And out of the room's [sic] raw materials, notably fine grey dust and grey rocks, you can make... um... not much?
Well, there are some folks over at the American Society of Civil Engineers woul might disagree with you there, sport.
Absolutely. Eveyone knows that mining and refining is so much easier in a hard vacuum. Not.
Nice attempt at misrepresentation, but no. When I referred to the moon's lack of atmosphere as a plus, I was stating that launching these materials (either into lunar orbit, earth orbit, or to L5) could be accomplished much more easily (by utilizing a solar-powered linear accelerator, rather than rockets).
...dismissing me as a troll doesn't invalidate the question.
Actually, he didn't dismiss you. If he had, he wouldn't have bothered responding to your post at all.
What of the previous moon trip, Skylab, the russian station, ISS, the Shuttle missions?
Oh, so we've already discovered everything we're going to discover in space, then? You sound like those people who wanted to close the Patent Office in 1901 because there was 'nothing left to invent'.
Re:I'm all for science/technology/astronomy but...
on
Back to Moon in 2015?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
And as I mentioned in a reply to that different post, you need something to build with. Once the infrastructure is in place, it's far cheaper to lift raw materials from the moon than it is to lift them from the earth.
L5 is an excellent place to build...but you need something to build with. The moon is ideal for harvesting raw materials, due to its shallow gravity well and lack of atmosphere.
Yes, I do...which is why I didn't say it was legal in Utah...
What I did say is that Utah, due (in main part) to its Mormon population, has a higher incidence of polygamy (a behaviour most Americans consider immoral) than average. When most people think of polygamy, they think of Utah...search this particular discussion for 'polygamy', 'bigamy', and 'wives' if you doubt this.
Personally, I think it's amusing that the legislature of the polygamy state sees fit to impose its own arbitrary definitions of immorality on the state at large.
Interesting article...but it seemed to fail to mention one important dynamic.
As time passes, operating systems and applications become progressively larger and more complex, requiring correspondingly more robust hardware to run on. I doubt that the 'entry level PC' (whatever that means) of a year ago is equal to the 'entry level PC' of today.
...until you drop this childish "I'm a rebel fighting 'THE MAN'" "M$" silliness YOU can't be taken objectively.
Well, you seem to be taking it seriously enough. I started using M$ because it's a handy abbreviation, and one that's recognized instantly by readers here. I continue using it because it gets under the skin of people like you. Nice to see it still works.
There's a nice penny arcade strip that pretty much details people like you. (I'm sure you've all seen it by now).
While I enjoy the antics of Gabe and Tycho as much as the next geek, I've managed to retain enough individuality to express opinions different from them on occasion. You ought to try it.
I'd like to pull a Jay & Silent Bob and visit each moron that uses "M$" in a post and give them a severe ass kicking.
Fresh from a Penny Arcade reference, we slide straight into a 'Jay and Silent Bob' reference. But I'm the one who is 'childish' and 'can't be taken objectively'.
One day, my dream will be reality.
No, it won't. Sorry to burst your bubble, but perhaps you ought to focus on a slightly more obtainable goal...like moving out of you Mom's basement.
Considering how complex piece of software it is, it's entirely possible that it does sometimes require reboot, but not always.
No, it's NOT. Your prevarications aside, Office (since 2000) doesn't require a reboot during installation (on Windows since 2000). Period. Over the years, I must have done over a thousand such installs...do you know how many of these installs required a restart? ZERO. That's why I doubted the AC's word, and that's why I reject your 'it's possible' argument now.
1.1.x releases are minor bugfix updates, you don't count office as having a new version every time a patch comes out, do you?
So we've established that the version of Open Office referenced in the comparison is of a more recent patch level. Disregarding for the moment that this supports my argument, what exactly is the patch level of the M$ Office referenced in the comparison?
You don't know? Neither do I. Yet another piece of vital info the author failed to specify.
...the Return to Flight Task Group, the overseeing committee that determines when the Space Shuttles can go back into space, has reported that the only items blocking the Shuttles are issues 'related to tank debris, orbiter hardening and tile repair.'
Um....aren't those problems the reason the Shuttles were grounded in the first place???
Also from TFS:
However, NASA has made clear it intends to resume shuttle flights with the repair capabilities it has in hand without knowing for sure whether they would work in an emergency.
Well...does this 'Return to Flight Task Group' have the authority to ground the flights?
From TFA:
It is unclear how much weight the panelists' opinion carries. NASA administrator Michael Griffin has said that he does not consider it mandatory to get the task group's go-ahead to fly the shuttle.
Apparently, they don't. Remind me exactly why we had a 'Return to Flight Task Group' again...
MS Office 2003 on Win XP doesn't require a restart?
