Mechanical failure. Example: my breaks, which I have had reguarally checked, just gave out at a statistically improbable time and I rear-ended the guy in front of me.
Also, I just got hit by a tree/falling rock/bird/deer/meteor, causing me to slam into another person.
Also, Michael Moore isn't the democratic party. the GOP is the republican party. This story is "The GOP is spreading propoganda" not "one republican is spreading propoganda"
Big difference.
1 To persuade or try to persuade by pleading or flattery; cajole.
2 To obtain by persistent persuasion: coaxed the secret out of the child.
3 Obsolete. To caress; fondle.
4 To move to or adjust toward a desired end: "A far more promising approach to treating advanced melanoma is to coax the immune system to recognize melanoma cells as deadly" (Natalie Angier).
See #4. Also please learn all the meanings of a word before trying to make fun of someone for improper usage
While I agree with most of your comment, points 1 and 2 are a bit stretching it.
Unless you build your own computer you probably will pay for microsoft software even if you won't use it unless you specifically hunt down a computer sans OS. Next you'll find all the software you've bought since you used your first computer is worthless and have to replace it, then you'll find you can't replace most of it.
As a business you run into the same problem, pretty much, but you also run into compatability issues, unless you scrap pretty much everything that uses power and belongs to the company and have to put up with alternatives that probably have less (a relative term) support and you have to have everyone in your company learn to use new software, which many people aren't willing to do.
Fortunately, shareholders in MS can and hopefully will dump their stock before value drops, an action which on its own will cause a drop if nothing else does. Larger shareholders will follow, as they try to cut losses, but this won't happen if they think MS can rebound somehow, which they probably can.
The real issue surrounding microsoft on this is the fact of incompatabliity. Quite simply nobody will change because if they do they won't be able to easily be able to communicate with others who convert. Everyone has to wait for everyone else to drop MS, before they will take the financial hit of losing their software. The only hope I see is an increased use of HTML, JAVA, and other systems of communicating that don't relay on one OS. People will be so much more likely to lose MS when they will only take a hit (actually a gain in the long term) on hardware, and they can keep the same software at no additional cost.
Did you even read the article *summary*? The point isn't that there are fewer numbers, but that the average ability of Americans in the sciences are actually going down, measurably. This isn't about numbers, relative to asia, but about average ability.
There is a slight difference with that: the acceleration takes place over the entire flight to orbit, not entirely on the ground. Instead of having a steady acceleration of at most a few G's, a station based on the ground "throwing" an object strait up would have all the acceleration before it left the structure, probably killing everything alive on board. Coming back down isn't so bad as you have a terminal velocity, and acceleration is limited to gravity, only 1 G.
The only way a ground based structure could do a "throw" would be if the "throw" were not strait up, but rather at an angle very shallow to the earth's surface, giving the acceleration on a track over miles. The problem with that of course is that the total air resistance while leaving earth is far greater, meaning even more, instead of less, energy.
No, overall if you want a steady non-rocket based acceleration into space, the space elevator is *still* more viable.
You're failing to consider the time at below and above, there is just so much time to be found with more advanced civilizations that it seems highly improbable that they would have less technology then us. I mean seriously, if you accept that the universe if more then a billion years old (much more, really), then how can you say that there is a 50% chance that the civilization would be in the exact 10k years that they are less advanced then us? And this is not even considering the possibility of a singularity having taken place allready somewhere in the galaxy or universe...
I'm curious how you came to the conclution the odds of a more advanced society is only 50-50.
There are two things involved in this: one, do they have the ability to become more advanced (or are they limited by intelligence to less then current levels), and two: how long would an advanced civilization survive?
If you assume that an advanced society cabable of intersteller transport and teraforming could survive indefinatly (or at least more then 100k years past space travel), there is a far greater chance of them having better technology then worse.
Another interesting question: is it possible to design artificial intelegence smarter then yourself? If so, said intelegence could then create an intelegence greater then themselves ad infintium, meaning that relitive intelegence of the original species is irrelivent.
