass software devs that worked for a particular gaming company who were forced by their publisher to include pervasive anti-copying software on their game which they themselves disagreed with on their own forums.
The focus of the show isn't the same as Law & Order, which is a bit more far reaching.
You mean that show that makes it look ok to trample on the bill of right?
Then again... I suppose it wouldn't be interesting if everyone they arrested said "I plead the 5th!" and stayed silent throughout the entire episode.
Even if you are innocent it actually benefits you to remain silent if you are a suspect or explain you don't remember and couldn't give valid information that would help them in their case.
Our company's main system is written in FoxPro for DOS 2.6. The FP programmers here seem to have guaranteed lifetime employment:-)
I worked for a rather large ISP who in the process up and switched from a rather large home grown custom database program it had used for years to the corporate Vantive which cost them millions at the time.
I asked my manager why would they bother doing such a thing when the old program worked just fine. He said "The guy who made the program died and know one knows how to code for it."
I laughed for a moment and then by his blank face realized he wasn't joking...
The problem I have with this is that no one seems to be looking at the logistical problems of what would happen if the human life span was increased so much. I think that it is a pandora's box.
Its not the death rate, but rather the birth rate of the human race that is the problem with that. If mankind sustains the current yearly birthrate, there will be more humans than atoms in the universe in 17,000 years. Yeah, I'm scratching my head about that one too (there is some wiki article article but i can't find it)
If people lived to be 1,000 years old and had children at a reasonable rate... say... 1 child per 500 years then we wouldn't have that problem.
The problems with scams is that they leave the victims with no course of retribution.
I personally believe sams have their place in PvP, but not so much PvE games.
In Ultima Online (back when everything was "unconsensual" as the article states Lord British saying) if someone scammed you and you knew who they were you had a chance of taking revenge on them at least by killing them.
I knew a guy that scammed my coworker back in 2000 (or was it 1999) and he took it personally. My coworker had a house and somehow this guy actually hacked his account with a trojan that he sent him on ICQ since he was supposedly a friend online and cleaned out his house and since it was obvious that it was the file that he had sent him he knew what the other names he played with.
We spent many a night just showing up and following him around. Out of the blue when he stepped out of the town we would kill him. We turned him in for macroing several times and even had someone make a character just to join his guild that he was in to mess with him.
When he was in town we'd have throw away death robe theives to steal from him and even run up to him naked with DP (deadly posion) daggers and hit him to make him die in town (even though the guards would halberd us at the same time)
After a while, we might have made it over excessive given the retaliation harrasment we gave him, but with player justice we took things into our own hands rather than letting the GMs handle it.
In a PvE environment this is really impossible since players do not have any other ways of retribution other than reporting the offending player.
However, the down side of player justice is that if you weren't in a guild or were just a poor player compared to the rest you don't have much chance of retribution. Secondly, I think often times player justice would often kill the wrong player or people that were supsect of scamming or being pks.
In a simulated world scams are just an extension of the theiving and player killing and perhaps is a legitimate strategy (although I would disdain anyone who would scam anyone in a game). However, you still have to balance that out with what the player base will tolerate in the terms of 'greifing'.
Man: "Look! We finally got our digital TV!" Woman: "Quick turn it on!" Newreporter: "This just in! A meteor will hit the earth in 20 minutes... Machines have become sentient and are attacking humans... And the sun is collapsing into a black hole!" Man: "Oh bloody hell!" Woman: "I told you not to mock the Mayan statues on our honey moon!" Man: "Mayans be damned, I've just lost my bet of 500 quid to Arthur at the pub over that Terence McKenna fellow!"
All the talk about the possible use of this technology in Iraq serves only to justify all the millions being spent on these machine translation projects.
In light of the bad things it causes, war tends to have given us most of our modern day technological conveniences.
Left to its own I would suspect the private sector wouldn't be coming up with things like the Manhattan project or even starting the internet as early as they did. (Internet being DARPA's child as a defense of transferring data after a nuclear attack)
If tax dollars are put into universal translators and military robots, then I don't personally mind because this means that I will reap the benefits sooner than if this was left up to the private sector who will also benefit from the military's effort.
But that doesn't mean I support the war in Iraq...
In fact, hiding behind NAT gives you about 17 million potential addresses. Anybody trying to get info on your computer or network has to first find the needle in the hay stack.
If i'm not mistaken, if you are using IE and you connect to an IIS webserver server it can log your internal IP by asking IE to ask your OS.
I remember this because I wrote an ASP page once that had a log of all people who visited the site and I had incorrectly wrote the code to pull that address and we ended up with a list of many 192.168.*.* rather than the true external IP address which we wanted... This was maybe 4 years ago and I can't remember exactly what I did to fix it, but unless MS corrected it with later versions of IE then I would assume that it is not too hard to get someones internal address if they visit a website.
