First, you need to extract the.sit file: I got the demo of stuffit expander
Then you need something that can burn the.dmg file, or something to convert it to an.iso: I used dmg2iso (the perl script seems to work better).
Then I burned the.iso, but it's a mac file system, so you need something that can read mac filesystems. I grabbed the demo of macdrive.
With that I can grab all the.aif files from the "The Hand That Feeds 1.0.band\Media" directory and import them into my audio program of choice! I couldn't find anything to convert the garageband "projectData" file into another format (it's xml, but with a weird encoded data block), but the.aif files are a good enough place to start playing with the sounds.
I'm sure there's equivalent utilities for linux, as well, but I don't know about them.
It's silly and funny and great for a chuckle. But think about it for a bit:
"With a torch." First of all, "torch" would have been changed to "flashlight" for an american audience. Because that's what he meant by "torch." Sure, the sight of Arthur creeping through a government cellar with an actual torch would be quite silly, but not very believable. But "with a flashlight" doesn't have that same quick wit about it and would be wasting screen time without being very funny.
"So had the stairs." So.. we're meant to believe he headed to the cellar, and there weren't stairs, and instead of complaining he went ahead went into the cellar anyway? Seems quite dangerous, and not very believable. Comes off as good for a chuckle, but still a bit silly for the sake of being silly.
Oh yes, they were 'on display' in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the leopard.
Everything up to but not including the leopard sign probably would have come across OK. The leopard sign, though, still comes across as being silly for the sake of silly. Sure, it was funny when I read the book in the 6th grade but is it really the kind of thing that's necessary for the spirit of the book to translate to the screen?
This seems on the same level as "no tom bombadil"-ism with the LoTR movies to me.
Ok, first of all, wikipedia is a work in progress. Certain articles are mature and of encyclopedia quality. Many others are relative immature and in development.
You've chosen three particlar articles that are VERY immature (less than 30 updates each, by only a handful of authors), about a topic that not many people are very interested in, but which is apparently something of interest to you.
I'm sure this kind of commentary cannot help Wikipedia's credibility.
Judging wikipedia by this kind of content is not only unfair, but completely useless. Why don't you start from some of the labeled featured articles and work your criticism from there, instead of seeking out the rarely updated stubs at the fringes of the database?
Wikipedia needs a huge content enema.
No, it needs knowledgable people to work on the articles that need work. You seem to know a lot about the topics involved. Why did you just waste everyone's time complaining about them here on slashdot instead of spending a few minutes to contribute something worthwhile to wikipedia itself? That's how it works, after all.
"Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" is all I could think of reading your post.
If you really can't grok the difference between a one-way many-to-one fixed-content "communication network" and a two-way point-to-point, demand-based "communication network" then you, sir, are the "fucking moron" in this conversation.
Also, you want to set up your own broadcast transmitter? Guess what. you have to PAY to do that. idiot.
"For every problem, there is one solution which is simple, obvious, and wrong."
Pretend for a moment that you live in Japan, or Russia, and you actually use websites that use these IDN characters.
So what? So the IDN URLs you go to are printed in a different color scheme. It doesn't hurt usability. But when you go to "paypal.com" and notice that the "a" is in a different color scheme than all the other characters, then you know something is up!
Of course there's the question of accessibility when you use a visual cue. Also black and white text only browsers, etc...
That does not make sense to me. If I buy a mobile phone, and somehow lose it, I cannot go to the reseller and claim a new phone simply because I "already own it". If I lose it, then it's lost and I will have to buy a new one.
Similarly, if I've lost my software key, then I've lost my proof of ownership, and I'm just as much a pirate as anybody else if I use a friend's key when installing.
No one can expect Microsoft to cover for one's own sloppiness - if you lose your key then you'll have to buy a new one. There's no "I already own this" argument to be made when you've lost it yourself.
First, as the other poster mentioned, a mobile phone is a physical entity that costs something to manufacture, and therefore costs a lot to replace. Therefore, reasonably, the manufacturer shouldn't have to pay for your sloppiness. However, a logical entity such as a software key costs NOTHING to replace, and software costs VIRTUALLY NOTHING to copy.
Second, you own that cell phone that you purchased. It's yours. But you DO NOT OWN SOFTWARE. You own a license to use that softare. And the key is not that license! The key is simply proof of the license, and losing the key does not equal losing the license that you own.
Basically, whether you have the right to use software when you've lost the piece of paper that says "you have a right to use this software" has *nothing* to do with whether you have the right to a new free phone if you lose your old one. The analogy is horribly flawed.
