Obviously, this massive conspiracy will allow Big Brother to see every email sent in every possible manner (webmail out-of-country, SSH, all conceivable indirect manners).
It doesn't sound like a Good Thing(TM), but it doesn't signal the end of times either.
The shift in the nature of the software to take advantage of this doesn't really seem worth it, when you could just make two or three sketches of a concept at different angles, put those as the background in your modeling suite, and rough it out to the concept, then refine.
Whatever. I don't like the whole "pass-the-buck" culture.
You get what you pay for. If you can't fix it, everything else is a crapshoot. You might hit the support jackpot or you might get shrugged off by a grumpy bunch of developers.
There must be something awful special about the warning. I've seen malicious background changes to 'fake' alerts plenty of times. The more convincing you are to the victim, the more likely they'll buy your 'removal' software. Or at least I suppose that's the scheme.
But changing a background is certainly something automation is capable of.
At my uni, the radio station runs a "DJ-Tron" which is just a randomized playlist of a fraction of our music that plays whenever a DJ isn't in the booth. When a DJ is in the booth, he logs onto the computer, flips DJ-Tron off on the control panel, and starts spinning and talking and ear-screwing the listeners to their heart's content.
The computer is an old i386 with very unimpressive hardware, probably snatched from some lab when OIT switched over to Dell desktops running XP/Fedora.
We don't do much of anything with it; We keep a copy of firefox running to access the web-based DJ control panel, and a copy of X-Chat to interact with any peons listening in. Personally, I open an xterm from time to time to ssh into my home machine to adjust StreamRipper, or into my university lab account for godknowswhat.
So, we don't really need big guns like GNOME or KDE. We run BlackBox on the machine, and it works spectacularly for the purpose. If non-engineering personnel ever had to do something on that machine beyond the web, chat, or restarting bb, they'd be totally lost. But they never do, and it saves the rest of that beastly computing power (I suspect it could be a Pentium II, but it's PIII at best) for running the IceCast stream and other miscellaneous doodads.
He's obviously very very excited about this glorious WildTangent Orb business, which I (as a somewhat-in-the-know gamer) have never heard of. Ever.
I gave up around the time he started talking about booting up an HP or Toshiba or Gateway and doing something with Orb. I was just getting nothing out of this article.
Curious question though. As far as I knew, the 'future' of gaming is all about more specialization in chips. He's talking about merging the GPU and CPU, but the big things I keep hearing about include more specialization (PPU and PhysX anybody?). What gives?
Does this mean GNOME is now a better desktop than KDE, or just that I have become so accustomed to GNOME that it's hard for me to give it up?
Neither.
It just means you prefer GNOME to KDE. That's all. Saying something is more superior because you prefer it over everything else (without any other grounds) is something the Slashdot crowd should recognize from a mile away: fanboism.
Personally, I prefer Fluxbox. Does that make Fluxbox superior? No, it just means that as a minimalist user, a more trimmed window manager does the trick for me.
That was my first thought, but TFA mentions that claims of entrapment in this context usually don't get far, because the defendants weren't "forced" or "tricked" into doing something they don't usually do.
I guess that really depends on the manner in which this 'sting' was set up, but personally, I'll just trust the article.
What if this follows the same rules as most juvenile records? I know in the states, you get a "second chance" of sorts when you become an adult.
If they're truly criminals, you'd just recollect the sample when they commit another crime, but you still get the DNA and the scare-the-bad-out-of-them factor.
These attacks will masquerade as legitimate business agencies
The bastards!! I'd better warn my associates in South Africa.
Seriously, TFA comes off as a padded version of "uhm, so...they're probably going to keep finding new ways to do this...since that's what they already do". The report itself looks to hold a little more substance, but then, I guess it's hard to make news out of spam that doesn't involve a big shift in the court, because it's pretty boring by definition.
It's a cozy thought to think he'd be fine if the intentions of the group were more 'honest', but you can't really say he would, unless you're on a board or two at Ryerson.
The metastory is the important bit here; as we careen headfirst into the Web 2.0 world and our meatspace lives become increasingly public in the blue nowhere, how are the rules changing? In particular, is the academic world just a little slow in adjusting centuries of tradition to cope with the changing lives of students?
If my university couldn't offer me coursework better than copy-to-pass, I would probably withdraw. In this particular case I think Ryerson is justified because of the technicalities of the wording of the group. This poor shmoe probably never thought to change the greeting message on the group when he took over, so he's basically getting slammed over somebody else's words because he assumed their position when he took over their job of running this group.
Parent pretty much sums up particle physics, and why people don't get it.
If they don't find a Higgs boson, they're still stepping into a massive new range of collision energy. I think the LHC will produce collisions with a total energy of 14TeV (I haven't read about this for a while).
This step up allows all sorts of other interesting experiments to be run too.
Not to mention, GP smells a little under-the-bridge. But so does every post related to religion on slashdot.
I'm not really sure why anybody would go back to lynx who doesn't already just use it. There just wouldn't be images to view in [browser of preference].
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously, this massive conspiracy will allow Big Brother to see every email sent in every possible manner (webmail out-of-country, SSH, all conceivable indirect manners).
It doesn't sound like a Good Thing(TM), but it doesn't signal the end of times either.
The shift in the nature of the software to take advantage of this doesn't really seem worth it, when you could just make two or three sketches of a concept at different angles, put those as the background in your modeling suite, and rough it out to the concept, then refine.
You get what you pay for. If you can't fix it, everything else is a crapshoot. You might hit the support jackpot or you might get shrugged off by a grumpy bunch of developers.
There must be something awful special about the warning. I've seen malicious background changes to 'fake' alerts plenty of times. The more convincing you are to the victim, the more likely they'll buy your 'removal' software. Or at least I suppose that's the scheme.
