Sure. I'd expect the budget difference has more to do with the fact that NASA built their shuttles way back when, and didn't have such advanced software tools and modern materials to use when designing and building them. To get a bigger payload up you 'simply' need a bigger rocket:p
Why shouldn't we respect authority? If you don't respect them, why vote them into power in the first place?
Fair point about Japan, it has a similar kind of culture to China, and is also densely populated, but it still isn't on the same scale as China. The people in Japan are still very respectful though, the culture is still totally different. I wouldn't say it's incompatible with democracy, but neither do I think western versions of 'democracy' is as great as everyone makes them out to be. As a British citizen I don't feel like I had a choice in things like whether we went to war in Iraq, or any number of issues. I have never voted either, so some will say "then you can't complain", but I honestly see very little difference between the parties, and I don't see how voting one of 3 or 4 choices gives me much of a say at all - apart from on some very specific issues which are usually not relevant to me anyway. I've never been a lover of politics, though slashdot has made me slightly more aware of politics on a world scale.
On a historical point, it's not just 'communist' china that's the cause of this restrictive and population controlling behaviour, China's rulers have been at it for thousands of years, its a cultural thing.
Indeed. They are moving towards capitalism and democracy, but you can't just suddenly shift to a totally new system overnight. The Chinese have a massive history and tradition compared to new countries like the US, which was built by a bunch of people who moved out there to be 'free'. I doubt any of those complaining about the way the Chinese government operate have much experience running even small projects, let alone a country with >1 billion population and different concepts of respect and authority (basically I don't really see any respect for authority in the western world, we're always complaining about the way things are done, and I don't see many people offering alternative solutions either).
There are a lot of things in life that waste peoples time. Like trying to get the MS Windows reimbursement when it is bundled. The sheer amount of hours that it takes means that some other poor users have to wait in queue to get support. Does this mean that I should just pay and shut up? I don't think so. Sometimes it is not only inevitable to be inconvenient, it's necessary.
That is not a waste of time, because it is using the line for what it is intended for. It is not your fault if Microsoft's support team is inefficient. If you phoned up just to rabidly spew forth a speech about open source then it would be a waste of time.
To me the only reason to use Windows is because everyone else is using it and because you can build your own machine with any parts you like. Linux is getting to the stage where it can almost compete in the usability stakes as it approaches, or has surpassed, critical mass and drivers are available for it either directly from companies or indirectly via open source enthusiasts.. there is just something about Windows that rubs me the wrong way. I thought it was improving with XP, but if MS are going to continue "trying it on" with customers by spewing out stuff like Vista, then I don't want to use their products.
I agree with you about DRM, I don't like it either, and as I probably said in my first post, I don't particularly like iPods,iTunes and the iPhone. Okay so the iPod Nanos are mildly attractive, especially when Apple had that deal with Samsung or whoever to use cheap flash, but next time I feel the need to buy an MP3 player, there will probably be a better value MP3 player in the same class as the Nano that either offers more storage/battery life, or costs less (my iRiver had all three of those things compared to the iPods of its time..).
Anyway, I see you are being quite reasonable with your opinion of Apple users, and I suppose most of them just like Macs because they are 'cool' or something. Personally I do think they have a certain coolness, but I don't buy things just because they are cool, I buy them if I think they are good products technically speaking, and are worth the money. The Macbook Pro is something that I consider to be both of those things at the moment, though Linux is getting to a stage where my next work laptop may be running Ubuntu and WINE or a Virtualisation system.
Yeah I tend to wander off track, I just wanted to point out that not everyone uses Macs as some kind of lifestyle statement. I don't like that it took the iPod to revitalise Apple, but as long as they keep making good machines and I don't develop any reasons to dislike them. DRM is one I suppose (I didn't say there was nothing wrong with DRM did I? Personally I hate it and don't see the point since it is so easily broken), but I don't have to use iTunes just because I have a Mac - I have VLC. All the music distributors are going to come round eventually to why DRM is a bad idea (I hope). I'm still just buying CDs myself.