There is nothing magic about the event horizon of the black hole. When two things pass an equal distance from any two objects that are big enough that they would normaly fall toward one thing or the other, the net force is zero. This is not to say that the force on the object is zero however, and if something passed between two black holes that were close to each other, they would be ripped in half. Due to the massive forces involved, however, people invariably talk of a slice of atoms that are in the exact center that would go to neither one. This only happens because of an incorrect train of thought. Remember that any spaceship or body is made of atoms (as far as *we* know...). Each of these atoms is incredibly small, and only an atom that was exactly in the center where net force was zero would stay put. Also remember that the majority of the mass of an atom is in the nucleus and this only take a tiny fraction of the total volume, making it highly improbable that any given atom through which the line passes isn't closer to one black hole then the other. In the fraction of those atoms in the center plane who ARE exactly blanced, which no longer make up a sheet but instead scattered atoms, that these atoms are moving, some translational movement from when they arived, all rotational or at least electron movement. As such, they will eventually tend one way or another and pass into a black hole.
As for the black holes themselves merging, remember that the event horizon isn't magic. It only means that something, even light, that passes into it won't get out without passing light speed due to the amount of gravity involved. Now recall that this is only true because the NET force is such that a speed faster then light is needed to get out. With two black holes near each other, the net force at any point between them will be less, causing the event horizon to shrink away from the black holes. My only uncertainty comes when the actual masses come close to each other, and then only to wonder what happens to light that passes between them.... can light itself be ripped with 2 black holes a few miles apart?
In anwser, I think the event horizons should shrink as the black holes get to the point where they should touch, doing unplesent things to anything that passes between them, but allowing the black holes to accelerate toward each other in perdictable patterns until they touch and become one larger black hole.
I think that it would be interesting to plot the event horizons of two black holes near each other: if my thinking is correct, there would be a conical section from the point between the holes outward missing from the event horizon: in which light could travel and be observed if said system of black holes passed between a sun and us. (assuming it doesn't somehow get torn apart by the forces involved, and that we have telescopes that can see it with all that plasma and such flying about).
I see two problems with using a switch to change distance viewing. The first is, of course, that it's not totally convient. The second is that it limits the possible viewing distances. This doesn't seem a problem to people without glasses, or at worst bifocals, but I know someone who needs trifocals. Why not wait a bit on this technology until they can take a picture of your eyes to see how far away the focal distance is and get a perfect focus?
I'm not sure how I did it, but middle click opens a new window for me in version 1.5 The only option I can find regarding this feature is in tools:options under tabbed browsing:tab focus. I'd suggest seeing if that works for you in 1.5, and not trying out an alpha release at this point.
Latency isn't going to be fixed, as the speed of light is a constant. The problem, really, is the rate of transfer. If it does take 538 seconds for light to get from mars to earth, there is no reason that this should do anything other then add a 1076 second delay from the first request to the start of data flow... after that there is no reason an un-interupted flow of data shouldn't flow. There is no reason that we shouldn't fix it so that after the delay the data coming in is more dense, with more arriving each second.
After all, latency is only important in two way communication, and we shouldn't need to send more then a request for data that needs a responce. Sure, we have to send commands on what to do next, but the robot shouldn't need to respond more then a confirmation. Even if we did need a real dialog, there really isn't anything we can concieve doing at this point that would fix the time it takes to send one message, but we can change how many messeges can be sent at once.
Now, I can understand why 90% of the computers in my school run windows, in the media center, labs, and classrooms, but the few others confound me. Why, for example, do the four computers in the lunch room run windows? I would never have suspected that they run windows, as I've only ever seen one screen (the lunch account system), and there is a resteraunt-style keyboard instead of a standard one, but these computers were shut down on febuary third as a precautionary mesure... I asked my computer science teacher and she confirmed that they run windows 98. These computers have only ever run one program, yet in every school in the county my parents are paying for two to four copies of windows to run ONE program. The same is true of the library check-out computer, and probably more I don't even know about. This seems to me a waste of money, unless someone can point out a good reason?
