That is an incredibly selfish point of view. I agree with the grandparent. If I'm out of it and my chances aren't looking good, then I want it over, not just for my own sake, but for my loved ones as well. Every day I go on living would be another day of misery for them, not to mention hellacious hospital bills. Do you know how much a single day of intensive care costs? Try spreading that out over several years.
The drug would allow you to control yourself for a brief period, probably even commit suicide if that's what you wanted.
You do realize that the drug in question functions by altering your brain chemistry, and that any testimony or request made (such as the decision to commit suicide) while under the influence of this drug is wide open to attack by the legal system. And that's completely disregarding your previous non-responsive state. At least your "living will" can be protected and honored by virtue of being written while you were in a sane state of mind.
Hmm, well, I admit I don't tend to keep up-to-date on all of Microsoft's meanderings. It seems you're at least partially right. I just tried and can't set my clock back to 1900. I can't seem to set it back to 1970 either, though. It will go back as far as 1980.
And besides, there's a certain amount of integrity involved with compliance to a well-known standard, beyond the obvious benefits of tracking down possible bugs.
I know that when I see a website that claims W3C compliance, be it Transitional or Strict (doesn't matter), I think to myself, now here's someone who takes pride in their work, that they would take the time to ensure compliance with a documented standard.
From a developer's viewpoint, too, there's just something that feels nice about seeing "Page successfully validated! 0 Errors" on the W3C validation website.
I'm working on a personal project right now in PHP (a web application for managing bowling leagues, for the interested), and I run the W3C validator page quite often. I'm writing for W3C Strict and thus far everything's going grand.
I don't really think killer pokes are a real enough threat nowadays as to warrant that kind of attention. Though if the person I'm helping does uses a lot of BASIC, I'll be sure to add that to the list of dangers for them.:D
Note to self: buy old C-64 and POKE it. Then POKE it again...with a stick.
Sorry for the double post, I just wanted to add something.
Because going wrong is just something that computers do.
I with you on this one. This kind of mentality is something that I try to quash anytime I'm fixing someone's computer. I always tell people that beyond taking a hammer, magnet, or cattle prod to a computer, it is remarkably difficult to truly harm it. As delicate as modern computers may seem, they are remarkably resilient. It's incredibly difficult to truly lose data (provided you're willing to pay the fee at a data recovery lab, in a worst-case scenario).
I always tell people to think of viruses, malware, and spyware as an annoyance, not a plague. The motivation for patching, updating, and scanning for these things should be to prevent their spread, not to protect your own ass. Once people get into a "every man for themselves" mentality, then the malware moves beyond being an annoyance, and the writers of such malware have won.
I remember when Blaster hit. I was working at a real estate office as their only IT guy (small office, about 25 computers total, including servers). Everyone was acting like it was Armageddon. I ended up spending half of my time trying to keep people calm. Time I could have spent solving the problem. Eventually I rounded up everyone (about 10 people) to explain the situation and a give them all a crash course in virus detection and prevention. Still, that particular day I ended up staying long after everyone had left the office so I could unplug every computer from the network, remove all the instances of Blaster (some had upwards of 2000 infected files), and patch the vulnerability.
I think the real problem is that a lot of people don't view computers as flexible, ever-changing tools. They want to see them as embedded devices. Something that performs a small, finite set of tasks, always performs them in the exact same way, does not require any maintenance to function, and will work the same way 10 years from now as it does today. This simply isn't the case. I don't know if this spawns from laziness, computer illiteracy, or some combination of both. I've known people who simply don't want to take the time to get a basic understanding of how their computer works. They don't know and don't care, they just want it to perform a very limited set of tasks, and to hell with everything else. Of course, these same people are likely to buy a car and end up seizing the engine by never having the oil changed.
We can change that. All we need to do is modify this virus to delete *.doc, *.xls, and everything in the My Documents folder. Also, it should hijack IE, set his/her clock to January 1, 1900 (Y2K, anyone?), replace his/her desktop wallpaper with Goatse, and delete every link off his/her desktop and start menu.
