I suspect they're referring to the tabernacle of Judaism, due to the reference to the "Holy of Holies," or the inner sanctum of the temple. Prior to the building of the temple, the "tabernacle" was a tent the Israelites carried and inside of which they stored the Ark of the Covenant, which was the container for the Ten Commmandments. After the temple was built, the Ark was stored behind a covering in the Holy of Holies AKA The Most Holy Place (the area directly outside this was the Holy Place) and it was only entered once a year by the high priest on Yom Kippur, or the Day of Atonement, when sacrifices were presented to God for the forgiveness of the entire nation's sins.
Anyone who entered the Holy of Holies or touched the Ark (who wasn't the high priest on Yom Kippur who had undergone rituals of cleansing) was said to die instantly. Even the high priest couldn't be sure he would live: they tied bells to his shawl so they could hear him moving once he was inside and a rope to his ankle so they could pull him out if he died while inside the Most Holy Place.
So the lesson is, I suppose, that if you screw with Vista 64's kernel, prepare to die:-P
Take a break for a while? I hit 18mil SP with a total of about 1.3 years played, so in about 6 months. Just 60k short of 10mil atm, and the game is still interesting... though mostly for the player interaction, the politics, and the challenge of finding the best way to do things. I do a lot of out-of-game playing:-P (thinking about different fits, possibilities, designing spreadsheets/programs to perform calculations to maximize efficiency...)
That's cool. The game is definitely tailored to a niche group, which seems to be ~18-35 year olds with an interest in mentally stimulating and challenging game play and an ability to communicate clearly through the typed word. It's probably just not for you.
And as another poster stated, you have to play the game for a lot more than three days to really get it. I was excited after two and purchased the game because I could see the potential which, even after 9+ months, I still haven't reached. The possibilities are exciting within the first week and, if you're not a carebear, are accessible really early on.
Try EVE-Online:-) No carebearism there, especially out in low security space. I picked up a 14-day free trial and couldn't even bring myself to log back onto WoW afterwards. Been playing almost 9 months now; time flies when you're having fun;-)
The only one I've heard of is Jack Thompson, who (as the abstract points out) is the plaintiff's lawyer. And he already has had his license to practice law revoked in Alabama. This isn't a problem with the legal system as much as it's a problem with irresponsible parents and 'ole Jacky.
There are plenty of solutions for Firefox for sites that allow IE only. I've heard that the UA switcher is the most invisible, though you do still have to change the UA yourself through the drop down menu. Personally, I prefer IE View. Go to a site that doesn't work, right click and open in IE. One extra click is a small price for better security.
Concerning proxy connections, I'd almost guarantee there's a solution for you if you look for it.
Just for the record, Kryptonite recalled all of the U-Bar locks that used circular keys and replaced them with regular teeth-key locks (not sure of the technical name for them). I bought one myself recently and find it to be just as sturdy as the op's video demonstrates ^_^
It's all fine and well to demand better, more secure voting machines, but the problem (as is so often the case) is funding./. users might think vote-box security is important, but it's the municipalities that run voting and either they or, more importantly, their tax-payers don't want to shell out extra cash for voting machines when the old ones "work." Even if we mandate a better machine, some localities can't pay for the better ones; keep in mind that some of the most hotly contested precints are also some of the poorest precints. If their district can't pay for the more secure machines, does that mean people there can't vote?
We're moving from HP to Toshiba, but for capitalistic rather than politic reasons. Who cares what HP does to deliver the bottom line? That's their business.* The problem is that the bottom line isn't good enough, and the Toshiba all-in-ones we've gotten are superior to HP. When it comes to end-users, the politics are irrelevant when compared to the price tag and the quality.
*This is assuming a capitalistic standpoint inherent in most (sic) US businesses. Surely some businesses will care about politics, but I certainly don't know any. Personally, I work for a state university and we're focused on getting the most bang for our buck, if you will. We've had a long-standing contract with HP and continue to use their printers, but people are slowly becoming more dissatisfied with them and looking for a more all-inclusive solution for (comparitively) less money.