Hmm... This does almost remind me of the most pointless chemistry lab I've ever done. We stuck a piece of magnesium in an eudiometer tube and destroyed it with hydrochloric acid. The point? Find the mass of the piece of magnesium. It's not just that we could have used a balance, but that we destroyed the piece of magnesium. What is the point of knowing the mass now that it is magnesium chloride?
This rover seems much the same. Lets break it and see what it USED to be made of. I guess I can kind of see how it's different, as we aren't removing the top ten feet from all of mars, i.e. there is still some there that we will now know the composition of, but I'd still prefer to just drill a little hole like we do here on earth... I guess NASA is nervous about finding "up" on this alien world...
You're completely right. There literally is not enough available copper on earth to provide wiring and piping for the parts of the world that don't yet have it, at the currently used densities(i.e. taking into account PVC piping and such). We should certainly not be sending huge slugs of it hurling into space. I guess they choose Copper for it's lack of reactivity, but seriously... it doesn't even need to be depleted uranium, why not send a chunk of nuclear waste? I'm sure there is plenty of at least the density and stability of copper, which could be loaded at the last second before launch and shielded with lead or depleted uranium. I mean, it's just going to slam into rock and dirt anyway...
Unfortunately, I rather suspect the Chinese government would care about the letter of the law... or just change it. It's rather like being banned from forums, where creating another account or spoofing your IP to get back in is an infraction even if they don't tell you... if they find out they just ban you again. I doubt the Chinese would hesitate to ban google entirely if they failed to comply with the intent of the law.
I personally like the way Guild Wars got around this issue... let players decide what they want to do, within limits. Given six classes (Warrior, Ranger, Elementalist, Necromancer, Mesmer, Monk), each with a job, you are given choices IN that job (i.e. Monk can heal, protect, or deal holy damage) AND you are given a secondary class, so you can have a warrior that heals itself or a Mesmer that only uses it's primary class for one thing: fast casting elementalist spells. This basically lets you make up your own class, if you really want to: the best of both worlds.
At the distances involved (in the outer reaches of the kupier belt, about a light year), I guess we wouldn't really notice anything but a brighter star, but I still don't really think this is a possibility. Do the math: v=sqrt(Gm/r) where G is 6.67*10^-11, m is the mass of our sun, and r is the distance between them... 1.21746415*10^-6 meters per second orbital velocity. That's about one meter every 9.5 earth years. Anyone else think that seems a bit... unlikley? Also, the of gravity between the earth and the sun is about 1000 times as strong as with another star of the sun's mass one light year away. I don't think such a system would be stable, as a large astroid passing close to one might well pull it enough out of "orbit," if you can call such a small speed "orbit," so that you'd notice it was no longer binary. For the record, at one AU distance, it would take the system 5.64701404*10^17 years for an orbit. That's like 10 order of magnitude longer then the sun's life span.
I personally don't think this is how the "Alliance" system works. If I had to hazard a guess, based on the article, there are two different things, "factions" and "alliances." There are only 2 factions, and as many alliances as players choose to build. Any Alliance can capture a territory or city or whatever, but they don't hold it for themselves, but instead the faction they have chosen to support. Such a system would mean that if one faction DID take over the world and hold it against everything, any alliance could join their faction and benefit, but more probably the other side would take it back (more fun).
As I read the Article, I saw that there would be lists showing games related to those already owned by the person in question. Naturally, I assumed that they would be split into categories, like sports, FPS, RPG, exe. Boy was I surprised to find that all the games were for Gamecube. I guess Guildwars, World of Warcraft, and other mmorpg don't make the list, along with every civilization builder ever made, including CIV IV, something I wouldn't mind for Christmas. If someone actually follows the instructions from this article, I suspect that they will be baffled when they find that most of the games owned by their gamer don't exist. Also, as others have pointed out, it doesn't even mention what counsel it's for... I have Ocarina of Time for N-64, and I surely wouldn't want The Wind Waker for Gamecube, seeing as I don't have one. I also suspect that I wouldn't want Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 if I had Tony Hawk's Underground. They fail to mention any order what so ever.
In conclusion, this article is throughly useless: it skips 90% of games, including whole genres, and what it does go over it doesn't go over in enough detail. I feel sorry for any gamer who's relatives read this.