Xanadu is cool and all... but this is quite questionable "news." The article linked seems to be from 2000. The site in question has been around since 1960. There doesn't seem to be much in the way of news here, except for wikinerd going "oh! xanadu is still alive!" Is that the story? wikinerd discovers xanadu, you should too!?
Raise the possibility that some things that women are not as good at, such as abstract reasoning, however, and you'll be slaughtered in public.
Yeah, especially when you're "just sayin'" it and not actually talking about the results of a study backing up what you said!
Same goes for your #1-8 "less/more likely" "facts." According to what studies? Under what conditions?
It seems that people have gotten so excited about a chance to be "non-PC through science" that they actually forgot about the pesky need to actually do science to back up what they're saying.
1) There is pretty much never just one single "best person for the job." Others have commented more on this.
2) You aren't sourcing any of your statistics, so they're effectively meaningless. Try finding some demographics and we can work from there. "Look at most of the universities in your area" is not anywhere near good enough. Another poster has already called you out on the "mostly caucasion" claim, but how do you know any of your statistics are correct?
3) I.T. jobs? Since when will the "top level computer science" students want I.T. jobs? What about the software engineering departments? Are you including those in your statistics? Because from where I sit, I certainly don't see > 35-50% females in engineering. Most of those I've worked with in software design groups are in HCI or project management. And as for I.T. -- hell, a lot of the people I know working in I.T. have never even graduated college. Actually getting your statistics from some place other than the ether would alleviate this problem somewhat.
I think your comment actually typifies a lot of what's wrong with gender and other sensitive social relations nowdays -- people just "know" things to be "true." They catch wind of some study that seems to support their views and hell, they feel more confident about it. But do they ever sit down and break down their strongly held views from a rational and empirical perspective? Most really don't seem to ever bother.
Maybe I'm missing something here. What is the big deal of remixing something?
How about going out and creating new and original music? Taking other people's work and mixing, splicing, etc...just really doesn't seem much like talent to me...
By your logic, every mixing engineer out there is doing something that's "not a big deal" and requires no talent. After all, all they're doing is taking other people's work (the tracks recorded by the band) and mixing, splicing, (and balancing, and arranging, and adding effects, and creating a proper stero image, and creating the proper dynamics, and making sounds "fit" together into a cohesive whole), etc to make a song. That doesn't seem much like talent to you...
Which is, of course, ridiculous. Doing good sound mixing is an incredibly difficult and artistic process. Doing good re-mixing, therefore, can be as well.
BTW: most remixes use only a small number of tracks from the original work (often only the vocal), and are built around completely new compositions to create what's effectively a new song. Would you also claim that in every band and songwriting team, only the vocalist has talent? Because that's where your logic leads.
Why do the Wikipedia admins need to lock popular, topical and controversial articles from editing
Pages are locked not because they're "popular, topical and controversial." Pages are locked as needed when two parties cannot agree as to some part of the content and engage in an "edit war" or "revert war" on eachother's work. The page is locked pending resolution of the conflict. Locking the page usually results in everyone calming down (though sometimes you get the issue of one party liking the locked version better and refusing to compromise -- but see http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wrong_Version. Also, such refusal to compromise in Wikipedia is Very Bad, and can result in temporary suspentions and even banning when taken far enough.))
They can also be locked in the face of persistant vandalism pending blocking of the vandal.
Slashdot Mirror
First, you need to extract the .sit file: I got the demo of stuffit expander
.dmg file, or something to convert it to an .iso: I used dmg2iso (the perl script seems to work better).
.iso, but it's a mac file system, so you need something that can read mac filesystems. I grabbed the demo of macdrive.
.aif files from the "The Hand That Feeds 1.0.band\Media" directory and import them into my audio program of choice! I couldn't find anything to convert the garageband "projectData" file into another format (it's xml, but with a weird encoded data block), but the .aif files are a good enough place to start playing with the sounds.
Then you need something that can burn the
Then I burned the
With that I can grab all the
I'm sure there's equivalent utilities for linux, as well, but I don't know about them.
It's silly and funny and great for a chuckle. But think about it for a bit:
"With a torch."
First of all, "torch" would have been changed to "flashlight" for an american audience. Because that's what he meant by "torch." Sure, the sight of Arthur creeping through a government cellar with an actual torch would be quite silly, but not very believable. But "with a flashlight" doesn't have that same quick wit about it and would be wasting screen time without being very funny.
"So had the stairs."
