I thought that capacitors discharged their entire load at once (hold the crass comments, please)? Wouldn't that limit its use to things that need one-time large charges such as starters, as opposed to electric motors which need continual lower discharge rates?
Also, there's probably some kind of collusion going on. We could make a 45mpg car that has decent numbers back in the 80's, but we can't make anything comparable now? Bullshit. There's something behind the scenes.
I've often wondered about this - ever since we had a 1980s diesel VW jetta that got about 55mpg on the highway. The two signficant changes since then that I can think of are more stringent emissions requirements (it seems that often changes which reduce emissions decrease fuel efficiency) and safety regulations (more safety requirements = more vehicle net weight = worse mpg).
In that scenario, does it matter who was doing it at that point? It's your car, for which you are responsible. I completely agree that they should not be able to assess points, etc against your record - but I don't see anything wrong with saying "The owner of the car is responsible for how that car is used".
OT - I agree, but most people who vocally profess atheism are of the "faith in lack" variety. Hard to make the distinction in the space allotted to a sig though. There's a world of difference between saying, "I haven't seen any evidence to support the existence of a god" and saying "All the people who follow a god are slavish morons". On this web site, the latter is a far more common message.
Don't get me wrong - if they run the red light, you better believe I'm going to make them pay the fine. But if I wanted to make sure I couldn't get the fine in the first place, I wouldn't have loand my car out. Seems like common sense, yes?
Actually, I rather like it (when it's not abused for city financial gain). If you report your car stolen, you won't be held responsible. And if someone else did it in your car, and it was not stolen, ultimately you/are/ responsible -- if you don't like it, use more caution in who you allow to use your car.
But there is a WORLD of difference between belief based on scientific observations and critical thinking, and a belief based on blind faith.
I agree. Agnosticism fits this perfectly. Atheism is blind faith in the lack of existence of a god/higher power/etc. Agnosticism allows for the possibility of such a creature, but doesn't commit in the absence of supporting evidence.
Atheism precludes the possibility of a god by its definition. This is belief in the absence of evidence, which is the same flaw that all religions suffer from.
Agnosticism says it's not possible to know whether a god or gods exist; I find that to be an attitude much more in keeping with scientific principles than dogmatic belief that there is not now, nor could there ever have been a god.
Weird. I wonder if it makes a difference if you purchase computers from the home user or business sites. At any rate I'm glad that you can still get the OS install disk by itself.
Hm - possibly a valid point. I purchased the Dell through an employee discount deal that my current company has negotiated with them; though this wasn't the case for the HP. I/think/ that the same options were available for pure consumer Dell, but I can't remember for sure.
I'm sure that the agreement the OEM's strike with the crapware vendors mandates that the crapware gets reinstalled whenever Windows does. I can't imagine HP or Dell discontinuing this practice since any corporate IT person is most likely going to wipe the disk anyway and most home users can't be bothered to raise a fuss about it.
Not sure what you're talking about - the last two laptops I've purchased (Dell, HP) came with clean OS install disks, which have gotten used multiple times to reinstall those systems over the years. The crapware came on a separate disk. I/think/ I had to pay $10 for the media with HP a few years ago, but there was no charge with Dell last year.
The Dell also came with a recovery partition (that runs a linux-based installation...) , which/did/ include the crapware - it got wiped shortly after install.
Samuel Renshaw, psychologist, which leads to this rather interesting read.
Re:It's not a game....
on
Review: Spore
·
· Score: 1
Valid point. If there's not an active goal to strive for - and if your decisions don't have impact on the end results - it definitely makes it less worth playing. From reading the review, though, it does sound like this exists. Now... I'm not convinced enough of this to go out and buy it; though if the DRM wasn't there, I probably would.
Re:If EA is reading this
on
Review: Spore
·
· Score: 1
If you're reading this, EA, I will pirate this game. That is the only way I can think of to teach you that you can't try to control my computer. Not wise to treat your customers like criminals.
Really? I would think that simply not buying the game without 'proving' the need for DRM by pirating would send a far more effective message. I'm not sure what logic leads people to think that pirating something will make publishers believe that they don't need to put anti-piracy protection on it (however ineffectual that protection may be).
Re:It's not a game....
on
Review: Spore
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Besides, while I love Will Wright, and I *want* to support him -- he knew what EA would do, I'm sure he was aware of the DRM scheme, and he let it go in.
You'd be surprised. Developers and designers have practically no say in DRM issues if they're going with a big publisher.
While it's a neat 'toy', for a *gamer* like myself it's ridiculous.
Whether one is a *gamer* or just a gamer -- aren't all games just neat toys, in the end? A form of mental masturbation that lets us pass the time in a fashion which we find pleasurable?
So because some people are finding that the limitations get in the way, you're trying to convince him he should dislike the game too? I love the implicit open-mindedness...
I pay $.05/minute to call Canada, compared to 0.00 for in-country calls. 21 instances of Internet access, presumably brief, adding up to $19,000 just doesn't seem to be/quite/ the same thing...
Are there any numbers published - perhaps in annual statements - as far as how much they've recovered from 'settlements' ie extortion, vs how much they've spent?
Slashdot Mirror
I thought that capacitors discharged their entire load at once (hold the crass comments, please)? Wouldn't that limit its use to things that need one-time large charges such as starters, as opposed to electric motors which need continual lower discharge rates?
I AM A FISH!
I am the walrus.
That means you are dinner.
(And before some smart-ass tells me that walruses prefer mollusks, yeah, I know. Now stop trying to ruin my joke.)
(And before some smart-ass tells me that I did that all on my own, yeah, I know. Now stop trying to ruin my meta-joke.)