Oh, and if you suspect someone you know of believing something like this, just give them a list. You'll know if they are following it by the smoke bomb (dead giveaway).
My school also asigns generic passwords to new users, the same password every year, and for new teachers as well. This rather makes it easier for loging on, but many students never change it. What's worse is that new users are added months before they come to the school, many before the end of the previous school year. And you can see a list of users if you really want to, sorted by year.
There are also some pretty major security holes besides the password. One example fixed the year before I got there was that holding the "a" during login would make your acount an administrator. Other ways to become an admin are still around... I saw one kid create a NEW admin account in under 30 seconds from Word, using the file opening interface. Other holes are less important; for example, we arn't allowed access to the C drive, but if you do certain things in powerpoint, then open a file "from history" anybody can get on, and do such things as play card games and change the screensaver. Our school tries to keep up with all the holes in Novel, but they just don't know most of them.
The anwser, of course, is that they did NOT each pay $9 for the room... it only cost $25. They paid $9 for the room AND the "tip" to the bellboy. His $2 is included in the $9 paid by each salesman, $25 for the room + $2 for the bellboy = 9*3 = $27
I block every add on the Internet I see, because they distract me from what I want. I will NEVER click on one, nor even read it, so why do I have to see it?
On television, I don't watch ads - I change the channel.
Movies? - I actually like some of these, and there is a chance I'll buy a ticket, so I watch them
Billboards? - Either I am driving, and keep my eyes on the road, or I am talking to somebody, or reading a book. I never look at them when given a choice.
It really comes down to choice. I don't have any choice about billboards, commercials, or trailers. They will occur, and I will be forced to see them or physically look away. The Internet is different. Thanks to pop-up blocking, and the ad-block extention to firefox, I *do* have a choice about what ads I see on the Internet. Even on sites that I like, and would support, I'll donate direct before I click an ad, so I refuse to see them.
In conclusion, people have a right to free speech, and to design a site with ads. They don't have the right to make me look at it, and there is no right to be heard.
Slashdot Mirror
Mechanical failure. Example: my breaks, which I have had reguarally checked, just gave out at a statistically improbable time and I rear-ended the guy in front of me. Also, I just got hit by a tree/falling rock/bird/deer/meteor, causing me to slam into another person.
Also, Michael Moore isn't the democratic party. the GOP is the republican party. This story is "The GOP is spreading propoganda" not "one republican is spreading propoganda" Big difference.
1 To persuade or try to persuade by pleading or flattery; cajole. 2 To obtain by persistent persuasion: coaxed the secret out of the child. 3 Obsolete. To caress; fondle. 4 To move to or adjust toward a desired end: "A far more promising approach to treating advanced melanoma is to coax the immune system to recognize melanoma cells as deadly" (Natalie Angier). See #4. Also please learn all the meanings of a word before trying to make fun of someone for improper usage
While I agree with most of your comment, points 1 and 2 are a bit stretching it. Unless you build your own computer you probably will pay for microsoft software even if you won't use it unless you specifically hunt down a computer sans OS. Next you'll find all the software you've bought since you used your first computer is worthless and have to replace it, then you'll find you can't replace most of it. As a business you run into the same problem, pretty much, but you also run into compatability issues, unless you scrap pretty much everything that uses power and belongs to the company and have to put up with alternatives that probably have less (a relative term) support and you have to have everyone in your company learn to use new software, which many people aren't willing to do. Fortunately, shareholders in MS can and hopefully will dump their stock before value drops, an action which on its own will cause a drop if nothing else does. Larger shareholders will follow, as they try to cut losses, but this won't happen if they think MS can rebound somehow, which they probably can. The real issue surrounding microsoft on this is the fact of incompatabliity. Quite simply nobody will change because if they do they won't be able to easily be able to communicate with others who convert. Everyone has to wait for everyone else to drop MS, before they will take the financial hit of losing their software. The only hope I see is an increased use of HTML, JAVA, and other systems of communicating that don't relay on one OS. People will be so much more likely to lose MS when they will only take a hit (actually a gain in the long term) on hardware, and they can keep the same software at no additional cost.
