Anybody remember Stunts? Back in the early days of polygonal graphics, you could design your own track and then run around it in various simulated vehicles. The physics model was rather Dukes-of-Hazzard-ish when it came to jumps. At my dorm, one guy became so notorious for a really nice (I hear Dixie playing) jump followed immediately by a 90-degree turn that you *never* made, that these combinations came to be known as Kevin Turns. A typical utterance while driving a newly-designed track was something along the lines of, "Godd***it! Another Kevin Turn!"
Anyway, since my college days, I'm always wary when cresting an unfamiliar rise, even when I'm offline in reality. Apparently there's a circuit somewhere in the back of my brain that is on constant alert for one of those Kevin Turns.
A virgin, a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man, whatever works. There is enough evidence to suggest to a reasonable and intelligent person that human-generated global warming may exist. There is also sufficient evidence to suggest to the same reasonable and intelligent person that human-generated global warming does not exist. I can't imagine that the Climate Gods enjoy such a balanced argument. Given the potential outcomes I've suggested, why are we not taking every reasonable step to solve this problem (even if it's not really a problem)?
Besides, if you sacrificed all the virgins, then who would post to/.?
This is something that has concerned me for a while...
I see four scenarios:
1 - We believe that "the sky is falling" and that humans are, effectively, destroying our habitat. We do something about it, and manage to reverse or minimize the impact. 2 - The sky is *not* falling, yet we still think so, and try to do something about it. Our efforts are roughly equivalent to the destruction that we thought we were doing - in other words, no significant change either way. 3 - The sky is still *not* falling and we do nothing about it. Nothing lost, nothing gained. 4 - Yes, the sky really is falling. We don't do anything about it. The seas rise, the sun darkens, and life as we know it comes to a screeching halt.
Why wouldn't we do something about it and (at worst) end up in situation number 2? Why do we, instead, bicker about whether or not the sky is indeed falling?
Did anyone else notice the stats between the PS, PS2, and PS3 power consumption? I figured that technology was going in that direction, but I had no idea how bad.
Raise the price of energy. Raise it enough for people to notice when they leave their computer at home on all night. Raise it enough that companies look for greener ways of doing things just to save money.
It hardly takes any effort to become informed. With sites like VoteSmart, OpenSecrets, FactCheck... even your local paper's site, you can become more informed over the course of 20-30 minutes than most people who *do* vote.
I voted this morning with a Direct-Recording Electronic Voting System. Just before going behind the screen, I mentioned to the poll worker that I knew how to crack it (ok, admittedly, I used the word 'hack' just so I was reasonably sure she understood). She was rather... disappointed.
There weren't any problems with the three machines in my precinct (that were detectable, anyway). The lady in line in front of me couldn't find her driver's license, though, which would keep her from voting in Indiana.
If they're smart, they'll somehow fork a honeypot off of this, since advertising such a project seems to be equivalent to putting a big digital bullseye on their foreheads.
Actually, I'd be in favor of my home state, Indiana, seceeding from the union. Then maybe we could get rid of that stoopid Daylight Savings Time thing again. And the Republicans wouldn't try so hard to get one of their cronies elected as governor (it's Indiana, after all - all he had to do was win the primary, beating a much better but far less endorsed candidate). And I wouldn't have to keep trying to vote my inept U.S. Rep out of office every two years. Oh, and maybe we could finally declare war on Kentucky and get all their whiskey as spoils.
Seriously, I'd prefer a whole lot of control moved from Washington to the individual states. Once upon a time, that was the case. Then politicians used the civil war and the great depression and other catastrophes (hmm... terrorism?) to consolidate power.
I'm curious about where typical NPR shows like Morning Edition and All Things Considered fall on this scale. I think it'd be much more damning to broadcast news to find that, for instance, on a scale of 1 to 10, CNN and the Daily Show both get a 3 while ATC gets a 7... or something like that.
I do remember a study a while back that found that NPR news shows were found to be among the most un-biased programs, contrary to the belief of many that they have a definite liberal bent. The NPR talk shows, on the other hand...
Eat dinner at home together as a family, inquire about how your kids spend their day, talk to them about their friends, their passions, their fears, spend time playing with your kids, hug them and tell them you love them, be kind and loving to your spouse, especially when they're watching or listening, limit your own mind-numbing attraction to TV and video games, and when you do watch or play, set the right example by having the dishes or yardwork or whatever done first. Do this, and your kids will probably be fine. Of course, that whole Christianity thing doesn't hurt, either, but I don't expect many/.'ers to bite on that.
Nah, it's just easier to watch them rot and blame it on video games. Then you can find out 20 years later on CNN that they were molested by the neighbor kid.
