No, EVERYONE is an asshole. Everyone wants something for nothing.
Please note that the following statements are somewhat stream-of-consciousness, but I feel they are all related to the main point. Also please note the intentional use of hyperbole. Of course there are exceptions.
Consumers want your product without paying for it.
Producers want your money without giving you a product.
Members of the EFF want all their computer tools and information without paying for it.
People at Microsoft and TimeWarner want everyone's money without giving them computer tools and information.
Everyone is motivated by greed in some form or another (and not necessarily egregiously...or their own greed). Otherwise money would not work.
Would you do your job for free?
Would you do your job for free if you could have all your needs met for free?
Or would you just sit on your free recliner watching your free TV eating your free food having your health maintained by your free doctor?
What would happen if the person who made the free recliner, free TV, free food, and the free doctor all decided to do the same as you?
"...but if you wish to know which power tools are toy junk being foisted off on the DIY crowd for a profit and which are of true value to the craftsman; Ask the craftsman."
Two girls standing in an otherwise essentially perfectly white area. Their paths don't even intersect, except for the hot chick throwing whatever that thing was. I see no reason to believe they were ever in the same room at the same time.
While we're all being pedantic about this guy's posts (hey, he said he was tired!), 80 is not two orders of magnitude greater than 1. It's close, but not quite.
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been of the impression that "32-bit" color is the same bit-depth as 24-bit color, plus an alpha (transparency) channel. Transparency is irrelevant in capturing an image.. You still end up with 8 bits per color channel. So in other words, there's no such thing as "true 32-bit color" from a scanner.
And no, *my* Java implementation wouldn't be bug free. A well-paid development team's would be, though.
Right, a well-paid development team results in bug-free code! That's why Windows is bug-free, and Microsoft Office is bug-free, and the firmware in my router is bug-free,...
Thank you for perpetuating a commonly-held misconception. When people hear about their "[right to] the pursuit of happiness," they conveniently mumble their way through the word "pursuit."
Unfortunately, that's the key word. You have a right to pursue happiness. You do not have any right (or guarantee) to succeed in your pursuit.
Your pursuit of happiness is not hindered by his exercise of free speech. Your pursuit carries on in its temporary (we all hope) state of failure.
There are OSs that do not crash, just took at medical equipment or space equipment like satellites.
That is true. Those OSes (almost) never crash. They also (generally) run exactly one program, and do exactly one well-documented set of tasks, and have a very small set of possible control inputs. Personal computers, on the other hand, are expected to run myriad programs, designed by myriad authors (who frequently are not in communication with each other), and handle random control input. Essentially your comparison is invalid.
I would think that a study "a few months ago" could (I'm no scientist) replace knowledge from "a few years back". Remember the study 3,000 years ago that proved the world was flat?
I didn't have any real difficulty reading that sentence. Only "reversing" and "interior" posed much trouble. Plus, in sorting algorithms (that's really what this is.. the brain resorting the letters in the word), it's not impossible for a sort procedure on a fully-reverse-sorted list to be less efficient than a sort procedure on a randomized list (of course this depends on the algorithm in use). In other words, fully reversing the interior letters could well present a more difficult problem for the brain than randomizing the interior letters. I'm not a neuroscientist either; I don't know how the brain actually handles something like sorting letters.
What the heck are you talking about? The parent poster said the judge should bill Thompson for the hundred hours of game play. Thompson is the plaintiff. That means he's the one doing the accusing. He's being a jerk and bringing a lawsuit against Take Two for a matter that really should not be judged in the courts at all. I wholeheartedly agree that the accuser should pay for the costs when his case is shot down. Thompson is the one wasting the court's time; Take Two is simply trying to defend itself.
Personally, I don't want my OS to "...[take] full advantage of the processing power..." my computer has to offer. I want my OS to take as little processor power as absolutely necessary to run, and leave the rest for my applications.
I can only say this seems typical of Microsoft mentality.
Actually, no, you wouldn't. (See Chapter 7). (Sorry I don't have links to actual case files.. Would love anyone else to provide them, either supporting or debunking my claim).
"What this man needs isn't money, it's sex. He should demand a night with a nubile female relative in exchange for continued support."
You're from Kentucky, right?
Hahaha.. I had to read the parent you're quoting twice myself to get it, but I think he means a nubile female relative of the customer and not one of his nubile female relatives.. (At least, I hope so!)
Er, then what do you call the Administrator account?
Granting that I may hold a misconception of the definition of 'super-user'. But you can't hide anything from Administrator, nor can you deny any permissions to the Administrator.
That is exactly how it really works. Come in early, all the boss sees is "you're leaving early every day." Stay late, all the boss sees is "you're late to work every day." Nevermind that part of my daily tasks include backup routines that couldn't be automated (limitations of the software), and had to be done after everyone else was out of the system.