Did you even read the article *summary*? The point isn't that there are fewer numbers, but that the average ability of Americans in the sciences are actually going down, measurably. This isn't about numbers, relative to asia, but about average ability.
There is a slight difference with that: the acceleration takes place over the entire flight to orbit, not entirely on the ground. Instead of having a steady acceleration of at most a few G's, a station based on the ground "throwing" an object strait up would have all the acceleration before it left the structure, probably killing everything alive on board. Coming back down isn't so bad as you have a terminal velocity, and acceleration is limited to gravity, only 1 G. The only way a ground based structure could do a "throw" would be if the "throw" were not strait up, but rather at an angle very shallow to the earth's surface, giving the acceleration on a track over miles. The problem with that of course is that the total air resistance while leaving earth is far greater, meaning even more, instead of less, energy. No, overall if you want a steady non-rocket based acceleration into space, the space elevator is *still* more viable.
You're failing to consider the time at below and above, there is just so much time to be found with more advanced civilizations that it seems highly improbable that they would have less technology then us. I mean seriously, if you accept that the universe if more then a billion years old (much more, really), then how can you say that there is a 50% chance that the civilization would be in the exact 10k years that they are less advanced then us? And this is not even considering the possibility of a singularity having taken place allready somewhere in the galaxy or universe...
I'm curious how you came to the conclution the odds of a more advanced society is only 50-50.
There are two things involved in this: one, do they have the ability to become more advanced (or are they limited by intelligence to less then current levels), and two: how long would an advanced civilization survive?
If you assume that an advanced society cabable of intersteller transport and teraforming could survive indefinatly (or at least more then 100k years past space travel), there is a far greater chance of them having better technology then worse.
Another interesting question: is it possible to design artificial intelegence smarter then yourself? If so, said intelegence could then create an intelegence greater then themselves ad infintium, meaning that relitive intelegence of the original species is irrelivent.
There is nothing magic about the event horizon of the black hole. When two things pass an equal distance from any two objects that are big enough that they would normaly fall toward one thing or the other, the net force is zero. This is not to say that the force on the object is zero however, and if something passed between two black holes that were close to each other, they would be ripped in half. Due to the massive forces involved, however, people invariably talk of a slice of atoms that are in the exact center that would go to neither one. This only happens because of an incorrect train of thought. Remember that any spaceship or body is made of atoms (as far as *we* know...). Each of these atoms is incredibly small, and only an atom that was exactly in the center where net force was zero would stay put. Also remember that the majority of the mass of an atom is in the nucleus and this only take a tiny fraction of the total volume, making it highly improbable that any given atom through which the line passes isn't closer to one black hole then the other. In the fraction of those atoms in the center plane who ARE exactly blanced, which no longer make up a sheet but instead scattered atoms, that these atoms are moving, some translational movement from when they arived, all rotational or at least electron movement. As such, they will eventually tend one way or another and pass into a black hole.
As for the black holes themselves merging, remember that the event horizon isn't magic. It only means that something, even light, that passes into it won't get out without passing light speed due to the amount of gravity involved. Now recall that this is only true because the NET force is such that a speed faster then light is needed to get out. With two black holes near each other, the net force at any point between them will be less, causing the event horizon to shrink away from the black holes. My only uncertainty comes when the actual masses come close to each other, and then only to wonder what happens to light that passes between them.... can light itself be ripped with 2 black holes a few miles apart?
In anwser, I think the event horizons should shrink as the black holes get to the point where they should touch, doing unplesent things to anything that passes between them, but allowing the black holes to accelerate toward each other in perdictable patterns until they touch and become one larger black hole.
I think that it would be interesting to plot the event horizons of two black holes near each other: if my thinking is correct, there would be a conical section from the point between the holes outward missing from the event horizon: in which light could travel and be observed if said system of black holes passed between a sun and us. (assuming it doesn't somehow get torn apart by the forces involved, and that we have telescopes that can see it with all that plasma and such flying about).
Just wait until someone finds a way to predict prime numbers, then pretty much all encryption could be cracked without effort...