I still don't get the "self-worth" thing, I find it pretty hilarious that anyone would consider their computer to have anything to do with self-worth. Their ability to use said computer could be worth something, so perhaps if they find Apples easy to use that makes them feel more like a 1337 haX0r...?
lol. That's the problem with being entrenched in your beliefs. Even when something is shown to you that apparently contradicts what you believe, you manage to invent some excuse to twist things round to your own view point. Bravo. Myself, I think this logically shows that the Christian God is either a bastard or simply isn't there (you will disagree saying God's intelligence and sense of justice is far above our own, but if you had never had any beliefs and were presented all the religions and the pros and cons, you would discount Christianity because of this kind of thing):
The majority of people who ever existed never heard of Jesus or were given a chance to worship the Israelite God. I expect probably at least 95% of the people who ever lived. Even today not many people know about Jesus. If you believe that God gives them a chance anyway, then why witness to them? If you are going to make their punishment worse by witnessing to them (everyone will be judged based on the knowledge given to them), then you will just be making it worse for some people.
Secondly, why bother sending people to hell at all? Especially for an eternity. I can understand punishment for say a million years if sin really is that big a deal to a 'perfect' God - who somehow is not responsible for sin in any way, but let it come into existence anyway. *sigh* There are just so many illogicalities in all of this that it's insane I ever believed it, but that's what happens when you are brought up in a Christian home and want to fit in.
Yes I have slight reason to believe in spiritual things, but I have no experiences in life to specifically make me think that the Christian God is real, and I believe from just the way the church is so divided, and from the way I've seen many Christians act, that the church is a very human endeavour.
I just said 'sir' because I was going to say sir anyway, and then I noticed it was in your name. No I didn't notice it was meant to be 'surfer', so that can count as a whoosh *shrug*
I actually live about half a mile from the sea, good guess there! You probably think I'm American too.
Sure we know a lot of stuff at 'our level of existence', but there is a lot more to the universe than that. Certain types of discoveries may have been coming at a reducing rate since Newton, since he was involved in developing a lot of the maths and physical formulae that we still use today, but when it comes to things on a subatomic level we are still learning, and could still be learning in a few hundred years. I still think it's closed minded to assume you know the majority of what there is to know about physics in the universe. Yes we know a lot, but when it comes to things like string theory, dark energy, antimatter, room temp superconductors and other useful materials, supercapacitors or other more efficient battery tech, they're all still very experimental, and could have a massive implication for 'our level of existence'. The atomic bomb was developed using principals on an entirely different 'level' to our own, but it certainly had a big effect.
I didn't misunderstand your post, I just think you are being too cocky. Assuming you know almost everything is never the best policy, and especially when you're a scientist. As a whole, humanity is developing at an exponential rate as we collaborate on larger and larger scales, sharing more and more ideas. The basic "hit this with a club and it acclerates at a = f/m" physics are out of the way, but we by no means know everything. Perhaps not "next to nothing", we are capable of some impressive stuff - but it's laughable to assume that we know the "majority" of what there is to know about physics - what if we discover how to manipulate space-time to create useful faster than light travel? There are many areas of physics that can be explored. Just because they aren't as simple as f=ma doesn't mean they are not a large part of physics, in fact things like string theory are so all encompassing that they will probably dwarf everything that we currently know about physics if we were able to create accurate models of how the universe works at that level, especially if we were able to then manipulate matter at that level to create interesting new physical 'laws', or at least bend the current ones.
I have used it on a few different machines. One of those machines was for home use and the user installed XP on it. Another is at work, I recommended that the user get Vista but was ignored. They now want XP installed. The rest are used by people who either don't care what their computer is running, or want to feel like they are using the "latest and greatest" just because they can. I never agree with upgrading just because a new version is out.
Go get your sense of smug superiority elsewhere, please.
I have used it on I think 4 systems so far. At least one of them was slightly higher specced than my own laptop (which I dual boot with OSX/XP) but still ran like a pig. Startup and shutdown were especially noticeable. I don't particularly care if my windows are shiny and 3D, as long as I don't find them outright offensive to look at. Over the years I have tried out a few programs to customise my desktop, in Amiga OS, Windows and most recently OSX, but most of the time I'm happy with some simple colour changes.
I don't need to take a 'second look'. UAC is a PITA compared to the systems you get on Linux and OSX, the whole thing runs like a dog even on a decently specced machine, and basically the fact that MS released it to the public in the state it was in is offensive to me. I was fairly happily surprised with XP (though I was using 98 up until 2006), but it looks like Vista is going to become another Windows ME.
Yes, I've never really liked MS, but I do admit when their products are good (I like Exchange, Outlook, SQL Server and Visual Studio..). Vista is a piece of shit compared to a real OS.
