Also, I think the ACLU is using the courts to impose a socialist political agenda rather than one based on the idea of long established American civil liberties. For instance, instead of truly supporting a separation of church and state, they have actually brought about a situation where the state is actively censoring religious expression on the (I think irrelevent) pretext of some state property being involved in the expression.
Socialism is an economic system. It is unrelated to religion.
Last I looked, the port had more bugs than the Win32-based original.
You can run the Win32-based version just fine in Linux in Wine, FWIW. I recently played through some of Homeworld under Wine -- got kind of bored with it, though. After playing all the Homeworlds, the flaws of each were kind of visible.
That problem's challenge is based on a misinterpretation of the problem. One assumes that Edison is challenging you to also not break the egg -- it's a reasonable assumption. Edison didn't specify that you not break it, but common speech usually is not logically rigorous -- you need to fill in the blanks.
This does not relate to having a real-world problem placed in front of you. There is an actual problem. It may be that someone wants to be able to find web pages related to some item of interest quickly or it may be that they want to avoid losing data when their computer loses power. You know what must be solved.
Nobody awards patents for figuring out what a customer was trying to specify in his requirements sheet, which is the closest analog I can think of in the software world. This is not a justification for the existence of software patents.
The "setting your maximum bid ensures that you get the best possible price so sniping is no problem" people have one flaw in their argument.
Nobody bids on *everything* on eBay. And they pay attention to current prices on the item when they do so. If they simply sat at their computer and assigned prices to things based on how much they want them and never even looked at the current price, then, sure, setting bids would be fine even in the presence of sniping. But many people say "hey, I'll bid on that -- that's a good price". They bid *because* of the current price, which is low.
I can understand why eBay doesn't want to extend the auction -- it kills some of the urgency as time runs out and it may be more difficult for the seller.
Perhaps if the minimum increment started increasing after the time runs out, so that people don't keep bumping up the price by some minimum amount -- for example, if each person had to double the previous increment to continue beyond time running out. "Overtime" is exciting in sports, right?
The story says that she's been director for 17 years. I'd assume that she's at least 40 years old. I don't think that she's an idealist kid. I think that she's standing up for civil rights and getting pounded by her bosses for it, which is kind of alarming.
Well, given that the World Bank is run by Paul Wolfowitz, which is part of the Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz group that goes back at least to Team B, that pretty much means "neocons".
Night Watch felt too edited. I felt that there should have been about twice the amount of footage and/or story, but that a lot had to be cut to get the running time down.
A friend watched an extended version (director's cut?) and it had some scenes that were removed for the theaters, but it still seemed a bit choppy.
I did like the ending, though. A very refreshing change from an American movie. Oh, and the characters and environment were interesting. There's grit and grime and things look imperfect.
Nope, there is always something else. How about humming that tune? Hmm? Hmm? You know that's costing them 5^22453536.1$ every year. Evil hummers... that's OUR tune!
Oh, think that they wouldn't do that, eh? You're not cynical enough yet.
I'm kinda surprised that they're doing these as physical books. Seems like it would be a lot easier, cheaper, and more convenient to do this on the Web. Hypertext is pretty ideal for this sort of thing, and I've seen people do collaborative authoring projects in with choose-your-own-adventure style structure before.
Now that the blurb actually points out it's the democrats the posts are suddenly "the problem is both parties!"
Uh. It *is* both parties. Five of the bills were D-sponsored, two R-sponsored. More are sponsored by D, but that's the way life goes.
And that's just manipulation again.
Voting for a third party is, in a system with the voting structure set up the way it is in the United States, throwing your vote away.
Finally, I don't think that there is a single party that represents all my views very well.
I don't like the Republican's social views (or their current tendency to blow massive amounts of money on military expeditures).
The Democrats are the closest, though there are things like this that are annoying. If Joe Lieberman (Mr. Videogame Censorship) had become VP, I would have been pretty unhappy.
The Libertarians have some nice ideas, but they're really, really short on actual practical implementation, which in the end is what matters. You want to slash government spending? Fine. Which departments are you going to lose? The FDA? I *like* being able to go down to the grocery store and buy anything without worrying about it harming me. The National Park Service? I *like* our national parks, and I think that if anything, we probably spend too little on environmentalism.
Take a look at their platform. They want to eliminate consentual crimes. I think that a lot of what we call "victimless crimes" *have* costs -- they're just hidden, rather than obvious. I'm not a fan of heroin legalization, because I think that there's significant impact to non-users, and because once you use the thing, you may not have the ability to back out and learn from your mistake.