I see two problems with using a switch to change distance viewing. The first is, of course, that it's not totally convient. The second is that it limits the possible viewing distances. This doesn't seem a problem to people without glasses, or at worst bifocals, but I know someone who needs trifocals. Why not wait a bit on this technology until they can take a picture of your eyes to see how far away the focal distance is and get a perfect focus?
I'm not sure how I did it, but middle click opens a new window for me in version 1.5 The only option I can find regarding this feature is in tools:options under tabbed browsing:tab focus. I'd suggest seeing if that works for you in 1.5, and not trying out an alpha release at this point.
Latency isn't going to be fixed, as the speed of light is a constant. The problem, really, is the rate of transfer. If it does take 538 seconds for light to get from mars to earth, there is no reason that this should do anything other then add a 1076 second delay from the first request to the start of data flow... after that there is no reason an un-interupted flow of data shouldn't flow. There is no reason that we shouldn't fix it so that after the delay the data coming in is more dense, with more arriving each second. After all, latency is only important in two way communication, and we shouldn't need to send more then a request for data that needs a responce. Sure, we have to send commands on what to do next, but the robot shouldn't need to respond more then a confirmation. Even if we did need a real dialog, there really isn't anything we can concieve doing at this point that would fix the time it takes to send one message, but we can change how many messeges can be sent at once.
Now, I can understand why 90% of the computers in my school run windows, in the media center, labs, and classrooms, but the few others confound me. Why, for example, do the four computers in the lunch room run windows? I would never have suspected that they run windows, as I've only ever seen one screen (the lunch account system), and there is a resteraunt-style keyboard instead of a standard one, but these computers were shut down on febuary third as a precautionary mesure... I asked my computer science teacher and she confirmed that they run windows 98. These computers have only ever run one program, yet in every school in the county my parents are paying for two to four copies of windows to run ONE program. The same is true of the library check-out computer, and probably more I don't even know about. This seems to me a waste of money, unless someone can point out a good reason?
Hmm... This does almost remind me of the most pointless chemistry lab I've ever done. We stuck a piece of magnesium in an eudiometer tube and destroyed it with hydrochloric acid. The point? Find the mass of the piece of magnesium. It's not just that we could have used a balance, but that we destroyed the piece of magnesium. What is the point of knowing the mass now that it is magnesium chloride? This rover seems much the same. Lets break it and see what it USED to be made of. I guess I can kind of see how it's different, as we aren't removing the top ten feet from all of mars, i.e. there is still some there that we will now know the composition of, but I'd still prefer to just drill a little hole like we do here on earth... I guess NASA is nervous about finding "up" on this alien world...
You're completely right. There literally is not enough available copper on earth to provide wiring and piping for the parts of the world that don't yet have it, at the currently used densities(i.e. taking into account PVC piping and such). We should certainly not be sending huge slugs of it hurling into space. I guess they choose Copper for it's lack of reactivity, but seriously... it doesn't even need to be depleted uranium, why not send a chunk of nuclear waste? I'm sure there is plenty of at least the density and stability of copper, which could be loaded at the last second before launch and shielded with lead or depleted uranium. I mean, it's just going to slam into rock and dirt anyway...
Unfortunately, I rather suspect the Chinese government would care about the letter of the law... or just change it. It's rather like being banned from forums, where creating another account or spoofing your IP to get back in is an infraction even if they don't tell you... if they find out they just ban you again. I doubt the Chinese would hesitate to ban google entirely if they failed to comply with the intent of the law.
I personally like the way Guild Wars got around this issue... let players decide what they want to do, within limits. Given six classes (Warrior, Ranger, Elementalist, Necromancer, Mesmer, Monk), each with a job, you are given choices IN that job (i.e. Monk can heal, protect, or deal holy damage) AND you are given a secondary class, so you can have a warrior that heals itself or a Mesmer that only uses it's primary class for one thing: fast casting elementalist spells. This basically lets you make up your own class, if you really want to: the best of both worlds.