No, it doesn't. As I stated earlier, it hasn't required a restart since Win2K.
I just installed it yesterday on somoene's computer, which was running Win XP Pro.
And are you saying it required a restart? I just want to be clear on this, since if that is what you are saying, that makes you a liar.
Perhaps people would take your lies more seriously if you didn't post anonymously...
And perhaps they wouldn't.
Regarding your insinuation regarding the age of Open Office versus the plus-one-year old M$ Office, I took your friendly advice and visited the OpenOffice website. Like to know what I found?
From The website:
OpenOffice.org 1.1.4 Downloads Updated 2004-12
Looks significantly younger to me (approx. 6 months). Nice try, though.
In conclusion, you are an idiot, and you should log off before you hurt yourself.
OK...fair enough question...I'll respond with a few examples.
First, a 'test result' that favors Open Office:
The first thing I did was to install OO.o It took only 7.5 minutes and took up 164MB (94.82 according to Windows). It did not require a restart. It has been over a year since I installed MS Office, but I know it had to be restarted and that it takes up 450MB (according to Windows).
OK...first, I'd just like to point out that Office installs haven't required a restart since Windows 2000. Of course, the author fails to even mention the OS he's running these 'tests' under...
Now, here's a 'test result' that favors M$ Office:
Word takes up more memory total, but Writer uses more in the main process. It is not a big difference.
Not surprising that he downplays this 'test result', as he has already admitted, 'I don't like Microsoft'...
A 'test result' in favor of Open Office:
Word was terrible when formatting was added. Word also had unused data at the top, like declaring fonts, but I only used one. I wanted to compare this to Dreamweaver, but it froze for about 2 hours trying to copy in the text.
And one in favor of M$ OFfice:
Word used more memory, but was faster, sort of.
Add to all this the fact that the author is comparing a brand new version of Open Office to a M$ Office install over a year old, and the 'skewing' I mentioned in my original post should be obvious to even the most rabid M$-hater.
Nice that the author is admitting his bias up front...makes the obvious skewing in the rest of this 'test' marginally easier to swallow.
I'd love to see a good, objective comparison of M$ Office and Open Office...too bad this article ain't it.
Dumbest thing I've read all week...
on
The Evil in E-Mail
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
From TFA:
Skillicorn doesn't know all the ways suspicious e-mails might read differently from innocent ones. The beauty of his approach is that he doesn't need to know. His software is designed simply to look for messages that are different, based on word frequencies, from the mass of e-mails. It needn't understand the reasons for the differences.
Super. I'm predicting a whole lot of false positives...especially during the initial phase of this operation...
Also from TFA:
One difference might be the complete absence of words someone might possibly think would draw a law enforcement agency's attention to their e-mails, but that most people would occasionally use innocently (as in "my presentation yesterday really bombed.")
Great...so words like 'bombed' get the email flagged...as well as an absense of the word 'bombed'? So far, Skillicorn's test appears 100% sensitive...too bad it's 0% specific.
Some more from TFA:
A related trick, he says, is to examine patterns in who e-mails whom. As an example, in criminal networks it is common to find several people communicating regularly with the same person, but never with each other.
OMG! This is the pattern of emails in my company! My whole company is a giant terrorist organization! I had no idea!
/sarcasm
But here's the kicker...again with the quoting:
To help with his work, Skillicorn has been working with archives of e-mail from Enron Corp., the company at the heart of one of the most prominent scandals in recent U.S. business history. In some respects, he notes, the Enron e-mails are not a good sample for analysis, because Enron employees seemed to have no compunction about what they were doing. "People should feel some guilt or at least some self-consciousness when they're being deceptive," he says.
So let me get this straight...if criminals are okay with their criminal activity (like...say...terrorists), they'll 'slip under the radar'??? Great test, Skillicorn...sounds a lot like a standard polygraph test, which experienced criminals can fool at will, while innocent people fail them 50% of the time. That's what the War on Terror really needs...another inaccurate 'test' that does nothing but throw false positives.
I'm just glad that this method is so obviously stupid that it will never be implemented by our government... Oh, wait...one more from TFA:
Such technology has obvious applications in surveillance by law enforcement and security bodies, but Skillicorn suspects agencies like the U.S. National Security Agency have little need of his help. "I infer from things they say around me that some of this stuff they already do," he says.
Good day, gentlemen. As you are no doubt aware, I have perfected a device capable of manipulating the earth's magnetic field. This device has already shifted the position of the earth's poles by a significant margin, and will continue to do so, eventually forcing the poles to swap positions entirely. For this reason, I've christened this latest caper 'Operation Roly-Poley'...
You see, gentlemen, Operation Roly-Poley will continue to destabilize the magnetic field of our fragile world, causing geological and meteorological disturbances on a global scale...that is, of course...unless you pay me...