I could easily afford a high end PC if I wanted, but that doesn't mean I purposely want to waste all of its resources by running an inefficient OS. 2GB of RAM is plenty for even games, so why should the fscking OS itself need 1GB to run acceptably? I know that in a decade or so 1GB will be laughable and everyone's watch will probably have 1GB of RAM, but that's not the point. At this point in computing, there is no need for an OS to take up 512MB or whatever Vista takes up when it's running no apps.
I'm probably preaching to the converted, but just because you can afford good hardware doesn't mean you should waste it? It's like buying a car with a massive engine, but then towing around a trailer full of lead all day so that you end up going the same speed or slower than in your previous car. It's a complete waste of time.
Other OSes can look better and perform better than Vista, and all using less resources. Microsoft are just being lazy because they know current hardware can kind of balance things out. But I'd rather see the benefits of new hardware rather than have them cancelled out by crappy software.
Floppy drive? Luxury! My first computer had a device that read the holes out of punch cards - only I couldn't afford cards, so I had to make do with the holes!
Why isn't it illegal to use Windows yet then? Think of all the people out there with pwned machines who are placing a massive burden on the internet (in terms of both bandwidth and wasted time) through spam and viruses? Is it just due to the international nature of the internet that not much is done about this? Or because Microsoft is a great American success story so they don't want to cause too much hassle for them?
I don't think the ban on drugs has that much to do with what is best for society, otherwise they wouldn't let people drink alcohol either.. drunken louts cause a lot of stress for people, and alcoholism is a big problem, but drinking is still legal. Most drugs have an even more obviously negative effect than alcohol, but pot doesn't particularly. In my own country they're cracking down on smoking in general though, and I agree with that. I'd actually probably prefer if people smoked weed than tobacco since it seems to be less damaging (though do a lot of people smoke a mix of both? I have no idea)
Just because you dislike Apple (seems very evident from your comments) does not justify what they are doing. I would find it funny if they did this to Microsoft sure, though still a bit off. If they did it to Dell, PC World or the like I'd still think it is retarded.
Yes, I have used plenty of Mac desktop and laptop PCs in my time, but I don't think Jobs is God, and I don't particularly like the iPod or iPhone. I just think Apple make good quality hardware and software.
If the FSF thinks that all software should be free then they are morons. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a commercial company keeping their software closed source if they wish. Personally I think open source has a lot of benefits, but as long as I have binary drivers and applications that work on my machine then I'm happy. I'd be quite happy for more vendors and games companies to release binary versions of their products for Linux. With the drivers there isn't that much reason to keep the source closed though as most of the innovation should be taking place in hardware, while with games and other applications the innovation is generally in software.
This isn't just a "not great" strategy, it is going to waste a lot of people's time. Just because these people are Apple users does not make that okay. I don't see how buying a Mac has somehow affected my "self-worth" (and I'm sorry if you somehow feel your self worth should be lower because you don't have a Mac o_0 ). I do however like that my system has a lot of the security benefits of a Linux based system, with none of the hardware or user interface issues (think of the Gnome/KDE battle and the hassles it causes, it's certainly been annoying to me when I've tried Linux in the past and apps didn't play nice with the 'system tray' equivalent).
Yeah, guns are pretty much illegal in public in the UK, apart from special cases. Despite the fact we have no guns, I doubt these guys would do this if they expected the owner back anytime soon - you can still get beat up without a gun.
Anyway, how can you justify shooting someone just for letting down your tyres? If they were illegally on your property at the time maybe, but otherwise I don't see it happening. Perhaps I just don't realise how insane the average American actually is..
How exactly are these SUV owners going to know that having their tyres let down is an environmental statement and not just vandalism? Running around on flat tyres damages your fuel consumption, and using an electric pump to re-inflate the tyres isn't saving the planet either. Better to leave a note in their wipers or something if they want to get a point across.
These types of real life denial of service tactics are pathetic, misdirected and are only causing inconvenience rather than enlightenment (referring to both the SUV and FSF thing).