At the distances involved (in the outer reaches of the kupier belt, about a light year), I guess we wouldn't really notice anything but a brighter star, but I still don't really think this is a possibility. Do the math: v=sqrt(Gm/r) where G is 6.67*10^-11, m is the mass of our sun, and r is the distance between them... 1.21746415*10^-6 meters per second orbital velocity. That's about one meter every 9.5 earth years. Anyone else think that seems a bit... unlikley? Also, the of gravity between the earth and the sun is about 1000 times as strong as with another star of the sun's mass one light year away. I don't think such a system would be stable, as a large astroid passing close to one might well pull it enough out of "orbit," if you can call such a small speed "orbit," so that you'd notice it was no longer binary. For the record, at one AU distance, it would take the system 5.64701404*10^17 years for an orbit. That's like 10 order of magnitude longer then the sun's life span.
I personally don't think this is how the "Alliance" system works. If I had to hazard a guess, based on the article, there are two different things, "factions" and "alliances." There are only 2 factions, and as many alliances as players choose to build. Any Alliance can capture a territory or city or whatever, but they don't hold it for themselves, but instead the faction they have chosen to support. Such a system would mean that if one faction DID take over the world and hold it against everything, any alliance could join their faction and benefit, but more probably the other side would take it back (more fun).
As I read the Article, I saw that there would be lists showing games related to those already owned by the person in question. Naturally, I assumed that they would be split into categories, like sports, FPS, RPG, exe. Boy was I surprised to find that all the games were for Gamecube. I guess Guildwars, World of Warcraft, and other mmorpg don't make the list, along with every civilization builder ever made, including CIV IV, something I wouldn't mind for Christmas. If someone actually follows the instructions from this article, I suspect that they will be baffled when they find that most of the games owned by their gamer don't exist. Also, as others have pointed out, it doesn't even mention what counsel it's for... I have Ocarina of Time for N-64, and I surely wouldn't want The Wind Waker for Gamecube, seeing as I don't have one. I also suspect that I wouldn't want Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 if I had Tony Hawk's Underground. They fail to mention any order what so ever. In conclusion, this article is throughly useless: it skips 90% of games, including whole genres, and what it does go over it doesn't go over in enough detail. I feel sorry for any gamer who's relatives read this. Oh, and if you suspect someone you know of believing something like this, just give them a list. You'll know if they are following it by the smoke bomb (dead giveaway).
My school also asigns generic passwords to new users, the same password every year, and for new teachers as well. This rather makes it easier for loging on, but many students never change it. What's worse is that new users are added months before they come to the school, many before the end of the previous school year. And you can see a list of users if you really want to, sorted by year.
There are also some pretty major security holes besides the password. One example fixed the year before I got there was that holding the "a" during login would make your acount an administrator. Other ways to become an admin are still around... I saw one kid create a NEW admin account in under 30 seconds from Word, using the file opening interface. Other holes are less important; for example, we arn't allowed access to the C drive, but if you do certain things in powerpoint, then open a file "from history" anybody can get on, and do such things as play card games and change the screensaver. Our school tries to keep up with all the holes in Novel, but they just don't know most of them.
The anwser, of course, is that they did NOT each pay $9 for the room... it only cost $25. They paid $9 for the room AND the "tip" to the bellboy. His $2 is included in the $9 paid by each salesman, $25 for the room + $2 for the bellboy = 9*3 = $27
I block every add on the Internet I see, because they distract me from what I want. I will NEVER click on one, nor even read it, so why do I have to see it? On television, I don't watch ads - I change the channel. Movies? - I actually like some of these, and there is a chance I'll buy a ticket, so I watch them Billboards? - Either I am driving, and keep my eyes on the road, or I am talking to somebody, or reading a book. I never look at them when given a choice. It really comes down to choice. I don't have any choice about billboards, commercials, or trailers. They will occur, and I will be forced to see them or physically look away. The Internet is different. Thanks to pop-up blocking, and the ad-block extention to firefox, I *do* have a choice about what ads I see on the Internet. Even on sites that I like, and would support, I'll donate direct before I click an ad, so I refuse to see them. In conclusion, people have a right to free speech, and to design a site with ads. They don't have the right to make me look at it, and there is no right to be heard.