But changing a background is certainly something automation is capable of.
For how long?
All this positioning and optimization and such is still missing the big picture.
And even if this does secure energy independence, is it really going to drive prices down that much?
As if thousands of voices cried out in agony....and were suddenly silenced.
Because the universities are trying to draw a line against other things. Airsoft for example, is banned in a lot of places.
These things don't get banned until somebody abuses the freedoms of the system and screws it up for everybody else.
Same old shit. Hope they push a good deal and get their Nerf back.
Just you wait, those hooligans with their "Open Source" will start jacking up the price, and you'll be sorry then, but I won't help you then!
A rather relevant example I can think of:
At my uni, the radio station runs a "DJ-Tron" which is just a randomized playlist of a fraction of our music that plays whenever a DJ isn't in the booth. When a DJ is in the booth, he logs onto the computer, flips DJ-Tron off on the control panel, and starts spinning and talking and ear-screwing the listeners to their heart's content.
The computer is an old i386 with very unimpressive hardware, probably snatched from some lab when OIT switched over to Dell desktops running XP/Fedora.
We don't do much of anything with it; We keep a copy of firefox running to access the web-based DJ control panel, and a copy of X-Chat to interact with any peons listening in. Personally, I open an xterm from time to time to ssh into my home machine to adjust StreamRipper, or into my university lab account for godknowswhat.
So, we don't really need big guns like GNOME or KDE. We run BlackBox on the machine, and it works spectacularly for the purpose. If non-engineering personnel ever had to do something on that machine beyond the web, chat, or restarting bb, they'd be totally lost. But they never do, and it saves the rest of that beastly computing power (I suspect it could be a Pentium II, but it's PIII at best) for running the IceCast stream and other miscellaneous doodads.
The right tool for the right job/user.
He's obviously very very excited about this glorious WildTangent Orb business, which I (as a somewhat-in-the-know gamer) have never heard of. Ever.
I gave up around the time he started talking about booting up an HP or Toshiba or Gateway and doing something with Orb. I was just getting nothing out of this article.
Curious question though. As far as I knew, the 'future' of gaming is all about more specialization in chips. He's talking about merging the GPU and CPU, but the big things I keep hearing about include more specialization (PPU and PhysX anybody?). What gives?
Neither.
It just means you prefer GNOME to KDE. That's all. Saying something is more superior because you prefer it over everything else (without any other grounds) is something the Slashdot crowd should recognize from a mile away: fanboism.
Personally, I prefer Fluxbox. Does that make Fluxbox superior? No, it just means that as a minimalist user, a more trimmed window manager does the trick for me.
....but I'm holding out for the pay-to-throw-out option.
We can do better!
That was my first thought, but TFA mentions that claims of entrapment in this context usually don't get far, because the defendants weren't "forced" or "tricked" into doing something they don't usually do.
I guess that really depends on the manner in which this 'sting' was set up, but personally, I'll just trust the article.
Well, I like to think in the theory and ideal aether a lot. In reality, of course, I can see why this is a bad idea.
My real question was, why the double standard? Why trust them with X, but not with Y, which is really just an upgraded version of X?
All quite interesting, and such and what-not.
What if this follows the same rules as most juvenile records? I know in the states, you get a "second chance" of sorts when you become an adult.
If they're truly criminals, you'd just recollect the sample when they commit another crime, but you still get the DNA and the scare-the-bad-out-of-them factor.
Now, if cloning is involved...
Quite so. I daresay this capitalism business is catching on rather quickly.
I don't know about you, but I just keep reusing the same oscilloscope from system to system...
Google's name and logo is on the report linked to in TFA, so I'd assume it IS fair to say that.
Plus, I imagine a year is an eternity at Google.
The bastards!! I'd better warn my associates in South Africa.
Seriously, TFA comes off as a padded version of "uhm, so...they're probably going to keep finding new ways to do this...since that's what they already do". The report itself looks to hold a little more substance, but then, I guess it's hard to make news out of spam that doesn't involve a big shift in the court, because it's pretty boring by definition.
Recently? You must have stopped coming around after signing up.
It's a cozy thought to think he'd be fine if the intentions of the group were more 'honest', but you can't really say he would, unless you're on a board or two at Ryerson.
The metastory is the important bit here; as we careen headfirst into the Web 2.0 world and our meatspace lives become increasingly public in the blue nowhere, how are the rules changing? In particular, is the academic world just a little slow in adjusting centuries of tradition to cope with the changing lives of students?
If my university couldn't offer me coursework better than copy-to-pass, I would probably withdraw. In this particular case I think Ryerson is justified because of the technicalities of the wording of the group. This poor shmoe probably never thought to change the greeting message on the group when he took over, so he's basically getting slammed over somebody else's words because he assumed their position when he took over their job of running this group.
Goddamn shame, really.
Parent pretty much sums up particle physics, and why people don't get it.
If they don't find a Higgs boson, they're still stepping into a massive new range of collision energy. I think the LHC will produce collisions with a total energy of 14TeV (I haven't read about this for a while).
This step up allows all sorts of other interesting experiments to be run too.
Not to mention, GP smells a little under-the-bridge. But so does every post related to religion on slashdot.
You're along the right track....sort-of.
It's a good deal above my head as an undergrad, but I do understand that the Higgs boson is somehow involved in giving rise to the nature of all other particles.
Brian Greene explains it pretty well in layman's terms in his book, The Elegant Universe.
Honestly, if I hadn't spent those modpoints on half-ass comments...
Religion is a man-made construct, social by definition and in nature. If you're looking for God, religion is a crutch.
I'm not really sure why anybody would go back to lynx who doesn't already just use it. There just wouldn't be images to view in [browser of preference].
Nostalgia: I remember when I understood it.