Heh, mod parent informative or funny, I didn't even think of that when I read the GP:p
(info from Wikipedia)
Movie versions:
* Original workprint version (1982, 113 minutes)
* A San Diego Sneak Preview shown only once in May 1982
* The U.S. theatrical version (1982, 116 minutes)
* The International Cut (1982, 117 minutes) also known as the "Criterion Edition" or uncut version
* The U.S. broadcast version (1986, 114 minutes)
* The Ridley Scott-approved Director's Cut (1992, 116 minutes)
* Ridley Scott's Final Cut (2007, 117 minutes), or the "25th Anniversary Edition,"
Authorised Book Sequels (by K.W. Jeter, a friend of Philip K. Dick):
* Blade Runner 2: The Edge of Human (1995)
* Blade Runner 3: Replicant Night (1996)
* Blade Runner 4: Eye and Talon (2000)
When I started writing this post I was going to have a few additional versions as a joke, but 7 is enough of a joke in itself.
I'm moderately interested in this Tron, and I'm 24. I saw it once I was really young and loved it, though I didn't really know what was going on beyond a guy being stuck inside a computer (I guess that's all that you need to know though!). I happily saw it on TV more recently and now actually know what a mainframe etc is so it made a bit more sense. The graphics are pretty cool in a retro way, and were probably amazing for the time.
I also went through a month or two of playing a lot of Armagetron - it's a great online lightcycles game with some neat ideas like 1st person camera, and server defined 'buffer' time when you run into a wall so that you can actually pull off some really impressive moves like running down a paper thin gap between 2 trails. The sound effects are also pretty authentic. The keyboard input didn't work very well for me on Linux compared to XP, it lagged, but maybe that was just my system:(
They were probably running on top of the range hardware as well, a grahics card with 1GB of RAM, system with 4GB of RAM and a Quad core processor etc.. most people accept that Vista looks nicer, but looks are not everything to those who have to use their computer every day for work.
Would have been funny if they tried to do this when Vista was first released and one of the tests was 'delete a file':p
No. Even if the end user is not malicious or stupid, the network itself will not always transmit accurately. Interference or signal degradation on the lines, or a dodgy switch can screw things up.
Slashdot Mirror
Characters with no tension or nuance, but they looked good posing, so that's all they did.
Rob Liefield created the Ginyu Force?
That also explains the budget difference.
Sure. I'd expect the budget difference has more to do with the fact that NASA built their shuttles way back when, and didn't have such advanced software tools and modern materials to use when designing and building them. To get a bigger payload up you 'simply' need a bigger rocket :p
Meh, fair point :p
Why shouldn't we respect authority? If you don't respect them, why vote them into power in the first place?
Fair point about Japan, it has a similar kind of culture to China, and is also densely populated, but it still isn't on the same scale as China. The people in Japan are still very respectful though, the culture is still totally different. I wouldn't say it's incompatible with democracy, but neither do I think western versions of 'democracy' is as great as everyone makes them out to be. As a British citizen I don't feel like I had a choice in things like whether we went to war in Iraq, or any number of issues. I have never voted either, so some will say "then you can't complain", but I honestly see very little difference between the parties, and I don't see how voting one of 3 or 4 choices gives me much of a say at all - apart from on some very specific issues which are usually not relevant to me anyway. I've never been a lover of politics, though slashdot has made me slightly more aware of politics on a world scale.
On a historical point, it's not just 'communist' china that's the cause of this restrictive and population controlling behaviour, China's rulers have been at it for thousands of years, its a cultural thing.
Indeed. They are moving towards capitalism and democracy, but you can't just suddenly shift to a totally new system overnight. The Chinese have a massive history and tradition compared to new countries like the US, which was built by a bunch of people who moved out there to be 'free'. I doubt any of those complaining about the way the Chinese government operate have much experience running even small projects, let alone a country with >1 billion population and different concepts of respect and authority (basically I don't really see any respect for authority in the western world, we're always complaining about the way things are done, and I don't see many people offering alternative solutions either).
There are a lot of things in life that waste peoples time. Like trying to get the MS Windows reimbursement when it is bundled. The sheer amount of hours that it takes means that some other poor users have to wait in queue to get support. Does this mean that I should just pay and shut up? I don't think so. Sometimes it is not only inevitable to be inconvenient, it's necessary.
That is not a waste of time, because it is using the line for what it is intended for. It is not your fault if Microsoft's support team is inefficient. If you phoned up just to rabidly spew forth a speech about open source then it would be a waste of time.