It doesn't matter if you know the internal ip address of someone behind a NAT router you still can't get there from the outside.
If they compromise the NAT device (aka someone setup the router and thought remote access to the routers setup page would be a good idea, but for some unknown reason didn't change the default password *coughs*) then they could setup up blanket port fowarding to the internal IP address in question and proceed to attack that machine like they would if it were directly on the net.
But luckily most NAT devices are not setup for that and most people don't know how to turn that option on in the first place.
Well the sky isn't falling but think of it like this...
You are building a house. Its a very big big house and you are building a very big basement to hold your wife's shoes. Its so big that it is taking years to build the house. Before you started your wife only had 1 million shoes and you thought to yourself, "Damn women won't buy any more than 10 million shoes in 10 years!" so you have the contractor design the specs so the basement will hold 10 million shoes.
However, after you complete the basement and start to build the frame of the house it occurs to you that you wife already has 8 million shoes and your only 1 year into building the house and she isn't slowing down.
So you have to choices at this point... Either:
1. Assume that she is going to have more shoes than your original basement can hold and build a bigger basement now and then build the house. 2. Assume your original assumption was correct and complete construction on the house itself and if you are wrong then you will have to lift the entire house up and rebuild a bigger basement.
The first option is more expensive and a pain in the immediate terms, but if you are wrong and you do run out of space then it is going to be really expensive and a big pain in the arse to lift the entire house up and redo the infrastructure underneath it. The more time that passes and the more you build on top of the basement foundation, the more problematic it will be to lift the entire house.
So in a sense... The sooner we start rolling out IPv6 the less of a pain it will be in the future if we turn out to really need it.
Now if will excuse me... I just broke my own rule on analogies and the internet.
By the same token, if they make more profit from adding draconian DRM to their CD's, then they will do so.
The fallacy of that thinking is that they assume piracy originates from the majority people who buy their music. DRM might in fact decrease profits since it will just annoy legitimate customers (see Sony debacle) and pirates will download music anyways from someone who removed the DRM through technical means or just ripped it through analog ports.
Someone thought it would cute to mode him as insightful instead of funny and now everyone else reads a well done piece of sarcasm and takes it literally.
This is why, like it or not, it is the role of the government (or at least the legal system) to come down and come down HARD on those who choose to pirate.
Great idea. Lets hurry up and put those CEO's in jail for all the lives they exploit and artists they ruin.
Seriously, piracy by legal definition theft of property nor lively hood (It is a total different crime and should remain a civl court issue).
Government should be spending more time going after people who actually do others direct harm such as scammers, rapists, and murderers. Throwing kids in jail because they download MP3s is not something we should be putting too much effort into.
Or perhaps you would like to walk around Detroit about 3am in the morning to prove me wrong.
The current Mac GUI stinks. I have to use it occassionaly for work and it drives me nuts with frustration. Just moving the windows about or (much worse) resizing them is a nightmare on a large screen. The Dock is far too limited, the menu bar too far away, the general layout of the control panel, to say nothing of the madness which is the file tree with its "sometimes I'm Unix, sometimes I'm MacOS" tangle. I hate it.
To give you professional advice, it appears your mastery of moving the mouse cursor across the screen and clicking leaves something to be desired. May I suggest buying a lubricated mouse pad for easier motion til your arm gets strong enough to drag items into the dock on a regular basis.
Slashdot Mirror
Religious extremism come in many flavors folks, and if we are not careful, we are going to lose our edge.
Have you ever considered militant Buddhism? Its compatible with evolution and quantum physics and if you kill anyone that disagrees with you they you can say "Well um... They'll just come back in the next life anyways..."
(OK. Just kidding about the killing part... Buddhism has rules against that at least as in far as inflicting suffering on others)
Where are all these people that have $500C for a game system with no games?
You know that guy Dvorak... You know about his praise of the menus... Well... Lets just say they are really good menus.
And I see prices from $900 to $1500 for the "buy now" features...
Yikes!
In short, the quicker we can tweak up the ol' Polymerase Chain Reacion, the more red state skanks we can get with safely.
By safe... You mean with or without the burning sensation?
They forget about people who dont have a computer or inet access to download an mp3. And when your out and about, 1.99 or so for a ringtone is a nice impluse buy.
Hrm... But my high end Toshiba cell phone cost more than a barebones PC and I pay SprintPCS more a month than I do Comcast.
Sony is such a big company - the PS3 guys have absolutely nothing to do with the recent audio-cd issues.
Of course not. Its the people above them that are the problematic persons.
The Sony Playstation people I have spoken to / met (both online and in real person) all seemed nice and down-to-earth - not evil, moneygrabbing monsters.
There are nice people that work for telemarketing and companies that border line in fraud. I don't have anything against them either and I'm not going to chastise them for trying to make a living.