One hundred billion kajillion fafillion dollaaaars! (cue dramatic music)
Remember Pastor Ken Hutcherson, and how he leaned on Bill about the whole gay issue? Where the hell is he now? Surely, if he and his band of fundies can kick up that much of a fuss about homosexuality, they can certainly flex their muscles in the defense of human liberty and dignity. C'mon, Ken...you've still got Bill's number...and here's a cause actually worth fighting for.
Slashdot Mirror
And out of the room's [sic] raw materials, notably fine grey dust and grey rocks, you can make
Well, there are some folks over at the American Society of Civil Engineers woul might disagree with you there, sport.
Absolutely. Eveyone knows that mining and refining is so much easier in a hard vacuum. Not.
Nice attempt at misrepresentation, but no.
When I referred to the moon's lack of atmosphere as a plus, I was stating that launching these materials (either into lunar orbit, earth orbit, or to L5) could be accomplished much more easily (by utilizing a solar-powered linear accelerator, rather than rockets).
Hope that clears things up for you.
Actually, he didn't dismiss you. If he had, he wouldn't have bothered responding to your post at all.
What of the previous moon trip, Skylab, the russian station, ISS, the Shuttle missions?
Oh, so we've already discovered everything we're going to discover in space, then? You sound like those people who wanted to close the Patent Office in 1901 because there was 'nothing left to invent'.
And as I mentioned in a reply to that different post, you need something to build with. Once the infrastructure is in place, it's far cheaper to lift raw materials from the moon than it is to lift them from the earth.
L5 is an excellent place to build...but you need something to build with. The moon is ideal for harvesting raw materials, due to its shallow gravity well and lack of atmosphere.
That's what I thought at first, but no luck. Both articles are about Microsoft censoring its blog service, MSN Spaces.
This story is a dupe....reported previously as "Microsoft Bans 'Democracy' for China's Web Users" on Saturday, June 11th.
Dupes are nothing new here, but the following is what really boggles me...
From TFS:
Um...OK...if you know it's a dupe, why is it still being re-reported?
It's a dirty job, but someone's gotta do it...
I'm prepared to look at porn as much as I have to to render a just verdict.
^_^
Mormons haven't practiced polygamy since the 1800s.
Someone ought to tell the Mormons that.
Just google 'mormon', 'polygamy', 'utah', and 'charges', and you'll see that the practice, while illegal, is still very much alive.
http://127.0.0.1/ is FULL of pornography!
Those dirty bastards! I'm gonna HAXX0R their site right now! I'll show them!
They're going downlsajkduhd877tyr74tghy78o74yto4qqpo4r4aaaaaaa.
NO CARRIER
Yes, I do...which is why I didn't say it was legal in Utah...
What I did say is that Utah, due (in main part) to its Mormon population, has a higher incidence of polygamy (a behaviour most Americans consider immoral) than average. When most people think of polygamy, they think of Utah...search this particular discussion for 'polygamy', 'bigamy', and 'wives' if you doubt this.
No, no...the AC was genuinely being congragulatory...note the absense of the <sarcasm> flag from his post.
^_^
Personally, I think it's amusing that the legislature of the polygamy state sees fit to impose its own arbitrary definitions of immorality on the state at large.
And if that isn't geeky enough to make it on Slashdot, the flight computers run Slack.
This shouldn't come as any surprise...after all, it's difficult to recover from a BSOD when your reset button is in the stratosphere...
^_^
Interesting article...but it seemed to fail to mention one important dynamic.
As time passes, operating systems and applications become progressively larger and more complex, requiring correspondingly more robust hardware to run on. I doubt that the 'entry level PC' (whatever that means) of a year ago is equal to the 'entry level PC' of today.
Well, you seem to be taking it seriously enough. I started using M$ because it's a handy abbreviation, and one that's recognized instantly by readers here. I continue using it because it gets under the skin of people like you. Nice to see it still works.
There's a nice penny arcade strip that pretty much details people like you. (I'm sure you've all seen it by now).
While I enjoy the antics of Gabe and Tycho as much as the next geek, I've managed to retain enough individuality to express opinions different from them on occasion. You ought to try it.
I'd like to pull a Jay & Silent Bob and visit each moron that uses "M$" in a post and give them a severe ass kicking.
Fresh from a Penny Arcade reference, we slide straight into a 'Jay and Silent Bob' reference. But I'm the one who is 'childish' and 'can't be taken objectively'.
One day, my dream will be reality.
No, it won't. Sorry to burst your bubble, but perhaps you ought to focus on a slightly more obtainable goal...like moving out of you Mom's basement.
Considering how complex piece of software it is, it's entirely possible that it does sometimes require reboot, but not always.