To me the only reason to use Windows is because everyone else is using it and because you can build your own machine with any parts you like. Linux is getting to the stage where it can almost compete in the usability stakes as it approaches, or has surpassed, critical mass and drivers are available for it either directly from companies or indirectly via open source enthusiasts.. there is just something about Windows that rubs me the wrong way. I thought it was improving with XP, but if MS are going to continue "trying it on" with customers by spewing out stuff like Vista, then I don't want to use their products.
I agree with you about DRM, I don't like it either, and as I probably said in my first post, I don't particularly like iPods ,iTunes and the iPhone. Okay so the iPod Nanos are mildly attractive, especially when Apple had that deal with Samsung or whoever to use cheap flash, but next time I feel the need to buy an MP3 player, there will probably be a better value MP3 player in the same class as the Nano that either offers more storage/battery life, or costs less (my iRiver had all three of those things compared to the iPods of its time..).
Anyway, I see you are being quite reasonable with your opinion of Apple users, and I suppose most of them just like Macs because they are 'cool' or something. Personally I do think they have a certain coolness, but I don't buy things just because they are cool, I buy them if I think they are good products technically speaking, and are worth the money. The Macbook Pro is something that I consider to be both of those things at the moment, though Linux is getting to a stage where my next work laptop may be running Ubuntu and WINE or a Virtualisation system.
Yeah I tend to wander off track, I just wanted to point out that not everyone uses Macs as some kind of lifestyle statement. I don't like that it took the iPod to revitalise Apple, but as long as they keep making good machines and I don't develop any reasons to dislike them. DRM is one I suppose (I didn't say there was nothing wrong with DRM did I? Personally I hate it and don't see the point since it is so easily broken), but I don't have to use iTunes just because I have a Mac - I have VLC. All the music distributors are going to come round eventually to why DRM is a bad idea (I hope). I'm still just buying CDs myself.
I still don't get the "self-worth" thing, I find it pretty hilarious that anyone would consider their computer to have anything to do with self-worth. Their ability to use said computer could be worth something, so perhaps if they find Apples easy to use that makes them feel more like a 1337 haX0r...?
lol. That's the problem with being entrenched in your beliefs. Even when something is shown to you that apparently contradicts what you believe, you manage to invent some excuse to twist things round to your own view point. Bravo. Myself, I think this logically shows that the Christian God is either a bastard or simply isn't there (you will disagree saying God's intelligence and sense of justice is far above our own, but if you had never had any beliefs and were presented all the religions and the pros and cons, you would discount Christianity because of this kind of thing):
The majority of people who ever existed never heard of Jesus or were given a chance to worship the Israelite God. I expect probably at least 95% of the people who ever lived. Even today not many people know about Jesus. If you believe that God gives them a chance anyway, then why witness to them? If you are going to make their punishment worse by witnessing to them (everyone will be judged based on the knowledge given to them), then you will just be making it worse for some people.
Secondly, why bother sending people to hell at all? Especially for an eternity. I can understand punishment for say a million years if sin really is that big a deal to a 'perfect' God - who somehow is not responsible for sin in any way, but let it come into existence anyway. *sigh* There are just so many illogicalities in all of this that it's insane I ever believed it, but that's what happens when you are brought up in a Christian home and want to fit in.
Yes I have slight reason to believe in spiritual things, but I have no experiences in life to specifically make me think that the Christian God is real, and I believe from just the way the church is so divided, and from the way I've seen many Christians act, that the church is a very human endeavour.
I just said 'sir' because I was going to say sir anyway, and then I noticed it was in your name. No I didn't notice it was meant to be 'surfer', so that can count as a whoosh *shrug*
I actually live about half a mile from the sea, good guess there! You probably think I'm American too.
Sure we know a lot of stuff at 'our level of existence', but there is a lot more to the universe than that. Certain types of discoveries may have been coming at a reducing rate since Newton, since he was involved in developing a lot of the maths and physical formulae that we still use today, but when it comes to things on a subatomic level we are still learning, and could still be learning in a few hundred years. I still think it's closed minded to assume you know the majority of what there is to know about physics in the universe. Yes we know a lot, but when it comes to things like string theory, dark energy, antimatter, room temp superconductors and other useful materials, supercapacitors or other more efficient battery tech, they're all still very experimental, and could have a massive implication for 'our level of existence'. The atomic bomb was developed using principals on an entirely different 'level' to our own, but it certainly had a big effect.