Despite previously refusing to reveal search information to the U.S. government, the company has announced they'll be releasing information on hate groups to the Brazilian courts.
This is nothing like the situation in the United States. Just looking at the first paragraph of TFA, we get "Google Inc.... said yesterday that it was complying with a Brazilian court's orders to turn over data..." In the US, the data was asked for, and Google said no. In Brazil, the court is forcing them. Yes, Google's going along with a court order, but if there hadn't been such an order, they wouldn't have given the data, just like they didn't hand it over in the US.
Of course, a lot of people will say, "Well, they shouldn't be collecting it!" To me, if you're using the service, you agree to the ToS, and those records are part of how Google operates. If you don't like it, either ensure your anonymity by taking the appropiate measures or use a different service... like MSN. Because we all know that they don't record the same data.
As someone who also works in central IT at a major university, I not only know about the *AA requesting info, but what our response is. It's the latter that's really important.
The RIAA can file a request to the university, but the university 1) doesn't have to turn over that information until subpoened, and 2) isn't responsible for what is done on private computers[1]. This means that if a student in the dorm is trafficking kiddie porn, it's not the university that is arrested when it's tracked down. If a student is sharing a gig of Metallica, it's not the university that is liable and can be sued. Individuals are responsible for their actions. However, there is a difference in these two cases. In the first, it is a criminal case, and if the university or certain university officials were aware that child pornography traffic was being transmitted yet did nothing, then those officials could be held liable for aiding and abetting. In the case of music or movie sharing, though, it is a civil case, and the university can not therefore be held accountable. You can't have an accomplice when no crime is committed.
They might want to sue the university, but their lawyers would tell them not to waste their time.
[1]Lab computers, on the other hand, are an entirely different story. Also, as far as our university goes, we have enacted bandwidth limits to the residence halls, because it's not really fair that user A, who just wants to check their GMail, gets a ridiculously slow connection because user B has a few gb of IRC traffic. Also, they get internet for free (well, it's incorporated in dorm costs, at any rate), so I can understand enacting such a limit. However, our dorm students also have the option of getting cable internet (and TV) provided by a local cable company if they are unsatisfied with the university's provision.
Check out the blog of ex-Google employees, which recently featured this event.
From the entry:
This week googling officially became a verb. The 11th edition of the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary now includes "googling" (lower case g). Actually the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) beat them to the punch a month ago by listing Google (upper case g) in their authoritative lexicon of the English language. It's about time. People have been using Google as a verb for years, despite protestations by the company (many of which I authored myself) about the genericization of the trademarked name.
Having your brand name used as a generic term, is of course, a mixed blessing for a company. On the one hand, it's great to have your name become the common shorthand for an entire category. It implies acceptance that your product is the standard by which all others in the category are judged and it's great word-of-mouth for building awareness and trial.
On the other hand, you want to protect your trademark and it's difficult to do that if overuse dilutes its connection to your product. If Google becomes synonymous with "searching the internet" without a connection to the specific service offered by Google Inc. at www.google.com, then anyone can offer a way to "google for information." Say, for example, Microsoft. They could offer an MSN google box if Google's trademark on the name were to be revoked through genericide.
Yeah, I discovered Latex just a few months ago and I've been loving it. Looking forward to the semester starting up so I have an excuse to use it a lot and some motivation for writing a template for SBL format:-P
UBRS was once a 40-man instance. Then it got put down to 15. Now I believe it is 10. How exactly is WoW changing the amount of people that can enter an instance "news?"
Which is why I fear the day our Dell machines start coming with Vista installed. My guess is that we'll keep installing XP for another few years and just not tell Microsoft >_> We don't have to stop supporting it until it's two versions old anyways, and at this rate, it'll be 2010 before that happens with XP.
Bought at 128, the all time high I think.
The highest price looks to have been 45.6... just curious if this was a typo. As it is, he took a slightly larger loss than if he had waited and sold it now, but they haven't shot back up yet in a way that proves your point.
