Instructions for the uninitiated/lazy... Directly from the Windows Help dialogue:
To specify shortcut keys for specific programs Before beginning this procedure, please refer to the documentation that came with the program to verify a shortcut was installed.
Open My Computer. Locate the program file (.exe) or the program's shortcut icon. Right-click the program file or shortcut, and then click Properties. Click the Program tab for an MS-DOS program or the Shortcut tab for a Windows program. With the cursor in the Shortcut key box, select the keyboard key you want to use in combination with CTRL+ALT. Shortcut keys automatically start with CTRL+ALT. The Shortcut key box will display None until you select the key and then the box will display Ctrl+Alt+the key you selected. You cannot use the ESC, ENTER, TAB, SPACEBAR, PRINT SCREEN, SHIFT, or BACKSPACE keys.
it requires more than 100 times less energy to send something out of moon's gravity
I think that means it requires less than 1/100 of the energy to fire something from the Moon compared to firing something from the Earth.
Just clarification, as your wording was a bit confusing. Still, its a neat idea, but brings up some questions. Where do we safely land these things? Also, it would take some special care not to fire titanium into our other man-made satellites. I doubt it's really a feasible model at this point in time.
It would have been sufficient to point out that he looked like a fool for the socialism bit, and even more still for his nonsense solution. Yet your argument is what? He's a Libertarian and Libertarians lack sense, so he's excused from class? A few bits of advice come to mind. 1) Refrain from attacking his character; it causes your argument to lose weight, since it shows you are obviously biased against his opinions from the get go. 2) If you are going to attack someone for holding certain opinions, make it clear why you do not agree with the opinions. ("You look crazy" is grossly insufficient)
It's not that I don't agree with you; it's that I don't like people making points that I agree with making themselves look foolish in the process, as that makes them just a little bit harder to be associated with. You don't like Libertarians. That's fine. Calling someone senseless because they're a Libertarian. That's.... senseless? Modded Insightful? Try Overrated.
"...goes inside one of the year's biggest tech launches."
One of the years biggest tech launches? It's only been 10 days!
And really, if the most interesting thing about your product is how you kept it secret, and it wasn't even that much of a secret, then you probably aren't doing so hot.
and fed the women a recipe from the early 60's
That doesn't seem so bad. My mom still has some of her cookbooks from the 60s... And how often do her dishes explode? The average lifetime is around 3 years.
So the million dollar question is: Can you have security directives that are open to the public that provide an acceptable level of security?
It certainly seems possible. Proving that it is impossible to have security directives that aren't a secret which still provide security would be an argument in favor of keeping the source to the voting machines closed. I don't have enough blind faith in either the TSA or EAC to trust that either system actually provides the level of security that they purport it does, though that is exactly what they are asking for; Blind trust in the governmental oversight that is to be keeping them in line. Call me paranoid, but that doesn't exactly sound like the system is designed with my best interests in mind.
I'm sure the author feels more strongly about this two, and the fact that he even mentioned opening it means he's at least given some thought to that. But, at this point it seems that he feels he deserves some money for all his efforts over the years, and I'm inclined to agree with him. It's not that it sounds like he doesn't want to open it, it seems like he does. But if he just opens it straight away, he might not have the leverage he needs for this last opportunity to make some money off of it. It sounds like he could use some cash right now, and opening the code would require even more work with still no promise of being paid.
I'd bet that it is likely that once his money problems are resolved, whether through working on this project or another, we will at least see work on this project resumed if not opened up completely. I'm sure he doesn't want to see his work go to waste just as much as you.
Better yet is the usage of the word "was". The debris was not believed to be hazardous. But now it has transformed into a giant robot and is currently rampaging through downtown Milwaukee.
While there is an argument as to whether or not the 200 x 100 actually provides and increase vs. the 20,000 scenario, it's also important to keep in mind the strength in branding. So, spinning off into smaller companies, however more or less efficient, would be counter-productive if those smaller companies cannot benefit from the google namesake. Contrary to Idealab philosophy, there are benefits to being a single large entity.