The joys of working for people who really have no grasp on (or any interest in having same) the way things really operate.
Slashdot Mirror
No, EVERYONE is an asshole. Everyone wants something for nothing.
Please note that the following statements are somewhat stream-of-consciousness, but I feel they are all related to the main point. Also please note the intentional use of hyperbole. Of course there are exceptions.
Consumers want your product without paying for it.
Producers want your money without giving you a product.
Members of the EFF want all their computer tools and information without paying for it.
People at Microsoft and TimeWarner want everyone's money without giving them computer tools and information.
Everyone is motivated by greed in some form or another (and not necessarily egregiously...or their own greed). Otherwise money would not work.
Would you do your job for free?
Would you do your job for free if you could have all your needs met for free?
Or would you just sit on your free recliner watching your free TV eating your free food having your health maintained by your free doctor?
What would happen if the person who made the free recliner, free TV, free food, and the free doctor all decided to do the same as you?
"...but if you wish to know which power tools are toy junk being foisted off on the DIY crowd for a profit and which are of true value to the craftsman; Ask the craftsman."
No mod points today.. +1 Preach It, Brutha!
Two girls standing in an otherwise essentially perfectly white area. Their paths don't even intersect, except for the hot chick throwing whatever that thing was. I see no reason to believe they were ever in the same room at the same time.
Tattoo isn't a proper noun. Stop using capitalization Improperly.
Why no, no I don't have anything of value to contribute to this discussion.
While we're all being pedantic about this guy's posts (hey, he said he was tired!), 80 is not two orders of magnitude greater than 1. It's close, but not quite.
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been of the impression that "32-bit" color is the same bit-depth as 24-bit color, plus an alpha (transparency) channel. Transparency is irrelevant in capturing an image.. You still end up with 8 bits per color channel. So in other words, there's no such thing as "true 32-bit color" from a scanner.
*sits back and waits to be corrected*
I think the first question-mark word you were looking for is "brass." "government top brass."
Thank you for perpetuating a commonly-held misconception. When people hear about their "[right to] the pursuit of happiness," they conveniently mumble their way through the word "pursuit."
Unfortunately, that's the key word. You have a right to pursue happiness. You do not have any right (or guarantee) to succeed in your pursuit.
Your pursuit of happiness is not hindered by his exercise of free speech. Your pursuit carries on in its temporary (we all hope) state of failure.
All systems have a failure point.
I didn't have any real difficulty reading that sentence. Only "reversing" and "interior" posed much trouble. Plus, in sorting algorithms (that's really what this is.. the brain resorting the letters in the word), it's not impossible for a sort procedure on a fully-reverse-sorted list to be less efficient than a sort procedure on a randomized list (of course this depends on the algorithm in use). In other words, fully reversing the interior letters could well present a more difficult problem for the brain than randomizing the interior letters. I'm not a neuroscientist either; I don't know how the brain actually handles something like sorting letters.
That's what your mom said last night!! BURN!!!
Do you pay taxes?
What the heck are you talking about? The parent poster said the judge should bill Thompson for the hundred hours of game play. Thompson is the plaintiff. That means he's the one doing the accusing. He's being a jerk and bringing a lawsuit against Take Two for a matter that really should not be judged in the courts at all. I wholeheartedly agree that the accuser should pay for the costs when his case is shot down. Thompson is the one wasting the court's time; Take Two is simply trying to defend itself.
Please, won't someone think of the KITTENS!
...and now I'm too old to enjoy them.
Why?
Cool! What's my prize?
*bang!*
OW!
(Forgive me if someone has already said this)
Personally, I don't want my OS to "...[take] full advantage of the processing power..." my computer has to offer. I want my OS to take as little processor power as absolutely necessary to run, and leave the rest for my applications.
I can only say this seems typical of Microsoft mentality.
In the context of this article, who cares?
Actually, no, you wouldn't. (See Chapter 7). (Sorry I don't have links to actual case files.. Would love anyone else to provide them, either supporting or debunking my claim).
Hmmm...
Hahaha.. I had to read the parent you're quoting twice myself to get it, but I think he means a nubile female relative of the customer and not one of his nubile female relatives.. (At least, I hope so!)
Sir, I stand corrected. :-) Thank you for the informative (and not condescending) reply! Someone mod this fellow up [Informative].
Cheers.
Rock on!! 80s Cher music references are teh rox0r.
Er, then what do you call the Administrator account?
Granting that I may hold a misconception of the definition of 'super-user'. But you can't hide anything from Administrator, nor can you deny any permissions to the Administrator.
That is exactly how it really works. Come in early, all the boss sees is "you're leaving early every day." Stay late, all the boss sees is "you're late to work every day." Nevermind that part of my daily tasks include backup routines that couldn't be automated (limitations of the software), and had to be done after everyone else was out of the system. The joys of working for people who really have no grasp on (or any interest in having same) the way things really operate.