I had a similar experience at the beginning of this summer (traveling to Switzerland, Germany, and England). I didn't have any problems with anti-US sentiments; the stereotype I seemed to be on the receiving-end of was "dumb tourist," more than "hated American." I clearly didn't know much about where I was (that's why I was there, after all), but people were kind and helpful, not disdainful because of the latest poor foreign policy choice by my president.
Amusingly enough, I roomed with a couple from Texas in a hostel in Berlin who seemed to have a similar experience. If I learned nothing else overseas, it's that people are people everywhere; we all have families and jobs and dreams. We* don't think that we're mean and hateful, so why do we assume that everyone else is?
*I'm from the US, so by "we" I mean "people with whom I associate myself," such as other people from the US./trying-to-avoid-flamewar-about-Americans-displaci ng-negative-attributes-on-else-everyone
Actually, English is easy. It's American that is difficult.
I had a communications major argue with me one day that American is a dialect, not a language. Sure, ok, but it's still hard. Take half a dozen languages (not all Latin-based and German based either (two of the easier languages, IMO), unlike English), toss them together, make up words and misspell things, then expect the whole world to know what you mean without teaching them the language. That's American.
I once heard it was third most difficult only behind Mandarin Chinese and Japanese, though I'm afraid that I don't have a source. Regardless, I started studying Hebrew recently and I can guarantee that it is easier than American. It's so nice to work with a language that follows its own rules.
Though it does amaze me how many people show up near my apartment from Kansas City or St. Louis (depending on the week) and had a fight with their girlfriend who subsequently took the car and left them, and their buddy was supposed to come pick them up but they can't get a hold of them, and they only need money for a bus ticket back to KC/StL (depending on the week)...
It's amazing, how close we all are to becoming homeless. I've met 3-4 in one week before all going through the exact same thing. Shocking, really.
No, if it were reversed we would have died out as a species:-P
The problem is that we define successful as making/having money and materialistic items, as well as having a "good" (read high-paying) job. People/couples without children can attain this much more easily because they don't have to pay for the kid and can devote a lot more time to their career.
One of two things happen with the "smart, successful people." Either A) they don't have kids, or B) they do, but don't take proper care of them because they're too focused on their career. In case A, we have the race dying out, and in case B we have a generation of children raised by nannies and daycares with a whole slew of mental problems, usually including prolonged immaturity.
Having a bunch of kids isn't a sign of stupidity or failure, as you seem to imply. It is simply an indication of different priorities. Sure, there are some people who are just dumb and have more kids than they can afford or who specifically try to have kids so they can cheat the welfare system out of a few more bucks, but despite the stereotype those are actually minority cases (in reference to first world countries). I would have no problem working an entry-level tech job fixing computers, even though the pay isn't that great, because I like fixing computers and because being "successful" in that sense and making a lot of money isn't my priority. My family is my first priority, and being able to spend time with and provide for them (not just financially, but emotionally) is what I consider successful.
Maybe if more of our parents thought of raising their children as more of a success than raising their stock portfolio, we'd have a lot less problems in this world.
I've read those Greco-Roman documents... but the problem is that they say the youth is horrible, and the post you're replying to says that the youth is good and that they're going to turn things around and make it better.
In my experience, the reason both parents have to work so hard and scrabble is usually because they are financially irresponsible. My boss and his wife barely make it by each month, not because they don't get paid enough, but because they have almost $30,000 in credit card debt, on top of a mortgage, car payment, etc. I can't speak for the rest of college students, but examples like him and like my father were enough to make me tired of the bullshit, like the above poster wrote, and I'm going to do my best to be financially responsible to the extent that I can live comfortably on the same thing other people barely get by on.
I am playing music loud on my outdoor speakers, I can't sue my neighbors for listening to it.
That's because the music doesn't belong to you, it belongs to the RIAA.
Which reminds me, the RIAA will be along shortly. Something about you distributing music audibly to your neighbours who have not purchased the songs in question.
