I'm just glad that Apple isn't a big secretive powerful corporation that threatens to sue small people, pushes DRM, or anything evil like that.
I'm sure someone is going to mod me for flamebait, but I never understand the people who insist Apple is the greatest company of the fan of the planet when there is plenty of proof that Apple is a corporation (for better or worse) on par with most corporations.
He suggests that everyone is starving in Africa. Malaria and AIDS may be larger threats in Africa than hunger. Some even suggest that the world's population will always expand to meet, and then exceed the food supply. (In less than 50 years, the world's population tripled from 2 billion to 6 billion with no signs it will slow down). I read a story on a doctor from the University of Nebraska who has spent the past 50 years or so traveling Africa teaching differing peoples how to grow and sustain crops in their environment. Sure beats buying them food once.
And buying computers with offline Wikipedia access is a major boon when textbooks aren't often available. Educating and empowering a people to move out of third-world status may be a more important project than feeding them today.
People with extreme opinions are interesting, for better or worse. That's why so many columnists and radio talk show hosts present extreme opinions. I wager that a large chunk of their audience, if not most of their audience disagrees with them, and may even hate them. Dvorak puts out insane predictions, and writes controversial opinions largely because it provokes such a strong reaction.
He has been known to express fanatic opinions, and later roll over later like he doesn't even care, which leads me to believe that he expresses fanaticism just to provoke people. Hence, he is a troll. He has been provoking people with his columns since 1986, which really might make him the first troll for computer geeks. Quoting from Wikipedia for proof of his trolly-ness.
"On 9 June 2006, he explained to Dave Winer that he would bait Mac users in order to increase traffic to his website."
Harrison Ford openly tanked the voice-over because he fought with the director on doing it. He thought it was stupid, and mailed in a poor performance in that regard. Many fans hate the voice-over, and thusly it was thankfully later removed.
Storytelling 101 - show, don't tell. Especially don't tell poorly.
The movie stands up quite well without the narration.
The Itanium line didn't run standard x86 binaries either, so saying "Intel" would be incorrect. Not to mention it completely ignores AMD and other x86 chip producers.
This is the 2008 awards, not the 2007 awards. Secondly, I hate when people link to an article that largely just links to another article. Here is the original article.
We already have devices designed for the mobile workforce, and they are called smart phones and PDAs and they get better every year with corporate research that doesn't cost tax payers anything.
Why should the EU be funding research for the corporate world?
The military were insanely successful in just wiping out the entire defense of Iraq almost overnight. They took full control of a country in less than a month.
However, in the the void of a government of Iraq, and undefended borders, you get the rise of insurgents. Military solutions don't really work there. You need diplomatic solutions to convince the local political and religious leaders to stop insurgents, fundamentalists, and terrorists. You need to convince them via ideology to lay down weapons and rebuild their homes.
It has taken 3 years to hunt down a couple thousand insurgents, and how many more are waiting in the wings, waiting to die in the name of their beliefs? We're not just talking about from the possible pool of 30 million Iraqis, but the entire Mid East. (Note, I'm not saying all Arabs are fundamentalist, but rather we're fighting insurgents from several nations right now. Fundamentalists are almost always a minority in any group, but often the most visible).
We can't fight this war forever, and that isn't the fault of the military or technology, but rather the fault of diplomats and politicians to not finish what they started, and I'm not pointing my finger at any one party. Both parties voted to go in, both parties continue to fund this, and both parties blame the other party as a means to make their party look better, while neither party are presenting solutions to actually finish the conflict. That is a travesty that no one speaks of.
I built homemade claymores in the field. And a grenade has an injure radius of 45 feet, but that doesn't mean it kills within 45 feet. Claymores are deployed low to the ground, and shoot directly outward. With any explosion, the blast will go up and down a bit, but the brunt of the blast is low to the ground.
Standard land mines however just pretty much kill.
Warren Spector was a legendary developer, and he is a main reason why the first was so great, and the second title so terrible. He had little influence on the second title, and often apologizes for it.
Spector had a big hand in:
Wing Commander Ultima System Shock Crusader Deus Ex Thief
and more.
Maybe the studios should listen to him every once in a while. No Warren Spector means no Deus Ex for me.
"This type of land mine is normally designed to injure--as opposed to killing--as many enemies as possible in order to increase the logistical (mostly medical) support required by such an enemy force. Some types of anti-personnel mines can also damage the tracks on armoured vehicles or the tires of wheeled vehicles."
The claymore is often "aimed" low intentionally to only take out legs. It isn't a traditional explosive, which will kill people, but rather it is designed to send shrapnel to injure you. If you can't walk, you can't fight in combat.