So.. we're meant to believe he headed to the cellar, and there weren't stairs, and instead of complaining he went ahead went into the cellar anyway? Seems quite dangerous, and not very believable. Comes off as good for a chuckle, but still a bit silly for the sake of being silly.
Oh yes, they were 'on display' in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the leopard.
Everything up to but not including the leopard sign probably would have come across OK. The leopard sign, though, still comes across as being silly for the sake of silly. Sure, it was funny when I read the book in the 6th grade but is it really the kind of thing that's necessary for the spirit of the book to translate to the screen?
This seems on the same level as "no tom bombadil"-ism with the LoTR movies to me.
To start taking anonymous p2p more seriously...
Ok, first of all, wikipedia is a work in progress. Certain articles are mature and of encyclopedia quality. Many others are relative immature and in development.
You've chosen three particlar articles that are VERY immature (less than 30 updates each, by only a handful of authors), about a topic that not many people are very interested in, but which is apparently something of interest to you.
I'm sure this kind of commentary cannot help Wikipedia's credibility.
Judging wikipedia by this kind of content is not only unfair, but completely useless. Why don't you start from some of the labeled featured articles and work your criticism from there, instead of seeking out the rarely updated stubs at the fringes of the database?
Wikipedia needs a huge content enema.
No, it needs knowledgable people to work on the articles that need work. You seem to know a lot about the topics involved. Why did you just waste everyone's time complaining about them here on slashdot instead of spending a few minutes to contribute something worthwhile to wikipedia itself? That's how it works, after all.
"Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" is all I could think of reading your post.
If you really can't grok the difference between a one-way many-to-one fixed-content "communication network" and a two-way point-to-point, demand-based "communication network" then you, sir, are the "fucking moron" in this conversation.
Also, you want to set up your own broadcast transmitter? Guess what. you have to PAY to do that. idiot.
Yeah yeah, I know, IHBT. But I had to reply.
Ah, I have no idea how logs are actually calculated, though I seem to remember you can do it with just a slide-rule and lotsa patience...
:)
Logs are probably the easiest thing to do on a slide rule, as the numbers are laid out in a logarithmic scale to begin with
Have you considered reading Apple's developer documentation on the Quartz imaging system instead?
Seriously. Sad how the web has gotten people to all but forget what primary sources actually are anymore!
"For every problem, there is one solution which is simple, obvious, and wrong."
Pretend for a moment that you live in Japan, or Russia, and you actually use websites that use these IDN characters.
So what? So the IDN URLs you go to are printed in a different color scheme. It doesn't hurt usability. But when you go to "paypal.com" and notice that the "a" is in a different color scheme than all the other characters, then you know something is up!
Of course there's the question of accessibility when you use a visual cue. Also black and white text only browsers, etc...
See screenshot: here
HTH.
Don't you think that "Shmoo Group Finds Exploit in IDN domain names" would have been more informative?
Alas, "Shmoo Group Finds Exploit For non-IE Browsers" is more likely to catch people's attention.
What a world!
"oh, well, the pirates shouldn't have pirated the OS and then they could have gotten our updates that came 6 months after the worm started"
Actually, pretty much every worm problem with MS has had a patch that came out *before* the worm started. Do you have any major counterexamples?
That does not make sense to me. If I buy a mobile phone, and somehow lose it, I cannot go to the reseller and claim a new phone simply because I "already own it". If I lose it, then it's lost and I will have to buy a new one.
Similarly, if I've lost my software key, then I've lost my proof of ownership, and I'm just as much a pirate as anybody else if I use a friend's key when installing.
No one can expect Microsoft to cover for one's own sloppiness - if you lose your key then you'll have to buy a new one. There's no "I already own this" argument to be made when you've lost it yourself.
First, as the other poster mentioned, a mobile phone is a physical entity that costs something to manufacture, and therefore costs a lot to replace. Therefore, reasonably, the manufacturer shouldn't have to pay for your sloppiness. However, a logical entity such as a software key costs NOTHING to replace, and software costs VIRTUALLY NOTHING to copy.
Second, you own that cell phone that you purchased. It's yours. But you DO NOT OWN SOFTWARE. You own a license to use that softare. And the key is not that license! The key is simply proof of the license, and losing the key does not equal losing the license that you own.
Basically, whether you have the right to use software when you've lost the piece of paper that says "you have a right to use this software" has *nothing* to do with whether you have the right to a new free phone if you lose your old one. The analogy is horribly flawed.