When so many decisions are made in Washington, it's awfully damn hard to feel represented if you don't have a major lobby to counter the fact that you're lost in a sea of constituents.
Putting a kid behind the wheel without any oversight is not simply a matter of trust. There is an overwhelming temptation to abuse that trust, and any human being, no matter how virtuous, is not perfect. I'd trust my kids not to smoke crack, too, but I'm not going to leave my daughter in a room by herself with a crack pipe. Too often, we like to find out how close to the fire we can get before being burnt, when we should actually just stay as far away from the fire as we can get.
I was out with the President of my company at lunch once. He drove his nifty little Porsche. When leaving the restaurant, he asked if I'd like to drive it. I immediately declined, joking that it was a matter of job security. Personally, I'd love to put that car through its paces. Instead of getting behind the wheel and hoping I could suppress my normal (ok, Andretti-like) driving habits, I just stayed the hell away. It was a minor thing, and funny more than anything, but a clear example of how to deal with these situations.
Wanted: Robust inexpensive mobile phone that can be purchased at local brick&mortar. Extremely loud (but mute-able) ringer preferred.
NOT Wanted: Potentially *hot* phone from eBay, which requires any hacking at all to use any given service provider. Phone that can play music, check email, make coffee, and/or dance the jitterbug. Service agreements.... never gonna happen.
FTFA: "It could also let a nosy citizen *with enough cash* find out if the mayor is having an affair, he says."
Privacy concerns, in my opinion, are hogwash if all is equal. If everybody could know the precise altitude, latitude, and longitude of everybody else's vehicle, then there's no issue. It's a zero-sum equation. It's when somebody with money or connections or whatever has access to this information and John Q. Public doesn't that there's a problem.
1975 here. It may have been a sign of my future as an anal-retentive programmer, but I hated all of those futuristic designs and pimped-out features. I wanted muscle cars and ferraris and trucks and tanks and police cars and fire trucks.
My 4yo son has a decent HW collection now. Some of them are whacked-out designs, thanks to gifts from family and friends. Many, though, are courtesy of yours truly. And he can tell the difference between the Chevelle and the Nova. His favorites? A BMW, a Ford GT, and a police car. That's my boy!
Not to mention that the entire caving community owes the man a debt of gratitude. Lighter, whiter, and brighter than our old headlamps, and insane battery life to boot.
If this is all true, then why, oh why, do I get nothing but ads from True.com whenever I go to my MySpace page even though I've clearly indicated that I'm married?
I've wondered if it's a sign of just how corrupt they are, preying upon the institution of marriage, but that defies Hanlon's Razor.
And on that note, I wonder how overall traffic across the net will be affected. I would assume there'd be a decline, probably linear over the next week or two. Anyone know where to go for numbers?
Ok, I just don't get this. What is everyone's obsession with a national id system? It's a number! It's not like they're tattooing it into your forehead and accelerating the Second Coming!
Granted, SSN's are not the answer, but that's more of a technical issue (private/public key, limitations of the value range, not what it was intended for, etc).
Maybe I'm oversimplifying this, but as a database programmer, I can't understand the justification for essentially having a *really big* table of data without a primary key.
We have a really big population. We have accounting systems that need to uniquely identify members of that population. Solution: Roll out a national id program. What's the issue?
...who wouldn't have a problem with this if *all* such records were in the public domain? I mean, it's not that the NSA can see who I called, but that I can't see who they called.
I personally prefer a level playing field, whatever that field is. I could live in a glass house, as long as everyone else lived in one too (can't wait for the/. humor on that one). The problem is that there's a growing perception (and where there's smoke, there's fire) that 'normal' Americans are the ones in the glass houses and the political and/or economic elite are comfortably tucked away on the hilltop.
Though the tone was flamebait, the question stands. Where are the news articles about actually making things work? Case in point is my diesel Jetta. I'm waiting for the news article about the $100 refinery you can buy from Stuff-Mart that converts Grandma's bacon grease into fuel for my car. It can be done, people are already doing it, but I'm not going to blow up myself and my garage trying to do it myself. I want a real product - something with annoying plastic packaging, a warranty, and a worthless set of instructions in 16 languages.
We don't get enough of those. Instead we get articles about the $100 bajillion Ferrari-beater. I'm not saying that's bad, though. I just want my Fuel-O-Matic 9000 a lot more than I want to envy some geek in SV.
Oh, and the Prius and Civic suck for those of us with a lead foot.