Nah, it won't be considered successful until Dell , HP, and the other OEM's are prepackaging them as the default in their machines. That's a ways away, and requires the consumer adoption that you've just mentioned. The only problem is that most consumers already have a computer with a DVD player, or burner, so there is no real reason for them to move to a format that doesn't offer any benefits other than the fact that it is royalty free. Maybe being an Open format would make a difference, but probably unlikely and not enough to turn that many heads. Then you have to worry about strong arming that the DVD consorts would surely apply to these OEM's in such a case.
It's a long ways off and a relative long shot, from where I'm sitting.
From the link: Earlier this month, EFF's FLAG Project submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to DHS seeking more details about the ATS data-mining program, but the agency has not yet disclosed the requested information.
It's also true that people who own automobiles cause nearly 100% of vehicular manslaughters in this country. Nevertheless, the vast majority of automobile owners do not cause death or injury with their cars.
The point is that getting rid of cars or guns isn't going to solve the problem of people acting irrationally or irresponsibly. Banning is a useless solution because it only treats the symptom and not the problem, and will not cause a decrease in violent activities. People need to be educated so they can find better solutions to resolve their personal problems, or in other cases properly medicated and/or given therapy to resolve their psychological problems.
I really don't believe that sanctions will do much of anything until they result in human suffering. I'm pretty much for an all or nothing approach. I don't think I can say anything more than that without coming off as extremely callous.
Criticizing them for not doing so is as silly as criticizing the NRA for not defending Amendment 3.I agree with you for the most part, though I think it would be better if the ACLU weren't so reluctant to stand up for 2nd Amendment rights.
The only problem with your statement is in your analogy at the end. The NRA is specifically focused on protecting 2nd Amendment rights, where as the ACLU, as their name implies, is for protecting "civil liberties". 2nd Amendment rights are civil liberties, so according to their name they should be protecting those rights too. I find they excuse not to protect them acceptable. So, NRA is a group aimed at protecting specific civil rights, whereas the ACLU is protecting a broad range of civil rights. This is what makes your analogy inaccurate.
Slashdot Mirror
Instructions for the uninitiated/lazy...
Directly from the Windows Help dialogue:
To specify shortcut keys for specific programs
Before beginning this procedure, please refer to the documentation that came with the program to verify a shortcut was installed.
Open My Computer.
Locate the program file (.exe) or the program's shortcut icon. Right-click the program file or shortcut, and then click Properties.
Click the Program tab for an MS-DOS program or the Shortcut tab for a Windows program.
With the cursor in the Shortcut key box, select the keyboard key you want to use in combination with CTRL+ALT. Shortcut keys automatically start with CTRL+ALT. The Shortcut key box will display None until you select the key and then the box will display Ctrl+Alt+the key you selected. You cannot use the ESC, ENTER, TAB, SPACEBAR, PRINT SCREEN, SHIFT, or BACKSPACE keys.
I agree, rapists and murderers should get much harsher punishments. 100 years for spamming is fine the way it is.
What's with all the anti-Libertarian nonsense?
It would have been sufficient to point out that he looked like a fool for the socialism bit, and even more still for his nonsense solution. Yet your argument is what? He's a Libertarian and Libertarians lack sense, so he's excused from class? A few bits of advice come to mind.
1) Refrain from attacking his character; it causes your argument to lose weight, since it shows you are obviously biased against his opinions from the get go.
2) If you are going to attack someone for holding certain opinions, make it clear why you do not agree with the opinions. ("You look crazy" is grossly insufficient)
It's not that I don't agree with you; it's that I don't like people making points that I agree with making themselves look foolish in the process, as that makes them just a little bit harder to be associated with. You don't like Libertarians. That's fine. Calling someone senseless because they're a Libertarian. That's.... senseless? Modded Insightful? Try Overrated.
"...goes inside one of the year's biggest tech launches." One of the years biggest tech launches? It's only been 10 days! And really, if the most interesting thing about your product is how you kept it secret, and it wasn't even that much of a secret, then you probably aren't doing so hot.
So the million dollar question is: Can you have security directives that are open to the public that provide an acceptable level of security?
It certainly seems possible. Proving that it is impossible to have security directives that aren't a secret which still provide security would be an argument in favor of keeping the source to the voting machines closed. I don't have enough blind faith in either the TSA or EAC to trust that either system actually provides the level of security that they purport it does, though that is exactly what they are asking for; Blind trust in the governmental oversight that is to be keeping them in line. Call me paranoid, but that doesn't exactly sound like the system is designed with my best interests in mind.