Slashdot Mirror
I suspect they're referring to the tabernacle of Judaism, due to the reference to the "Holy of Holies," or the inner sanctum of the temple. Prior to the building of the temple, the "tabernacle" was a tent the Israelites carried and inside of which they stored the Ark of the Covenant, which was the container for the Ten Commmandments. After the temple was built, the Ark was stored behind a covering in the Holy of Holies AKA The Most Holy Place (the area directly outside this was the Holy Place) and it was only entered once a year by the high priest on Yom Kippur, or the Day of Atonement, when sacrifices were presented to God for the forgiveness of the entire nation's sins.
Anyone who entered the Holy of Holies or touched the Ark (who wasn't the high priest on Yom Kippur who had undergone rituals of cleansing) was said to die instantly. Even the high priest couldn't be sure he would live: they tied bells to his shawl so they could hear him moving once he was inside and a rope to his ankle so they could pull him out if he died while inside the Most Holy Place.
So the lesson is, I suppose, that if you screw with Vista 64's kernel, prepare to die :-P
Take a break for a while? I hit 18mil SP with a total of about 1.3 years played, so in about 6 months. Just 60k short of 10mil atm, and the game is still interesting... though mostly for the player interaction, the politics, and the challenge of finding the best way to do things. I do a lot of out-of-game playing :-P (thinking about different fits, possibilities, designing spreadsheets/programs to perform calculations to maximize efficiency...)
That's cool. The game is definitely tailored to a niche group, which seems to be ~18-35 year olds with an interest in mentally stimulating and challenging game play and an ability to communicate clearly through the typed word. It's probably just not for you.
And as another poster stated, you have to play the game for a lot more than three days to really get it. I was excited after two and purchased the game because I could see the potential which, even after 9+ months, I still haven't reached. The possibilities are exciting within the first week and, if you're not a carebear, are accessible really early on.
Try EVE-Online :-) No carebearism there, especially out in low security space. I picked up a 14-day free trial and couldn't even bring myself to log back onto WoW afterwards. Been playing almost 9 months now; time flies when you're having fun ;-)
The only one I've heard of is Jack Thompson, who (as the abstract points out) is the plaintiff's lawyer. And he already has had his license to practice law revoked in Alabama. This isn't a problem with the legal system as much as it's a problem with irresponsible parents and 'ole Jacky.
They're just catching on to what MMORPG designers have known for centuries: moneysinks are good for the economy!
IE View
IE Tab
User Agent Switcher
There are plenty of solutions for Firefox for sites that allow IE only. I've heard that the UA switcher is the most invisible, though you do still have to change the UA yourself through the drop down menu. Personally, I prefer IE View. Go to a site that doesn't work, right click and open in IE. One extra click is a small price for better security.
Concerning proxy connections, I'd almost guarantee there's a solution for you if you look for it.
Just for the record, Kryptonite recalled all of the U-Bar locks that used circular keys and replaced them with regular teeth-key locks (not sure of the technical name for them). I bought one myself recently and find it to be just as sturdy as the op's video demonstrates ^_^
It's all fine and well to demand better, more secure voting machines, but the problem (as is so often the case) is funding. /. users might think vote-box security is important, but it's the municipalities that run voting and either they or, more importantly, their tax-payers don't want to shell out extra cash for voting machines when the old ones "work." Even if we mandate a better machine, some localities can't pay for the better ones; keep in mind that some of the most hotly contested precints are also some of the poorest precints. If their district can't pay for the more secure machines, does that mean people there can't vote?
We're moving from HP to Toshiba, but for capitalistic rather than politic reasons. Who cares what HP does to deliver the bottom line? That's their business.* The problem is that the bottom line isn't good enough, and the Toshiba all-in-ones we've gotten are superior to HP. When it comes to end-users, the politics are irrelevant when compared to the price tag and the quality.
*This is assuming a capitalistic standpoint inherent in most (sic) US businesses. Surely some businesses will care about politics, but I certainly don't know any. Personally, I work for a state university and we're focused on getting the most bang for our buck, if you will. We've had a long-standing contract with HP and continue to use their printers, but people are slowly becoming more dissatisfied with them and looking for a more all-inclusive solution for (comparitively) less money.