Slashdot Mirror
Anybody remember Stunts? Back in the early days of polygonal graphics, you could design your own track and then run around it in various simulated vehicles. The physics model was rather Dukes-of-Hazzard-ish when it came to jumps. At my dorm, one guy became so notorious for a really nice (I hear Dixie playing) jump followed immediately by a 90-degree turn that you *never* made, that these combinations came to be known as Kevin Turns. A typical utterance while driving a newly-designed track was something along the lines of, "Godd***it! Another Kevin Turn!"
Anyway, since my college days, I'm always wary when cresting an unfamiliar rise, even when I'm offline in reality. Apparently there's a circuit somewhere in the back of my brain that is on constant alert for one of those Kevin Turns.
J
and i see no reason to upgrade - even to xp
A virgin, a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man, whatever works. There is enough evidence to suggest to a reasonable and intelligent person that human-generated global warming may exist. There is also sufficient evidence to suggest to the same reasonable and intelligent person that human-generated global warming does not exist. I can't imagine that the Climate Gods enjoy such a balanced argument. Given the potential outcomes I've suggested, why are we not taking every reasonable step to solve this problem (even if it's not really a problem)?
Besides, if you sacrificed all the virgins, then who would post to /.?
This is something that has concerned me for a while...
I see four scenarios:
1 - We believe that "the sky is falling" and that humans are, effectively, destroying our habitat. We do something about it, and manage to reverse or minimize the impact.
2 - The sky is *not* falling, yet we still think so, and try to do something about it. Our efforts are roughly equivalent to the destruction that we thought we were doing - in other words, no significant change either way.
3 - The sky is still *not* falling and we do nothing about it. Nothing lost, nothing gained.
4 - Yes, the sky really is falling. We don't do anything about it. The seas rise, the sun darkens, and life as we know it comes to a screeching halt.
Why wouldn't we do something about it and (at worst) end up in situation number 2? Why do we, instead, bicker about whether or not the sky is indeed falling?
J
Did anyone else notice the stats between the PS, PS2, and PS3 power consumption? I figured that technology was going in that direction, but I had no idea how bad.
Raise the price of energy. Raise it enough for people to notice when they leave their computer at home on all night. Raise it enough that companies look for greener ways of doing things just to save money.
It hardly takes any effort to become informed. With sites like VoteSmart, OpenSecrets, FactCheck... even your local paper's site, you can become more informed over the course of 20-30 minutes than most people who *do* vote.
I voted this morning with a Direct-Recording Electronic Voting System. Just before going behind the screen, I mentioned to the poll worker that I knew how to crack it (ok, admittedly, I used the word 'hack' just so I was reasonably sure she understood). She was rather... disappointed.
There weren't any problems with the three machines in my precinct (that were detectable, anyway). The lady in line in front of me couldn't find her driver's license, though, which would keep her from voting in Indiana.
If they're smart, they'll somehow fork a honeypot off of this, since advertising such a project seems to be equivalent to putting a big digital bullseye on their foreheads.
Actually, I'd be in favor of my home state, Indiana, seceeding from the union. Then maybe we could get rid of that stoopid Daylight Savings Time thing again. And the Republicans wouldn't try so hard to get one of their cronies elected as governor (it's Indiana, after all - all he had to do was win the primary, beating a much better but far less endorsed candidate). And I wouldn't have to keep trying to vote my inept U.S. Rep out of office every two years. Oh, and maybe we could finally declare war on Kentucky and get all their whiskey as spoils.
Seriously, I'd prefer a whole lot of control moved from Washington to the individual states. Once upon a time, that was the case. Then politicians used the civil war and the great depression and other catastrophes (hmm... terrorism?) to consolidate power.
Anyone else here get a completely wrong impression of the article by the inclusion of "IE" and "immoral" in the title?
I'm curious about where typical NPR shows like Morning Edition and All Things Considered fall on this scale. I think it'd be much more damning to broadcast news to find that, for instance, on a scale of 1 to 10, CNN and the Daily Show both get a 3 while ATC gets a 7... or something like that.
I do remember a study a while back that found that NPR news shows were found to be among the most un-biased programs, contrary to the belief of many that they have a definite liberal bent. The NPR talk shows, on the other hand...
Eat dinner at home together as a family, inquire about how your kids spend their day, talk to them about their friends, their passions, their fears, spend time playing with your kids, hug them and tell them you love them, be kind and loving to your spouse, especially when they're watching or listening, limit your own mind-numbing attraction to TV and video games, and when you do watch or play, set the right example by having the dishes or yardwork or whatever done first. Do this, and your kids will probably be fine. Of course, that whole Christianity thing doesn't hurt, either, but I don't expect many /.'ers to bite on that.
Nah, it's just easier to watch them rot and blame it on video games. Then you can find out 20 years later on CNN that they were molested by the neighbor kid.