I rarely respond to AC's, but what the hell, I'm feeling masochistic tonight.
Your definition (which defers the poster above you, despite both of you assuming the definition is commonly accepted) is based on motive, not method. Fine. In your world, it is torture if the motive is to interrogate or punish.
How are tasers meant to interrogate? And in causing pain as punishment is torture on the whole, then remove all weapons from police officers. Hell, all weapons punish someone with pain. Remove all weapons.
You say an item is a weapon if it can severely injure a person. Yet, it wouldn't be a weapon, but rather torture if it had non-lethal intent.
A claymore can injure a person, but it has non-lethal intent. The purpose of a claymore is to take out people's legs, so they can't fight in battle. Furthermore, even more troops must now carry out the wounded troops, even further removing troops from battle. Many praise how many lives the claymore saves, by causing rather nasty, often permanent wounds. That isn't torture, but something that causes pain as a means to avoid shooting someone is?
Again, tasers are an alternative to shooting someone, and beating them with a baton. People die from gun shot wounds as well, not to mention from beatings. I think tasers are obviously too strong if people are dying from them with any real frequency, and surely there are other non-lethal ways to take someone down. But I certainly wouldn't call a taser torture.
At the root of this debate, is whether or not is wrong to cause a person pain, when you are trying to take them down. I'm sure the bleeding-heart crowd would rather that we not cause any pain what-so-ever, when a meth-addict charges a cop with a knife. In a very calm tone (as to not torture them with stress) we should politely ask them to put down the knife, and if they stab the cop, well, what can you do?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm just glad that Apple isn't a big secretive powerful corporation that threatens to sue small people, pushes DRM, or anything evil like that.
I'm sure someone is going to mod me for flamebait, but I never understand the people who insist Apple is the greatest company of the fan of the planet when there is plenty of proof that Apple is a corporation (for better or worse) on par with most corporations.
He suggests that everyone is starving in Africa. Malaria and AIDS may be larger threats in Africa than hunger. Some even suggest that the world's population will always expand to meet, and then exceed the food supply. (In less than 50 years, the world's population tripled from 2 billion to 6 billion with no signs it will slow down). I read a story on a doctor from the University of Nebraska who has spent the past 50 years or so traveling Africa teaching differing peoples how to grow and sustain crops in their environment. Sure beats buying them food once.
And buying computers with offline Wikipedia access is a major boon when textbooks aren't often available. Educating and empowering a people to move out of third-world status may be a more important project than feeding them today.
Harrison Ford copyrighted his digital likeness when he saw dead actors recreated digitally to hawk products. Smart guy.
Dvorak predates even Slashdot, I'm pretty sure.
People with extreme opinions are interesting, for better or worse. That's why so many columnists and radio talk show hosts present extreme opinions. I wager that a large chunk of their audience, if not most of their audience disagrees with them, and may even hate them. Dvorak puts out insane predictions, and writes controversial opinions largely because it provokes such a strong reaction.
He has been known to express fanatic opinions, and later roll over later like he doesn't even care, which leads me to believe that he expresses fanaticism just to provoke people. Hence, he is a troll. He has been provoking people with his columns since 1986, which really might make him the first troll for computer geeks. Quoting from Wikipedia for proof of his trolly-ness.
"On 9 June 2006, he explained to Dave Winer that he would bait Mac users in order to increase traffic to his website."
Harrison Ford is a fine actor, and that is arguably the worst reading he has ever done.
He mailed it in.
Dvorak was the first troll. But I'm sure Wikipedia can fill you in on some finer points.
Harrison Ford openly tanked the voice-over because he fought with the director on doing it. He thought it was stupid, and mailed in a poor performance in that regard. Many fans hate the voice-over, and thusly it was thankfully later removed.
Storytelling 101 - show, don't tell. Especially don't tell poorly.
The movie stands up quite well without the narration.
No, I assume nerds would use correct terms and make accurate statements.
Nerds are often pedantic.
The Itanium line didn't run standard x86 binaries either, so saying "Intel" would be incorrect. Not to mention it completely ignores AMD and other x86 chip producers.
Correction.
You said non-Intel, and you meant non-x86-compatible machines.
This is the 2008 awards, not the 2007 awards. Secondly, I hate when people link to an article that largely just links to another article. Here is the original article.
http://www.igf.com/02finalists.html
I can't imagine using emacs, period. :P
We already have devices designed for the mobile workforce, and they are called smart phones and PDAs and they get better every year with corporate research that doesn't cost tax payers anything.
Why should the EU be funding research for the corporate world?
Insert KDE vs Gnome rant here.
Insert All other Linux distros vs Ubuntu here.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
A very good point, indeed.