I didn't misunderstand your post, I just think you are being too cocky. Assuming you know almost everything is never the best policy, and especially when you're a scientist. As a whole, humanity is developing at an exponential rate as we collaborate on larger and larger scales, sharing more and more ideas. The basic "hit this with a club and it acclerates at a = f/m" physics are out of the way, but we by no means know everything. Perhaps not "next to nothing", we are capable of some impressive stuff - but it's laughable to assume that we know the "majority" of what there is to know about physics - what if we discover how to manipulate space-time to create useful faster than light travel? There are many areas of physics that can be explored. Just because they aren't as simple as f=ma doesn't mean they are not a large part of physics, in fact things like string theory are so all encompassing that they will probably dwarf everything that we currently know about physics if we were able to create accurate models of how the universe works at that level, especially if we were able to then manipulate matter at that level to create interesting new physical 'laws', or at least bend the current ones.
I have used it on a few different machines. One of those machines was for home use and the user installed XP on it. Another is at work, I recommended that the user get Vista but was ignored. They now want XP installed. The rest are used by people who either don't care what their computer is running, or want to feel like they are using the "latest and greatest" just because they can. I never agree with upgrading just because a new version is out.
Go get your sense of smug superiority elsewhere, please.
I have used it on I think 4 systems so far. At least one of them was slightly higher specced than my own laptop (which I dual boot with OSX/XP) but still ran like a pig. Startup and shutdown were especially noticeable. I don't particularly care if my windows are shiny and 3D, as long as I don't find them outright offensive to look at. Over the years I have tried out a few programs to customise my desktop, in Amiga OS, Windows and most recently OSX, but most of the time I'm happy with some simple colour changes.
I don't need to take a 'second look'. UAC is a PITA compared to the systems you get on Linux and OSX, the whole thing runs like a dog even on a decently specced machine, and basically the fact that MS released it to the public in the state it was in is offensive to me. I was fairly happily surprised with XP (though I was using 98 up until 2006), but it looks like Vista is going to become another Windows ME.
Yes, I've never really liked MS, but I do admit when their products are good (I like Exchange, Outlook, SQL Server and Visual Studio..). Vista is a piece of shit compared to a real OS.
Every time you use "Fixed that for you", I think you're an asshole.
There we go, fixed that for you
I could easily afford a high end PC if I wanted, but that doesn't mean I purposely want to waste all of its resources by running an inefficient OS. 2GB of RAM is plenty for even games, so why should the fscking OS itself need 1GB to run acceptably? I know that in a decade or so 1GB will be laughable and everyone's watch will probably have 1GB of RAM, but that's not the point. At this point in computing, there is no need for an OS to take up 512MB or whatever Vista takes up when it's running no apps.
I'm probably preaching to the converted, but just because you can afford good hardware doesn't mean you should waste it? It's like buying a car with a massive engine, but then towing around a trailer full of lead all day so that you end up going the same speed or slower than in your previous car. It's a complete waste of time.
Other OSes can look better and perform better than Vista, and all using less resources. Microsoft are just being lazy because they know current hardware can kind of balance things out. But I'd rather see the benefits of new hardware rather than have them cancelled out by crappy software.
Floppy drive? Luxury! My first computer had a device that read the holes out of punch cards - only I couldn't afford cards, so I had to make do with the holes!
I also think weed should be regulated. If they can find a medical use for it, okay, but they haven't.
I thought people with certain painful conditions like arthritis or whatever were prescribed it?
Just had a google and http://www.cannabis-med.org/english/patients-use.htm shows quite a few medical uses..
Why isn't it illegal to use Windows yet then? Think of all the people out there with pwned machines who are placing a massive burden on the internet (in terms of both bandwidth and wasted time) through spam and viruses? Is it just due to the international nature of the internet that not much is done about this? Or because Microsoft is a great American success story so they don't want to cause too much hassle for them?
I don't think the ban on drugs has that much to do with what is best for society, otherwise they wouldn't let people drink alcohol either.. drunken louts cause a lot of stress for people, and alcoholism is a big problem, but drinking is still legal. Most drugs have an even more obviously negative effect than alcohol, but pot doesn't particularly. In my own country they're cracking down on smoking in general though, and I agree with that. I'd actually probably prefer if people smoked weed than tobacco since it seems to be less damaging (though do a lot of people smoke a mix of both? I have no idea)
Just because you dislike Apple (seems very evident from your comments) does not justify what they are doing. I would find it funny if they did this to Microsoft sure, though still a bit off. If they did it to Dell, PC World or the like I'd still think it is retarded.