I'm sure the author feels more strongly about this two, and the fact that he even mentioned opening it means he's at least given some thought to that. But, at this point it seems that he feels he deserves some money for all his efforts over the years, and I'm inclined to agree with him. It's not that it sounds like he doesn't want to open it, it seems like he does. But if he just opens it straight away, he might not have the leverage he needs for this last opportunity to make some money off of it. It sounds like he could use some cash right now, and opening the code would require even more work with still no promise of being paid.
I'd bet that it is likely that once his money problems are resolved, whether through working on this project or another, we will at least see work on this project resumed if not opened up completely. I'm sure he doesn't want to see his work go to waste just as much as you.
Better yet is the usage of the word "was". The debris was not believed to be hazardous. But now it has transformed into a giant robot and is currently rampaging through downtown Milwaukee.
How about the Mongooses? That's a good team name. "The Fighting Mongooses." Yeah!
While there is an argument as to whether or not the 200 x 100 actually provides and increase vs. the 20,000 scenario, it's also important to keep in mind the strength in branding. So, spinning off into smaller companies, however more or less efficient, would be counter-productive if those smaller companies cannot benefit from the google namesake. Contrary to Idealab philosophy, there are benefits to being a single large entity.
Nah, it won't be considered successful until Dell , HP, and the other OEM's are prepackaging them as the default in their machines. That's a ways away, and requires the consumer adoption that you've just mentioned. The only problem is that most consumers already have a computer with a DVD player, or burner, so there is no real reason for them to move to a format that doesn't offer any benefits other than the fact that it is royalty free. Maybe being an Open format would make a difference, but probably unlikely and not enough to turn that many heads. Then you have to worry about strong arming that the DVD consorts would surely apply to these OEM's in such a case.
It's a long ways off and a relative long shot, from where I'm sitting.
Survival of the fittest FTW!
Only if they both kill each other.
What were they thinking?! Didn't they see what the superhuman registration act did to the Fantastic Four?
*sigh* This will all end in tears...
Is that what that squealing was? Phew, I thought my cpu fan was going again.
Try to keep it down next time.
Oops, forgot the link:
3 0
http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2006_11.php#0050
Linkage
From the link:
Earlier this month, EFF's FLAG Project submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to DHS seeking more details about the ATS data-mining program, but the agency has not yet disclosed the requested information.
For EFF's full comments to DHS:
http://www.eff.org/Privacy/ats/ats_comments.pdf
For the DHS Federal Register notice announcing ATS:
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/06-9026.htm
It's also true that people who own automobiles cause nearly 100% of vehicular manslaughters in this country. Nevertheless, the vast majority of automobile owners do not cause death or injury with their cars.
The point is that getting rid of cars or guns isn't going to solve the problem of people acting irrationally or irresponsibly. Banning is a useless solution because it only treats the symptom and not the problem, and will not cause a decrease in violent activities. People need to be educated so they can find better solutions to resolve their personal problems, or in other cases properly medicated and/or given therapy to resolve their psychological problems.
I really don't believe that sanctions will do much of anything until they result in human suffering. I'm pretty much for an all or nothing approach. I don't think I can say anything more than that without coming off as extremely callous.
Although satire is usually witty, and often very funny, the primary purpose of satire is not primarily humour but criticism of an individual or a group in a witty manner.
Just because it's not funny doesn't mean it isn't good satire.
Even still, I thought the story was funny.
Criticizing them for not doing so is as silly as criticizing the NRA for not defending Amendment 3.I agree with you for the most part, though I think it would be better if the ACLU weren't so reluctant to stand up for 2nd Amendment rights.
The only problem with your statement is in your analogy at the end. The NRA is specifically focused on protecting 2nd Amendment rights, where as the ACLU, as their name implies, is for protecting "civil liberties". 2nd Amendment rights are civil liberties, so according to their name they should be protecting those rights too. I find they excuse not to protect them acceptable. So, NRA is a group aimed at protecting specific civil rights, whereas the ACLU is protecting a broad range of civil rights. This is what makes your analogy inaccurate.
He's a fanboy with proper spelling and grammar? Not likely. He's probably in it for the money too.