The military were insanely successful in just wiping out the entire defense of Iraq almost overnight. They took full control of a country in less than a month.
However, in the the void of a government of Iraq, and undefended borders, you get the rise of insurgents. Military solutions don't really work there. You need diplomatic solutions to convince the local political and religious leaders to stop insurgents, fundamentalists, and terrorists. You need to convince them via ideology to lay down weapons and rebuild their homes.
It has taken 3 years to hunt down a couple thousand insurgents, and how many more are waiting in the wings, waiting to die in the name of their beliefs? We're not just talking about from the possible pool of 30 million Iraqis, but the entire Mid East. (Note, I'm not saying all Arabs are fundamentalist, but rather we're fighting insurgents from several nations right now. Fundamentalists are almost always a minority in any group, but often the most visible).
We can't fight this war forever, and that isn't the fault of the military or technology, but rather the fault of diplomats and politicians to not finish what they started, and I'm not pointing my finger at any one party. Both parties voted to go in, both parties continue to fund this, and both parties blame the other party as a means to make their party look better, while neither party are presenting solutions to actually finish the conflict. That is a travesty that no one speaks of.
I'm sure glad we had the Firehose to filter out crap like this.
Oh, wait...
I built homemade claymores in the field. And a grenade has an injure radius of 45 feet, but that doesn't mean it kills within 45 feet. Claymores are deployed low to the ground, and shoot directly outward. With any explosion, the blast will go up and down a bit, but the brunt of the blast is low to the ground.
Standard land mines however just pretty much kill.
Warren Spector was a legendary developer, and he is a main reason why the first was so great, and the second title so terrible. He had little influence on the second title, and often apologizes for it.
Spector had a big hand in:
Wing Commander
Ultima
System Shock
Crusader
Deus Ex
Thief
and more.
Maybe the studios should listen to him every once in a while. No Warren Spector means no Deus Ex for me.
Odd, the Claymore entry on Wikipedia doesn't directly mention that, but the anti-personnel entry does state that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-personnel_mine
"This type of land mine is normally designed to injure--as opposed to killing--as many enemies as possible in order to increase the logistical (mostly medical) support required by such an enemy force. Some types of anti-personnel mines can also damage the tracks on armoured vehicles or the tires of wheeled vehicles."
The claymore is often "aimed" low intentionally to only take out legs. It isn't a traditional explosive, which will kill people, but rather it is designed to send shrapnel to injure you. If you can't walk, you can't fight in combat.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-personnel_mine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claymore_mine
"...the US forces may legally use the claymore in victim initiated detonation as long as provisions of the protocol are met."
I did study this stuff in the Marine Corps.
Your point?
Death != torture
I'm talking claymores and tasers. Neither are designed to kill. Where did death enter the analogy?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claymore_mine
Please know what you are talking about before you respond next time.
I rarely respond to AC's, but what the hell, I'm feeling masochistic tonight.
Your definition (which defers the poster above you, despite both of you assuming the definition is commonly accepted) is based on motive, not method. Fine. In your world, it is torture if the motive is to interrogate or punish.
How are tasers meant to interrogate? And in causing pain as punishment is torture on the whole, then remove all weapons from police officers. Hell, all weapons punish someone with pain. Remove all weapons.
This just in! All weapons are torture! Who knew?
Nukes/bombs/missles (bombs have a second "b" by the way) aren't non-lethal means to stop people.
Tasers and claymore mines are both non-lethal means to stop people.
I'm sorry that the analogy was like the joke about the ceiling. It was over your head.
Hrm. Your two definitions overlap.
You say an item is a weapon if it can severely injure a person. Yet, it wouldn't be a weapon, but rather torture if it had non-lethal intent.
A claymore can injure a person, but it has non-lethal intent. The purpose of a claymore is to take out people's legs, so they can't fight in battle. Furthermore, even more troops must now carry out the wounded troops, even further removing troops from battle. Many praise how many lives the claymore saves, by causing rather nasty, often permanent wounds. That isn't torture, but something that causes pain as a means to avoid shooting someone is?
Again, tasers are an alternative to shooting someone, and beating them with a baton. People die from gun shot wounds as well, not to mention from beatings. I think tasers are obviously too strong if people are dying from them with any real frequency, and surely there are other non-lethal ways to take someone down. But I certainly wouldn't call a taser torture.
At the root of this debate, is whether or not is wrong to cause a person pain, when you are trying to take them down. I'm sure the bleeding-heart crowd would rather that we not cause any pain what-so-ever, when a meth-addict charges a cop with a knife. In a very calm tone (as to not torture them with stress) we should politely ask them to put down the knife, and if they stab the cop, well, what can you do?