No, it's NOT. Your prevarications aside, Office (since 2000) doesn't require a reboot during installation (on Windows since 2000). Period. Over the years, I must have done over a thousand such installs...do you know how many of these installs required a restart? ZERO.
That's why I doubted the AC's word, and that's why I reject your 'it's possible' argument now.
1.1.x releases are minor bugfix updates, you don't count office as having a new version every time a patch comes out, do you?
So we've established that the version of Open Office referenced in the comparison is of a more recent patch level. Disregarding for the moment that this supports my argument, what exactly is the patch level of the M$ Office referenced in the comparison?
You don't know? Neither do I. Yet another piece of vital info the author failed to specify.
Reads like The Early Times of Wesley Crusher...
^_^
From TFS:
Um....aren't those problems the reason the Shuttles were grounded in the first place???
Also from TFS:
Well...does this 'Return to Flight Task Group' have the authority to ground the flights?
From TFA:
Apparently, they don't.
Remind me exactly why we had a 'Return to Flight Task Group' again...
MS Office 2003 on Win XP doesn't require a restart?
No, it doesn't. As I stated earlier, it hasn't required a restart since Win2K.
I just installed it yesterday on somoene's computer, which was running Win XP Pro.
And are you saying it required a restart? I just want to be clear on this, since if that is what you are saying, that makes you a liar.
Perhaps people would take your lies more seriously if you didn't post anonymously...
And perhaps they wouldn't.
Regarding your insinuation regarding the age of Open Office versus the plus-one-year old M$ Office, I took your friendly advice and visited the OpenOffice website. Like to know what I found?
From The website:
Looks significantly younger to me (approx. 6 months). Nice try, though.
In conclusion, you are an idiot, and you should log off before you hurt yourself.
What obvious skewing?
OK...fair enough question...I'll respond with a few examples.
First, a 'test result' that favors Open Office:
OK...first, I'd just like to point out that Office installs haven't required a restart since Windows 2000. Of course, the author fails to even mention the OS he's running these 'tests' under...
Now, here's a 'test result' that favors M$ Office:
Not surprising that he downplays this 'test result', as he has already admitted, 'I don't like Microsoft'...
A 'test result' in favor of Open Office:
And one in favor of M$ OFfice:
Add to all this the fact that the author is comparing a brand new version of Open Office to a M$ Office install over a year old, and the 'skewing' I mentioned in my original post should be obvious to even the most rabid M$-hater.
TripMaster Monkey is a known astroturfer.
Is that a fact? Gee...I wonder where all my checks are, then...
Try browsing through my previous posts, moron, and you'll see what a 'MS zealot' I am.
Log off before you hurt yourself.
From TFA:
Nice that the author is admitting his bias up front...makes the obvious skewing in the rest of this 'test' marginally easier to swallow.
I'd love to see a good, objective comparison of M$ Office and Open Office...too bad this article ain't it.
From TFA:
Super. I'm predicting a whole lot of false positives...especially during the initial phase of this operation...
Also from TFA:
Great...so words like 'bombed' get the email flagged...as well as an absense of the word 'bombed'? So far, Skillicorn's test appears 100% sensitive...too bad it's 0% specific.
Some more from TFA:
OMG! This is the pattern of emails in my company! My whole company is a giant terrorist organization! I had no idea!
But here's the kicker...again with the quoting:
So let me get this straight...if criminals are okay with their criminal activity (like...say...terrorists), they'll 'slip under the radar'??? Great test, Skillicorn...sounds a lot like a standard polygraph test, which experienced criminals can fool at will, while innocent people fail them 50% of the time. That's what the War on Terror really needs...another inaccurate 'test' that does nothing but throw false positives.
I'm just glad that this method is so obviously stupid that it will never be implemented by our government...
Oh, wait...one more from TFA:
Crap.
Good day, gentlemen. As you are no doubt aware, I have perfected a device capable of manipulating the earth's magnetic field. This device has already shifted the position of the earth's poles by a significant margin, and will continue to do so, eventually forcing the poles to swap positions entirely. For this reason, I've christened this latest caper 'Operation Roly-Poley'...
You see, gentlemen, Operation Roly-Poley will continue to destabilize the magnetic field of our fragile world, causing geological and meteorological disturbances on a global scale...that is, of course...unless you pay me...
One hundred billion kajillion fafillion dollaaaars!
(cue dramatic music)
Gentlemen, you have my demands...peace out.
Remember Pastor Ken Hutcherson, and how he leaned on Bill about the whole gay issue? Where the hell is he now?
Surely, if he and his band of fundies can kick up that much of a fuss about homosexuality, they can certainly flex their muscles in the defense of human liberty and dignity.
C'mon, Ken...you've still got Bill's number...and here's a cause actually worth fighting for.