They want all-volunteer juries. I disagree. This is a good way to get collections of activists on juries. The point of juries is to ensure that the judicial branch is not deviating wildly from common views, not to try to make law through the jury. The last thing I want is a minimally-educated and informed group of people who lack the ability to ask questions regarding a case to be trying to legislate things.
They oppose involuntary institutionalization. Sounds good, and there was a time when the situation in asylums was pretty dark. However, when someone's in an asylum, it's because they're posing an issue to others.
I still don't know what the hell the "American Indians should have their property rights restored" chunk of their platform means, but I can easily see myself not agreeing with it.
I strongly disagree with their views on monopolies. This is the single strongest reason why I would oppose the LP controlling the government. They favor an unregulated, free market. They do not acknowledge the existence of natural monopolies -- they think that given a completely unregulated free market, everything will work out for the best. That's simply not the case. The Econ 101 idealized free market -- agents fully informed, all resources and businesses fluid, agents rational and thus not subject to marketing pressures -- does not exist in real life.
Looking at California, I'm not sure that deregulation of utilities that are natural monopolies -- which the LPs support -- is a good thing.
Their take on pollution is not workable in the real world. It's not possible to evaluate how much damage and who pollution is affecting. You just build a taller smokestack or a more hidden pipe. Even our rough estimates are expensive to produce.
I'm not certain that halting subsidized public education is a good thing. I think that the benefits of having at least some education throughout the populace is pretty significant.
I think that their take on political secession is complete and utter nonsense, and totally unworkable in the real world. According to the LP, *I* can secede with my house and the surrounding property. That would be interesting from a tax perspective. They'd probably
Of course, I have also consumed vast amounts of pornography, and been exposed to (thank you internet) some pretty disgusting porn. I've yet to go out and rape someone. So that's another claim (porn makes people commit rape) that is ridiculous on its face.
Your typical soccer mom is probably a lot more worried about influences on her kids (thanks to profitable fear-mongering from the media and folks like Jack Thompson) than she is about some rather distant political document.
In a recent talk I attended by IBM, they argued that they embraced open source specifically because it gave them a strong competative advantage and crushed the opposition. In effect, IBM develops high-end software, makes tons of money for 3-4 years, then releases it into open source as soon as their profit margins starts to slide because of new competition. Thus, in effect, they undermine the competition by giving away the software.
And how exactly is this bad? It means that IBM makes money and consumers get good software.
What did you expect, that software companies would cease to exist?
I don't understand exactly what this entails. If this means that I can write regular ol' Linux software in C that can run on the phone (and communicate with other phones in some way) then I admit, I'm interested in getting a cell for the first time ever. I can think of a lot of software that would be damned useful in a portable package.
And modern cells have GPS...I wonder if it's possible to get at that data.
I wish I could get a summary of "what this means from a programmer's standpoint"
Hmmm, open source for a proprietary, niche HW platform. Sounds like they're too cheap to hire their own developers and are using the Open Source buzzward in hopes for some free SW development.
If my understanding is correct, and you're just coding to Linux, it's not as if you're locked into their API, whatever it is.
So, there was some debate about whether you can package proprietary drivers with open source. So, can you package open source drivers with proprietary hardware?
Yes. Besides, it's not like your desktop is "non-proprietary" -- try getting Verilog (or whatever) sources for the P4 from Intel.
Open source generally implies users installing the OS on their own devices. I don't really see this happening on a large scale with Motorola since it'll come pre-bundled. So on has to wonder, what's the point of open sourcing stuff?
Almost all desktop computers come with an OS pre-installed too.
Slashdot Mirror
Listen up kids
Listen up, kids
"owned", "pwned", "h4x0red", "l33t",
"owned", "pwned", "h4x0red", and "l33t" [no comma]
was interesting for about 5 minutes 5 years ago,
were interesting for about five minutes five years ago;
Stop using them, it's pathetically annoying.
Stop using them; it's pathetically annoying.
Try using some proper English for once.
Yes.
>It is not always the case that the signs are blindingly bright that you find yourself squinting, rather they are too bright for their surroundings.
Good point. I wonder if a light sensor could be incorporated to adjust the brightness of lighted signs.
Also, I think the ACLU is using the courts to impose a socialist political agenda rather than one based on the idea of long established American civil liberties. For instance, instead of truly supporting a separation of church and state, they have actually brought about a situation where the state is actively censoring religious expression on the (I think irrelevent) pretext of some state property being involved in the expression.
Socialism is an economic system. It is unrelated to religion.
Plain Wine. I don't use Cedega.