Despite previously refusing to reveal search information to the U.S. government, the company has announced they'll be releasing information on hate groups to the Brazilian courts.
This is nothing like the situation in the United States. Just looking at the first paragraph of TFA, we get "Google Inc. ... said yesterday that it was complying with a Brazilian court's orders to turn over data ..." In the US, the data was asked for, and Google said no. In Brazil, the court is forcing them. Yes, Google's going along with a court order, but if there hadn't been such an order, they wouldn't have given the data, just like they didn't hand it over in the US.
Of course, a lot of people will say, "Well, they shouldn't be collecting it!" To me, if you're using the service, you agree to the ToS, and those records are part of how Google operates. If you don't like it, either ensure your anonymity by taking the appropiate measures or use a different service... like MSN. Because we all know that they don't record the same data.
As someone who also works in central IT at a major university, I not only know about the *AA requesting info, but what our response is. It's the latter that's really important.
The RIAA can file a request to the university, but the university 1) doesn't have to turn over that information until subpoened, and 2) isn't responsible for what is done on private computers[1]. This means that if a student in the dorm is trafficking kiddie porn, it's not the university that is arrested when it's tracked down. If a student is sharing a gig of Metallica, it's not the university that is liable and can be sued. Individuals are responsible for their actions. However, there is a difference in these two cases. In the first, it is a criminal case, and if the university or certain university officials were aware that child pornography traffic was being transmitted yet did nothing, then those officials could be held liable for aiding and abetting. In the case of music or movie sharing, though, it is a civil case, and the university can not therefore be held accountable. You can't have an accomplice when no crime is committed.
They might want to sue the university, but their lawyers would tell them not to waste their time.
[1]Lab computers, on the other hand, are an entirely different story. Also, as far as our university goes, we have enacted bandwidth limits to the residence halls, because it's not really fair that user A, who just wants to check their GMail, gets a ridiculously slow connection because user B has a few gb of IRC traffic. Also, they get internet for free (well, it's incorporated in dorm costs, at any rate), so I can understand enacting such a limit. However, our dorm students also have the option of getting cable internet (and TV) provided by a local cable company if they are unsatisfied with the university's provision.
What's sad is that the op was tagged Interesting instead of Funny...
What's more sad is that it's probably true.
Check out the blog of ex-Google employees, which recently featured this event.
From the entry:
This week googling officially became a verb. The 11th edition of the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary now includes "googling" (lower case g). Actually the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) beat them to the punch a month ago by listing Google (upper case g) in their authoritative lexicon of the English language. It's about time. People have been using Google as a verb for years, despite protestations by the company (many of which I authored myself) about the genericization of the trademarked name.
Having your brand name used as a generic term, is of course, a mixed blessing for a company. On the one hand, it's great to have your name become the common shorthand for an entire category. It implies acceptance that your product is the standard by which all others in the category are judged and it's great word-of-mouth for building awareness and trial.
On the other hand, you want to protect your trademark and it's difficult to do that if overuse dilutes its connection to your product. If Google becomes synonymous with "searching the internet" without a connection to the specific service offered by Google Inc. at www.google.com, then anyone can offer a way to "google for information." Say, for example, Microsoft. They could offer an MSN google box if Google's trademark on the name were to be revoked through genericide.
Yeah, I discovered Latex just a few months ago and I've been loving it. Looking forward to the semester starting up so I have an excuse to use it a lot and some motivation for writing a template for SBL format :-P
UBRS was once a 40-man instance. Then it got put down to 15. Now I believe it is 10. How exactly is WoW changing the amount of people that can enter an instance "news?"
Which is why I fear the day our Dell machines start coming with Vista installed. My guess is that we'll keep installing XP for another few years and just not tell Microsoft >_> We don't have to stop supporting it until it's two versions old anyways, and at this rate, it'll be 2010 before that happens with XP.
MSN, IRC, Yahoo! and others all lead to reduced IQs and a sure road to hell.
Bought at 128, the all time high I think. The highest price looks to have been 45.6... just curious if this was a typo. As it is, he took a slightly larger loss than if he had waited and sold it now, but they haven't shot back up yet in a way that proves your point.