When so many decisions are made in Washington, it's awfully damn hard to feel represented if you don't have a major lobby to counter the fact that you're lost in a sea of constituents.
public bool Cheat(bool multiPlayer, bool reward, bool beatGameAlready)
{
bool result = false;
if (multiPlayer)
{
if (reward)
{
result = AnalyzeRisk();
}
}
else
{
result = beatGameAlready
}
return result;
}
Putting a kid behind the wheel without any oversight is not simply a matter of trust. There is an overwhelming temptation to abuse that trust, and any human being, no matter how virtuous, is not perfect. I'd trust my kids not to smoke crack, too, but I'm not going to leave my daughter in a room by herself with a crack pipe. Too often, we like to find out how close to the fire we can get before being burnt, when we should actually just stay as far away from the fire as we can get.
I was out with the President of my company at lunch once. He drove his nifty little Porsche. When leaving the restaurant, he asked if I'd like to drive it. I immediately declined, joking that it was a matter of job security. Personally, I'd love to put that car through its paces. Instead of getting behind the wheel and hoping I could suppress my normal (ok, Andretti-like) driving habits, I just stayed the hell away. It was a minor thing, and funny more than anything, but a clear example of how to deal with these situations.
Wanted: Robust inexpensive mobile phone that can be purchased at local brick&mortar. Extremely loud (but mute-able) ringer preferred.
... never gonna happen.
NOT Wanted: Potentially *hot* phone from eBay, which requires any hacking at all to use any given service provider. Phone that can play music, check email, make coffee, and/or dance the jitterbug. Service agreements.
J
FTFA: "It could also let a nosy citizen *with enough cash* find out if the mayor is having an affair, he says."
Privacy concerns, in my opinion, are hogwash if all is equal. If everybody could know the precise altitude, latitude, and longitude of everybody else's vehicle, then there's no issue. It's a zero-sum equation. It's when somebody with money or connections or whatever has access to this information and John Q. Public doesn't that there's a problem.
1975 here. It may have been a sign of my future as an anal-retentive programmer, but I hated all of those futuristic designs and pimped-out features. I wanted muscle cars and ferraris and trucks and tanks and police cars and fire trucks.
My 4yo son has a decent HW collection now. Some of them are whacked-out designs, thanks to gifts from family and friends. Many, though, are courtesy of yours truly. And he can tell the difference between the Chevelle and the Nova. His favorites? A BMW, a Ford GT, and a police car. That's my boy!
Not to mention that the entire caving community owes the man a debt of gratitude. Lighter, whiter, and brighter than our old headlamps, and insane battery life to boot.
If this is all true, then why, oh why, do I get nothing but ads from True.com whenever I go to my MySpace page even though I've clearly indicated that I'm married?
I've wondered if it's a sign of just how corrupt they are, preying upon the institution of marriage, but that defies Hanlon's Razor.
And on that note, I wonder how overall traffic across the net will be affected. I would assume there'd be a decline, probably linear over the next week or two. Anyone know where to go for numbers?
I gotta know. In his copy, did Han shoot first?
Ok, I just don't get this. What is everyone's obsession with a national id system? It's a number! It's not like they're tattooing it into your forehead and accelerating the Second Coming!
Granted, SSN's are not the answer, but that's more of a technical issue (private/public key, limitations of the value range, not what it was intended for, etc).
Maybe I'm oversimplifying this, but as a database programmer, I can't understand the justification for essentially having a *really big* table of data without a primary key.
We have a really big population. We have accounting systems that need to uniquely identify members of that population. Solution: Roll out a national id program. What's the issue?
...who wouldn't have a problem with this if *all* such records were in the public domain? I mean, it's not that the NSA can see who I called, but that I can't see who they called.
/. humor on that one). The problem is that there's a growing perception (and where there's smoke, there's fire) that 'normal' Americans are the ones in the glass houses and the political and/or economic elite are comfortably tucked away on the hilltop.
I personally prefer a level playing field, whatever that field is. I could live in a glass house, as long as everyone else lived in one too (can't wait for the
Though the tone was flamebait, the question stands. Where are the news articles about actually making things work? Case in point is my diesel Jetta. I'm waiting for the news article about the $100 refinery you can buy from Stuff-Mart that converts Grandma's bacon grease into fuel for my car. It can be done, people are already doing it, but I'm not going to blow up myself and my garage trying to do it myself. I want a real product - something with annoying plastic packaging, a warranty, and a worthless set of instructions in 16 languages.
We don't get enough of those. Instead we get articles about the $100 bajillion Ferrari-beater. I'm not saying that's bad, though. I just want my Fuel-O-Matic 9000 a lot more than I want to envy some geek in SV.
Oh, and the Prius and Civic suck for those of us with a lead foot.