Yes, I have used plenty of Mac desktop and laptop PCs in my time, but I don't think Jobs is God, and I don't particularly like the iPod or iPhone. I just think Apple make good quality hardware and software.
If the FSF thinks that all software should be free then they are morons. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a commercial company keeping their software closed source if they wish. Personally I think open source has a lot of benefits, but as long as I have binary drivers and applications that work on my machine then I'm happy. I'd be quite happy for more vendors and games companies to release binary versions of their products for Linux. With the drivers there isn't that much reason to keep the source closed though as most of the innovation should be taking place in hardware, while with games and other applications the innovation is generally in software.
This isn't just a "not great" strategy, it is going to waste a lot of people's time. Just because these people are Apple users does not make that okay. I don't see how buying a Mac has somehow affected my "self-worth" (and I'm sorry if you somehow feel your self worth should be lower because you don't have a Mac o_0 ). I do however like that my system has a lot of the security benefits of a Linux based system, with none of the hardware or user interface issues (think of the Gnome/KDE battle and the hassles it causes, it's certainly been annoying to me when I've tried Linux in the past and apps didn't play nice with the 'system tray' equivalent).
Heh, this plan sounds like it was hatched by Twitter's non-evil twin.
Yeah, guns are pretty much illegal in public in the UK, apart from special cases. Despite the fact we have no guns, I doubt these guys would do this if they expected the owner back anytime soon - you can still get beat up without a gun.
Anyway, how can you justify shooting someone just for letting down your tyres? If they were illegally on your property at the time maybe, but otherwise I don't see it happening. Perhaps I just don't realise how insane the average American actually is..
How exactly are these SUV owners going to know that having their tyres let down is an environmental statement and not just vandalism? Running around on flat tyres damages your fuel consumption, and using an electric pump to re-inflate the tyres isn't saving the planet either. Better to leave a note in their wipers or something if they want to get a point across.
These types of real life denial of service tactics are pathetic, misdirected and are only causing inconvenience rather than enlightenment (referring to both the SUV and FSF thing).
Heh, mod parent informative or funny, I didn't even think of that when I read the GP :p
(info from Wikipedia)
Movie versions:
* Original workprint version (1982, 113 minutes)
* A San Diego Sneak Preview shown only once in May 1982
* The U.S. theatrical version (1982, 116 minutes)
* The International Cut (1982, 117 minutes) also known as the "Criterion Edition" or uncut version
* The U.S. broadcast version (1986, 114 minutes)
* The Ridley Scott-approved Director's Cut (1992, 116 minutes)
* Ridley Scott's Final Cut (2007, 117 minutes), or the "25th Anniversary Edition,"
Authorised Book Sequels (by K.W. Jeter, a friend of Philip K. Dick):
* Blade Runner 2: The Edge of Human (1995)
* Blade Runner 3: Replicant Night (1996)
* Blade Runner 4: Eye and Talon (2000)
When I started writing this post I was going to have a few additional versions as a joke, but 7 is enough of a joke in itself.
I'm moderately interested in this Tron, and I'm 24. I saw it once I was really young and loved it, though I didn't really know what was going on beyond a guy being stuck inside a computer (I guess that's all that you need to know though!). I happily saw it on TV more recently and now actually know what a mainframe etc is so it made a bit more sense. The graphics are pretty cool in a retro way, and were probably amazing for the time.
I also went through a month or two of playing a lot of Armagetron - it's a great online lightcycles game with some neat ideas like 1st person camera, and server defined 'buffer' time when you run into a wall so that you can actually pull off some really impressive moves like running down a paper thin gap between 2 trails. The sound effects are also pretty authentic. The keyboard input didn't work very well for me on Linux compared to XP, it lagged, but maybe that was just my system :(
They were probably running on top of the range hardware as well, a grahics card with 1GB of RAM, system with 4GB of RAM and a Quad core processor etc.. most people accept that Vista looks nicer, but looks are not everything to those who have to use their computer every day for work.
Would have been funny if they tried to do this when Vista was first released and one of the tests was 'delete a file' :p
No. Even if the end user is not malicious or stupid, the network itself will not always transmit accurately. Interference or signal degradation on the lines, or a dodgy switch can screw things up.
A flag can be stored as a bit, but not all bits are used as flags..
Oops! That's quite imcjaracjterostoc of me... my apologies.