I had a similar experience at the beginning of this summer (traveling to Switzerland, Germany, and England). I didn't have any problems with anti-US sentiments; the stereotype I seemed to be on the receiving-end of was "dumb tourist," more than "hated American." I clearly didn't know much about where I was (that's why I was there, after all), but people were kind and helpful, not disdainful because of the latest poor foreign policy choice by my president.
Amusingly enough, I roomed with a couple from Texas in a hostel in Berlin who seemed to have a similar experience. If I learned nothing else overseas, it's that people are people everywhere; we all have families and jobs and dreams. We* don't think that we're mean and hateful, so why do we assume that everyone else is?
*I'm from the US, so by "we" I mean "people with whom I associate myself," such as other people from the US. /trying-to-avoid-flamewar-about-Americans-displaci ng-negative-attributes-on-else-everyone
Actually, English is easy. It's American that is difficult.
I had a communications major argue with me one day that American is a dialect, not a language. Sure, ok, but it's still hard. Take half a dozen languages (not all Latin-based and German based either (two of the easier languages, IMO), unlike English), toss them together, make up words and misspell things, then expect the whole world to know what you mean without teaching them the language. That's American.
I once heard it was third most difficult only behind Mandarin Chinese and Japanese, though I'm afraid that I don't have a source. Regardless, I started studying Hebrew recently and I can guarantee that it is easier than American. It's so nice to work with a language that follows its own rules.
This is so true.
Though it does amaze me how many people show up near my apartment from Kansas City or St. Louis (depending on the week) and had a fight with their girlfriend who subsequently took the car and left them, and their buddy was supposed to come pick them up but they can't get a hold of them, and they only need money for a bus ticket back to KC/StL (depending on the week)...
It's amazing, how close we all are to becoming homeless. I've met 3-4 in one week before all going through the exact same thing. Shocking, really.
No, if it were reversed we would have died out as a species :-P
The problem is that we define successful as making/having money and materialistic items, as well as having a "good" (read high-paying) job. People/couples without children can attain this much more easily because they don't have to pay for the kid and can devote a lot more time to their career.
One of two things happen with the "smart, successful people." Either A) they don't have kids, or B) they do, but don't take proper care of them because they're too focused on their career. In case A, we have the race dying out, and in case B we have a generation of children raised by nannies and daycares with a whole slew of mental problems, usually including prolonged immaturity.
Having a bunch of kids isn't a sign of stupidity or failure, as you seem to imply. It is simply an indication of different priorities. Sure, there are some people who are just dumb and have more kids than they can afford or who specifically try to have kids so they can cheat the welfare system out of a few more bucks, but despite the stereotype those are actually minority cases (in reference to first world countries). I would have no problem working an entry-level tech job fixing computers, even though the pay isn't that great, because I like fixing computers and because being "successful" in that sense and making a lot of money isn't my priority. My family is my first priority, and being able to spend time with and provide for them (not just financially, but emotionally) is what I consider successful.
Maybe if more of our parents thought of raising their children as more of a success than raising their stock portfolio, we'd have a lot less problems in this world.
I've read those Greco-Roman documents... but the problem is that they say the youth is horrible, and the post you're replying to says that the youth is good and that they're going to turn things around and make it better.
In my experience, the reason both parents have to work so hard and scrabble is usually because they are financially irresponsible. My boss and his wife barely make it by each month, not because they don't get paid enough, but because they have almost $30,000 in credit card debt, on top of a mortgage, car payment, etc. I can't speak for the rest of college students, but examples like him and like my father were enough to make me tired of the bullshit, like the above poster wrote, and I'm going to do my best to be financially responsible to the extent that I can live comfortably on the same thing other people barely get by on.
I am playing music loud on my outdoor speakers, I can't sue my neighbors for listening to it.
That's because the music doesn't belong to you, it belongs to the RIAA.
Which reminds me, the RIAA will be along shortly. Something about you distributing music audibly to your neighbours who have not purchased the songs in question.