Xanadu is cool and all... but this is quite questionable "news." The article linked seems to be from 2000. The site in question has been around since 1960. There doesn't seem to be much in the way of news here, except for wikinerd going "oh! xanadu is still alive!" Is that the story? wikinerd discovers xanadu, you should too!?
That doesn't make it irrational. It would be irrational to spend money doing something which makes them less money than not doing it.
You have a very narrow definition of "irrational." I think you've been hanging around economists too much.
Raise the possibility that some things that women are not as good at, such as abstract reasoning, however, and you'll be slaughtered in public.
Yeah, especially when you're "just sayin'" it and not actually talking about the results of a study backing up what you said!
Same goes for your #1-8 "less/more likely" "facts." According to what studies? Under what conditions?
It seems that people have gotten so excited about a chance to be "non-PC through science" that they actually forgot about the pesky need to actually do science to back up what they're saying.
1) There is pretty much never just one single "best person for the job." Others have commented more on this.
2) You aren't sourcing any of your statistics, so they're effectively meaningless. Try finding some demographics and we can work from there. "Look at most of the universities in your area" is not anywhere near good enough. Another poster has already called you out on the "mostly caucasion" claim, but how do you know any of your statistics are correct?
3) I.T. jobs? Since when will the "top level computer science" students want I.T. jobs? What about the software engineering departments? Are you including those in your statistics? Because from where I sit, I certainly don't see > 35-50% females in engineering. Most of those I've worked with in software design groups are in HCI or project management. And as for I.T. -- hell, a lot of the people I know working in I.T. have never even graduated college. Actually getting your statistics from some place other than the ether would alleviate this problem somewhat.
I think your comment actually typifies a lot of what's wrong with gender and other sensitive social relations nowdays -- people just "know" things to be "true." They catch wind of some study that seems to support their views and hell, they feel more confident about it. But do they ever sit down and break down their strongly held views from a rational and empirical perspective? Most really don't seem to ever bother.
*finally*, after several "you're wrong!" "no you're wrong!" posts, someone actually comes along with a source. Thank you, ac!
Prions can infect any neuron. If you think there are only neurons in the brain and spinal column, try touching a red hot stove burner.
Source please? I've never seen any claim that BSE type diseases can be communicated in any way other than brain and spinal cord matter.
The non-neural meat is still dangerous because a lot of nerual contamination can happen in the slaughterhouse.
So what's your opinion on arguing about meta-arguing, then? /burn-karma
Maybe I'm missing something here. What is the big deal of remixing something?
How about going out and creating new and original music? Taking other people's work and mixing, splicing, etc...just really doesn't seem much like talent to me...
By your logic, every mixing engineer out there is doing something that's "not a big deal" and requires no talent. After all, all they're doing is taking other people's work (the tracks recorded by the band) and mixing, splicing, (and balancing, and arranging, and adding effects, and creating a proper stero image, and creating the proper dynamics, and making sounds "fit" together into a cohesive whole), etc to make a song. That doesn't seem much like talent to you...
Which is, of course, ridiculous. Doing good sound mixing is an incredibly difficult and artistic process. Doing good re-mixing, therefore, can be as well.
BTW: most remixes use only a small number of tracks from the original work (often only the vocal), and are built around completely new compositions to create what's effectively a new song. Would you also claim that in every band and songwriting team, only the vocalist has talent? Because that's where your logic leads.
Oops. it's time change per day, not year. So it would be every ... couple thousand years or so? Sorry.
Seriously, this means we'll need an additional leap second once every thousand years or so.
Every million years or so. It's microseconds, not milliseconds.
Well, I just checked, and it's been fixed.
Your reason for not fixing it yourself Doesn't Make Any Sense, BTW.
Why do the Wikipedia admins need to lock popular, topical and controversial articles from editing
Pages are locked not because they're "popular, topical and controversial." Pages are locked as needed when two parties cannot agree as to some part of the content and engage in an "edit war" or "revert war" on eachother's work. The page is locked pending resolution of the conflict. Locking the page usually results in everyone calming down (though sometimes you get the issue of one party liking the locked version better and refusing to compromise -- but see http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wrong_Version. Also, such refusal to compromise in Wikipedia is Very Bad, and can result in temporary suspentions and even banning when taken far enough.))
They can also be locked in the face of persistant vandalism pending blocking of the vandal.
Your "example" doesn't actually exist in wikipedia. Not a very strong argument, that.
The actual wikipedia article links to an actual criticisms of wikipedia article, no problem. Though I like this one better.