For some reason neither can make a vehicle that doesn't have problems before I pay it off.
American labor is more expensive than Chinese labor.
If you slash the number of hours of labor put into a car to compensate for your more expensive labor, guess what happens to reliability?
I do this -- I run mldonkey sgid mlnet, then use packet mangling to set any packets from that gid to have a ToS of IPTOS_MAXIMIZE_THROUGHPUT.
And you can do pretty much anything you might dream of under Linux WRT traffic shaping. Including doing that shaping that you want.
Last I looked, the port had more bugs than the Win32-based original.
You can run the Win32-based version just fine in Linux in Wine, FWIW. I recently played through some of Homeworld under Wine -- got kind of bored with it, though. After playing all the Homeworlds, the flaws of each were kind of visible.
That problem's challenge is based on a misinterpretation of the problem. One assumes that Edison is challenging you to also not break the egg -- it's a reasonable assumption. Edison didn't specify that you not break it, but common speech usually is not logically rigorous -- you need to fill in the blanks.
This does not relate to having a real-world problem placed in front of you. There is an actual problem. It may be that someone wants to be able to find web pages related to some item of interest quickly or it may be that they want to avoid losing data when their computer loses power. You know what must be solved.
Nobody awards patents for figuring out what a customer was trying to specify in his requirements sheet, which is the closest analog I can think of in the software world. This is not a justification for the existence of software patents.
The "setting your maximum bid ensures that you get the best possible price so sniping is no problem" people have one flaw in their argument.
Nobody bids on *everything* on eBay. And they pay attention to current prices on the item when they do so. If they simply sat at their computer and assigned prices to things based on how much they want them and never even looked at the current price, then, sure, setting bids would be fine even in the presence of sniping. But many people say "hey, I'll bid on that -- that's a good price". They bid *because* of the current price, which is low.
I can understand why eBay doesn't want to extend the auction -- it kills some of the urgency as time runs out and it may be more difficult for the seller.
Perhaps if the minimum increment started increasing after the time runs out, so that people don't keep bumping up the price by some minimum amount -- for example, if each person had to double the previous increment to continue beyond time running out. "Overtime" is exciting in sports, right?
The story says that she's been director for 17 years. I'd assume that she's at least 40 years old. I don't think that she's an idealist kid. I think that she's standing up for civil rights and getting pounded by her bosses for it, which is kind of alarming.
Well, given that the World Bank is run by Paul Wolfowitz, which is part of the Cheney-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz group that goes back at least to Team B, that pretty much means "neocons".
Night Watch felt too edited. I felt that there should have been about twice the amount of footage and/or story, but that a lot had to be cut to get the running time down.
A friend watched an extended version (director's cut?) and it had some scenes that were removed for the theaters, but it still seemed a bit choppy.
I did like the ending, though. A very refreshing change from an American movie. Oh, and the characters and environment were interesting. There's grit and grime and things look imperfect.
What an interesting world it'd be if /.ers ran it.
Natalie Portman. Hot grits.
Nope, there is always something else. How about humming that tune? Hmm? Hmm? You know that's costing them 5^22453536.1$ every year. Evil hummers... that's OUR tune!
Oh, think that they wouldn't do that, eh? You're not cynical enough yet.
I'm kinda surprised that they're doing these as physical books. Seems like it would be a lot easier, cheaper, and more convenient to do this on the Web. Hypertext is pretty ideal for this sort of thing, and I've seen people do collaborative authoring projects in with choose-your-own-adventure style structure before.
Now that the blurb actually points out it's the democrats the posts are suddenly "the problem is both parties!"
Uh. It *is* both parties. Five of the bills were D-sponsored, two R-sponsored. More are sponsored by D, but that's the way life goes.
And that's just manipulation again.
Voting for a third party is, in a system with the voting structure set up the way it is in the United States, throwing your vote away.
Finally, I don't think that there is a single party that represents all my views very well.
I don't like the Republican's social views (or their current tendency to blow massive amounts of money on military expeditures).
The Democrats are the closest, though there are things like this that are annoying. If Joe Lieberman (Mr. Videogame Censorship) had become VP, I would have been pretty unhappy.
The Libertarians have some nice ideas, but they're really, really short on actual practical implementation, which in the end is what matters. You want to slash government spending? Fine. Which departments are you going to lose? The FDA? I *like* being able to go down to the grocery store and buy anything without worrying about it harming me. The National Park Service? I *like* our national parks, and I think that if anything, we probably spend too little on environmentalism.