Also, there's probably some kind of collusion going on. We could make a 45mpg car that has decent numbers back in the 80's, but we can't make anything comparable now? Bullshit. There's something behind the scenes.
I've often wondered about this - ever since we had a 1980s diesel VW jetta that got about 55mpg on the highway. The two signficant changes since then that I can think of are more stringent emissions requirements (it seems that often changes which reduce emissions decrease fuel efficiency) and safety regulations (more safety requirements = more vehicle net weight = worse mpg).
I'm sorry. I was only off my one consonant.
Bake that two now.
There, fixed that for ya.
In that scenario, does it matter who was doing it at that point? It's your car, for which you are responsible. I completely agree that they should not be able to assess points, etc against your record - but I don't see anything wrong with saying "The owner of the car is responsible for how that car is used".
OT - I agree, but most people who vocally profess atheism are of the "faith in lack" variety. Hard to make the distinction in the space allotted to a sig though. There's a world of difference between saying, "I haven't seen any evidence to support the existence of a god" and saying "All the people who follow a god are slavish morons". On this web site, the latter is a far more common message.
Don't get me wrong - if they run the red light, you better believe I'm going to make them pay the fine. But if I wanted to make sure I couldn't get the fine in the first place, I wouldn't have loand my car out. Seems like common sense, yes?
I lack sense for knowing who I loan out my car too, and being willing to take responsibility for that? What an /intriguing/ perspective you have.
Actually, I rather like it (when it's not abused for city financial gain). If you report your car stolen, you won't be held responsible. And if someone else did it in your car, and it was not stolen, ultimately you /are/ responsible -- if you don't like it, use more caution in who you allow to use your car.
They didn't take it to the next logical step though - approaching dark-colored avatars with light-colored making the DITF request.
But there is a WORLD of difference between belief based on scientific observations and critical thinking, and a belief based on blind faith.
I agree. Agnosticism fits this perfectly. Atheism is blind faith in the lack of existence of a god/higher power/etc. Agnosticism allows for the possibility of such a creature, but doesn't commit in the absence of supporting evidence.
Agnosticism says it's not possible to know whether a god or gods exist; I find that to be an attitude much more in keeping with scientific principles than dogmatic belief that there is not now, nor could there ever have been a god.
Weird. I wonder if it makes a difference if you purchase computers from the home user or business sites. At any rate I'm glad that you can still get the OS install disk by itself.
Hm - possibly a valid point. I purchased the Dell through an employee discount deal that my current company has negotiated with them; though this wasn't the case for the HP. I /think/ that the same options were available for pure consumer Dell, but I can't remember for sure.
I'm sure that the agreement the OEM's strike with the crapware vendors mandates that the crapware gets reinstalled whenever Windows does. I can't imagine HP or Dell discontinuing this practice since any corporate IT person is most likely going to wipe the disk anyway and most home users can't be bothered to raise a fuss about it.
Not sure what you're talking about - the last two laptops I've purchased (Dell, HP) came with clean OS install disks, which have gotten used multiple times to reinstall those systems over the years. The crapware came on a separate disk. I /think/ I had to pay $10 for the media with HP a few years ago, but there was no charge with Dell last year.
The Dell also came with a recovery partition (that runs a linux-based installation...) , which /did/ include the crapware - it got wiped shortly after install.
Ctrl+Alt+Backspace restarts the X-Windows server. GP did make it sound a bit more complicated than it needs to be...
Some images better than the crappy one with TFA. Or just go to the source: http://www.isgs.uiuc.edu/research/coal/fossil-forest/
Samuel Renshaw, psychologist, which leads to this rather interesting read.
Valid point. If there's not an active goal to strive for - and if your decisions don't have impact on the end results - it definitely makes it less worth playing. From reading the review, though, it does sound like this exists. Now... I'm not convinced enough of this to go out and buy it; though if the DRM wasn't there, I probably would.
If you're reading this, EA, I will pirate this game. That is the only way I can think of to teach you that you can't try to control my computer. Not wise to treat your customers like criminals.
Really? I would think that simply not buying the game without 'proving' the need for DRM by pirating would send a far more effective message. I'm not sure what logic leads people to think that pirating something will make publishers believe that they don't need to put anti-piracy protection on it (however ineffectual that protection may be).
Besides, while I love Will Wright, and I *want* to support him -- he knew what EA would do, I'm sure he was aware of the DRM scheme, and he let it go in.
You'd be surprised. Developers and designers have practically no say in DRM issues if they're going with a big publisher.
While it's a neat 'toy', for a *gamer* like myself it's ridiculous.
Whether one is a *gamer* or just a gamer -- aren't all games just neat toys, in the end? A form of mental masturbation that lets us pass the time in a fashion which we find pleasurable?
So because some people are finding that the limitations get in the way, you're trying to convince him he should dislike the game too? I love the implicit open-mindedness...
Last night I was at a restaurant and being one of those people who can't spend more than one minute of idleness without something to read
*sob* And I thought I was alone in this world...
I pay $.05/minute to call Canada, compared to 0.00 for in-country calls. 21 instances of Internet access, presumably brief, adding up to $19,000 just doesn't seem to be /quite/ the same thing...
Sun N1 iPlanet Java System ONE database Enterprise Edition (R)
You forgot: Sun N1 iPlanet Java System ONE database Enterprise Edition 2.0 Update 10 (R)
Reason: The Websense category "Hacking" is filtered.
Better than the messages I get at work. I go to 'the onion' and am greeted with:
Humor is forbidden
Are there any numbers published - perhaps in annual statements - as far as how much they've recovered from 'settlements' ie extortion, vs how much they've spent?