The 2 issues don't need to be mixed, imho.
If my money indirectly or directly supports their profit margin then yes it does.
Secondly, how do you not know that DRM technology from another department will be used on the PS3?
Sure the nice guy geeks in PS3 won't include DRM, but what if the upper management or VP says they will use it? I remember a few kickass software devs that worked for a particular gaming company who were forced by their publisher to include pervasive anti-copying software on their game which they themselves disagreed with on their own forums.
The focus of the show isn't the same as Law & Order, which is a bit more far reaching.
You mean that show that makes it look ok to trample on the bill of right?
Then again... I suppose it wouldn't be interesting if everyone they arrested said "I plead the 5th!" and stayed silent throughout the entire episode.
Even if you are innocent it actually benefits you to remain silent if you are a suspect or explain you don't remember and couldn't give valid information that would help them in their case.
Our company's main system is written in FoxPro for DOS 2.6. The FP programmers here seem to have guaranteed lifetime employment :-)
I worked for a rather large ISP who in the process up and switched from a rather large home grown custom database program it had used for years to the corporate Vantive which cost them millions at the time.
I asked my manager why would they bother doing such a thing when the old program worked just fine. He said "The guy who made the program died and know one knows how to code for it."
I laughed for a moment and then by his blank face realized he wasn't joking...
The problem I have with this is that no one seems to be looking at the logistical problems of what would happen if the human life span was increased so much. I think that it is a pandora's box.
Its not the death rate, but rather the birth rate of the human race that is the problem with that. If mankind sustains the current yearly birthrate, there will be more humans than atoms in the universe in 17,000 years. Yeah, I'm scratching my head about that one too (there is some wiki article article but i can't find it)
If people lived to be 1,000 years old and had children at a reasonable rate... say... 1 child per 500 years then we wouldn't have that problem.
The problems with scams is that they leave the victims with no course of retribution.
I personally believe sams have their place in PvP, but not so much PvE games.
In Ultima Online (back when everything was "unconsensual" as the article states Lord British saying) if someone scammed you and you knew who they were you had a chance of taking revenge on them at least by killing them.
I knew a guy that scammed my coworker back in 2000 (or was it 1999) and he took it personally. My coworker had a house and somehow this guy actually hacked his account with a trojan that he sent him on ICQ since he was supposedly a friend online and cleaned out his house and since it was obvious that it was the file that he had sent him he knew what the other names he played with.
We spent many a night just showing up and following him around. Out of the blue when he stepped out of the town we would kill him. We turned him in for macroing several times and even had someone make a character just to join his guild that he was in to mess with him.
When he was in town we'd have throw away death robe theives to steal from him and even run up to him naked with DP (deadly posion) daggers and hit him to make him die in town (even though the guards would halberd us at the same time)
After a while, we might have made it over excessive given the retaliation harrasment we gave him, but with player justice we took things into our own hands rather than letting the GMs handle it.
In a PvE environment this is really impossible since players do not have any other ways of retribution other than reporting the offending player.
However, the down side of player justice is that if you weren't in a guild or were just a poor player compared to the rest you don't have much chance of retribution. Secondly, I think often times player justice would often kill the wrong player or people that were supsect of scamming or being pks.
In a simulated world scams are just an extension of the theiving and player killing and perhaps is a legitimate strategy (although I would disdain anyone who would scam anyone in a game). However, you still have to balance that out with what the player base will tolerate in the terms of 'greifing'.
Man: "Look! We finally got our digital TV!"
Woman: "Quick turn it on!"
Newreporter: "This just in! A meteor will hit the earth in 20 minutes... Machines have become sentient and are attacking humans... And the sun is collapsing into a black hole!"
Man: "Oh bloody hell!"
Woman: "I told you not to mock the Mayan statues on our honey moon!"
Man: "Mayans be damned, I've just lost my bet of 500 quid to Arthur at the pub over that Terence McKenna fellow!"
All the talk about the possible use of this technology in Iraq serves only to justify all the millions being spent on these machine translation projects.
In light of the bad things it causes, war tends to have given us most of our modern day technological conveniences.
Left to its own I would suspect the private sector wouldn't be coming up with things like the Manhattan project or even starting the internet as early as they did. (Internet being DARPA's child as a defense of transferring data after a nuclear attack)
If tax dollars are put into universal translators and military robots, then I don't personally mind because this means that I will reap the benefits sooner than if this was left up to the private sector who will also benefit from the military's effort.
But that doesn't mean I support the war in Iraq...
Or better yet... A little squawky voice that says:
"WE COME IN PEACE! WE COME IN PEACE!"
Apologies to Tim Burton.
In fact, hiding behind NAT gives you about 17 million potential addresses. Anybody trying to get info on your computer or network has to first find the needle in the hay stack.