Take a look at their platform. They want to eliminate consentual crimes. I think that a lot of what we call "victimless crimes" *have* costs -- they're just hidden, rather than obvious. I'm not a fan of heroin legalization, because I think that there's significant impact to non-users, and because once you use the thing, you may not have the ability to back out and learn from your mistake.
They want all-volunteer juries. I disagree. This is a good way to get collections of activists on juries. The point of juries is to ensure that the judicial branch is not deviating wildly from common views, not to try to make law through the jury. The last thing I want is a minimally-educated and informed group of people who lack the ability to ask questions regarding a case to be trying to legislate things.
They oppose involuntary institutionalization. Sounds good, and there was a time when the situation in asylums was pretty dark. However, when someone's in an asylum, it's because they're posing an issue to others.
I still don't know what the hell the "American Indians should have their property rights restored" chunk of their platform means, but I can easily see myself not agreeing with it.
I strongly disagree with their views on monopolies. This is the single strongest reason why I would oppose the LP controlling the government. They favor an unregulated, free market. They do not acknowledge the existence of natural monopolies -- they think that given a completely unregulated free market, everything will work out for the best. That's simply not the case. The Econ 101 idealized free market -- agents fully informed, all resources and businesses fluid, agents rational and thus not subject to marketing pressures -- does not exist in real life.
Looking at California, I'm not sure that deregulation of utilities that are natural monopolies -- which the LPs support -- is a good thing.
Their take on pollution is not workable in the real world. It's not possible to evaluate how much damage and who pollution is affecting. You just build a taller smokestack or a more hidden pipe. Even our rough estimates are expensive to produce.
I'm not certain that halting subsidized public education is a good thing. I think that the benefits of having at least some education throughout the populace is pretty significant.
I think that their take on political secession is complete and utter nonsense, and totally unworkable in the real world. According to the LP, *I* can secede with my house and the surrounding property. That would be interesting from a tax perspective. They'd probably
Of course, I have also consumed vast amounts of pornography, and been exposed to (thank you internet) some pretty disgusting porn. I've yet to go out and rape someone. So that's another claim (porn makes people commit rape) that is ridiculous on its face.
Pornography reduces sex crimes.
Your typical soccer mom is probably a lot more worried about influences on her kids (thanks to profitable fear-mongering from the media and folks like Jack Thompson) than she is about some rather distant political document.
Apple did fake demos for their latest Mac OS Classic replacement projects for years until they finally sat down and actually did OS X.
I've played this game before, and I don't understand why everybody always compares Dells.
:-)
Because they have an online store that's nice for producing price comparisons.
A Christian virus? That wouldn't make sense. Christians are not supposed to judge non-Christians:
There are damned few Christians in the United States, by that standard. If any.
(No I haven't tested this, you bunch of nerds)
/dev/urandom. /dev/random will quickly exhaust the entropy pool and slow to a crawl.
If you had, you'd have used
Maybe some little hacker kiddie got caught wanking it by his mom and she deleted all his pr0n so he's on a "if I can't have it nobody can" rampage.
Because, obviously, masses of sexually frusterated people are the best possible makeup for a society.
In a recent talk I attended by IBM, they argued that they embraced open source specifically because it gave them a strong competative advantage and crushed the opposition. In effect, IBM develops high-end software, makes tons of money for 3-4 years, then releases it into open source as soon as their profit margins starts to slide because of new competition. Thus, in effect, they undermine the competition by giving away the software.
And how exactly is this bad? It means that IBM makes money and consumers get good software.
What did you expect, that software companies would cease to exist?
I don't understand exactly what this entails. If this means that I can write regular ol' Linux software in C that can run on the phone (and communicate with other phones in some way) then I admit, I'm interested in getting a cell for the first time ever. I can think of a lot of software that would be damned useful in a portable package.
And modern cells have GPS...I wonder if it's possible to get at that data.
I wish I could get a summary of "what this means from a programmer's standpoint"
Hmmm, open source for a proprietary, niche HW platform. Sounds like they're too cheap to hire their own developers and are using the Open Source buzzward in hopes for some free SW development.
If my understanding is correct, and you're just coding to Linux, it's not as if you're locked into their API, whatever it is.
So, there was some debate about whether you can package proprietary drivers with open source. So, can you package open source drivers with proprietary hardware?
Yes. Besides, it's not like your desktop is "non-proprietary" -- try getting Verilog (or whatever) sources for the P4 from Intel.
Open source generally implies users installing the OS on their own devices. I don't really see this happening on a large scale with Motorola since it'll come pre-bundled. So on has to wonder, what's the point of open sourcing stuff?
Almost all desktop computers come with an OS pre-installed too.