If i'm not mistaken, if you are using IE and you connect to an IIS webserver server it can log your internal IP by asking IE to ask your OS.
I remember this because I wrote an ASP page once that had a log of all people who visited the site and I had incorrectly wrote the code to pull that address and we ended up with a list of many 192.168.*.* rather than the true external IP address which we wanted... This was maybe 4 years ago and I can't remember exactly what I did to fix it, but unless MS corrected it with later versions of IE then I would assume that it is not too hard to get someones internal address if they visit a website.
It doesn't matter if you know the internal ip address of someone behind a NAT router you still can't get there from the outside.
If they compromise the NAT device (aka someone setup the router and thought remote access to the routers setup page would be a good idea, but for some unknown reason didn't change the default password *coughs*) then they could setup up blanket port fowarding to the internal IP address in question and proceed to attack that machine like they would if it were directly on the net.
But luckily most NAT devices are not setup for that and most people don't know how to turn that option on in the first place.
Well the sky isn't falling but think of it like this...
You are building a house. Its a very big big house and you are building a very big basement to hold your wife's shoes. Its so big that it is taking years to build the house. Before you started your wife only had 1 million shoes and you thought to yourself, "Damn women won't buy any more than 10 million shoes in 10 years!" so you have the contractor design the specs so the basement will hold 10 million shoes.
However, after you complete the basement and start to build the frame of the house it occurs to you that you wife already has 8 million shoes and your only 1 year into building the house and she isn't slowing down.
So you have to choices at this point... Either:
1. Assume that she is going to have more shoes than your original basement can hold and build a bigger basement now and then build the house.
2. Assume your original assumption was correct and complete construction on the house itself and if you are wrong then you will have to lift the entire house up and rebuild a bigger basement.
The first option is more expensive and a pain in the immediate terms, but if you are wrong and you do run out of space then it is going to be really expensive and a big pain in the arse to lift the entire house up and redo the infrastructure underneath it. The more time that passes and the more you build on top of the basement foundation, the more problematic it will be to lift the entire house.
So in a sense... The sooner we start rolling out IPv6 the less of a pain it will be in the future if we turn out to really need it.
Now if will excuse me... I just broke my own rule on analogies and the internet.
Usenet is deeply flawed. Its democratic dream offers no defence against viruses, spammers, criminals, hucksters or deranged individuals.
How is this different from the rest of the internet?
By the same token, if they make more profit from adding draconian DRM to their CD's, then they will do so.
The fallacy of that thinking is that they assume piracy originates from the majority people who buy their music. DRM might in fact decrease profits since it will just annoy legitimate customers (see Sony debacle) and pirates will download music anyways from someone who removed the DRM through technical means or just ripped it through analog ports.
Someone thought it would cute to mode him as insightful instead of funny and now everyone else reads a well done piece of sarcasm and takes it literally.
No, 26 and I take it you've never been to Detroit or even bothered to look at the legal definition of property theft or copyright infringment.
However I wouldn't call you an idiot if you have made the willful choice not to visit Detroit.
On the other issue... I would say you are.
This is why, like it or not, it is the role of the government (or at least the legal system) to come down and come down HARD on those who choose to pirate.
Great idea. Lets hurry up and put those CEO's in jail for all the lives they exploit and artists they ruin.
Seriously, piracy by legal definition theft of property nor lively hood (It is a total different crime and should remain a civl court issue).
Government should be spending more time going after people who actually do others direct harm such as scammers, rapists, and murderers. Throwing kids in jail because they download MP3s is not something we should be putting too much effort into.
Or perhaps you would like to walk around Detroit about 3am in the morning to prove me wrong.
That girl that nobody wants to date comes from the richest family in the world. I'll date her...
I've dated her before... Having her pay the dinner bill was nice but she never uses proper protection like Miss OS X does.
And even after two doctors visits later... *Ow*
It still burns when I pee.
Fair enough. Still doesn't answer the deeper questions, but I don't think humans can find those on their own.
The current Mac GUI stinks. I have to use it occassionaly for work and it drives me nuts with frustration. Just moving the windows about or (much worse) resizing them is a nightmare on a large screen. The Dock is far too limited, the menu bar too far away, the general layout of the control panel, to say nothing of the madness which is the file tree with its "sometimes I'm Unix, sometimes I'm MacOS" tangle. I hate it.
To give you professional advice, it appears your mastery of moving the mouse cursor across the screen and clicking leaves something to be desired. May I suggest buying a lubricated mouse pad for easier motion til your arm gets strong enough to drag items into the dock on a regular basis.
Gamers (and, dare I say it, many web surfers) have trained themselves to forego real work and real life in favor of a game.
And what will real work and real life acheive in the end? Hrm???
A happy relaxed life doing nothing much will still end up the same as a sad bitter overworked life.