That should hit Average Joe User hard enough to make them feel like they got raped by a train.
This personal browser tool permits users to clip text, images, and links from the pages they're browsing, save them to an online 'notebook' that is accessible from any computer, and share them with others.
I'm getting the impression that Google is gonna have to go through some heavy flak to get this one off the ground. They've already been in the spotlight for caching copyrighted images and such.
I know it's trendy to bash George Lucas and Star Wars and all, but I'm getting a little tired of hearing the same arguments against them over and over.
"George Lucas makes a lot of money, therefore he's a sell-out and evil." Well, gee, I never would have guessed that a guy should expect to make money off a venture into which he has poured 32 years of his life and millions upon millions of dollars of his own money. And let's not forget that when he was first starting out, he fully expected failure. He produced ANH with the movie studios laughing in his face. Even the actors working for him thought it was a little silly.
"George Lucas says one thing, then a few years later changes his mind." Such high standards! I know that something I said a few years ago sure doesn't hold much much water with me now. What do you expect him to do? Read the future?
"Star Wars sucks!" Wonderful. It's great that you're outspoken and all. I don't think you're gonna be able to talk Lucas out of releasing this new box set, but you're welcome to try.
So, we've had an original VHS release, a special edition release, and a DVD box set release of the original trilogy. So what if he wants to release the originals again on DVD? No one's forcing you to buy them. If it's really that big a deal to you to see the original cut vs. the remastered/re-edited versions, then buy them. If not, then don't. It's as simple as that. Don't put the blame at Lucas' doorstep.
Me, personally, I'm probably going to hold out and see what the impending 6-DVD box set will be like. I already have the special edition VHS tapes and the remastered box set. If the 6-DVD box set doesn't include the original trilogy as it was before the special edition re-editing, then I'll just buy this set that coming soon.
...the other 20% of spoofable IP addresses are reported to be in the possession of Weird Al Yankovic, who, according to US Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, is capable of spoofing damn near anything.
A full-blown investigation is under way to put an end to Weird Al's wild spoofing. Rap legend Coolio has pledged his support in these investigations.
Weird Al was unavailable for comment, but his assistant did pass along his official response, which was, "Mecha lecha hi, Mecha hiny hiny ho."
Anyways, back on topic. The day I see a mobile HDD survive an 3-story fall onto solid concrete, then I'll be impressed. And yes, I've seen it. Except for the surviving part.
You're absolutely correct, and in the case of Wikipedia, facts are what SHOULD matter. However, the whole situation has gotten caught up in such a battle of POVs that the facts are getting mucked.
It's good for a POV to be based on factual evidence, but when it comes right down to it, a POV really does need to have an opinion behind it. Otherwise, you're just stating facts, not presenting a different way of looking at things. I mean, facts are facts are facts, no matter how you look at them. Deciding how to apply or interpret those facts gives rise to POVs, and those kind of matters are almost always in contention.
That's crazy talk. Online banking isn't the way to go! The real money is in those desperate Nigerian money transfers. Hell, I've won the UK lottery at least 20 times. I should be the richest man in the world by now.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna buy some cheap Viagra and refinance my home.
I have a true issue with the concept of a "neutral" point of view. No POV is neutral. The belief that such a POV exists is born of the idea that all issues have 2 sides to them, black and white, right and wrong, and that a neutral POV can exist somewhere in the middle. This simply isn't the case.
By definition, in order to have a POV, you have to have observed and formulated an opinion of that which is in question; and any opinion is bound to be offensive to someone.
In my eyes, the only way to remain neutral in any situation is to actively avoid having a POV. "I don't know, I don't wanna know, and I don't care." Anyone that takes the time to write something on Wikipedia doesn't fall under this heading.
Dark Helmet: We can't go in there! Yogurt has the Wii! He's far too powerful! Sanders: But don't you have the Wii too, sir? Dark Helmet: Yeah, but he got the upside. I got the downside. See, there's two sides to every Wii.
I'm not sure the monthly cost is really getting that point across to the players though. Other than that, I completely agree, and in that respect, I have but one word for you: Mephisto.
Occasionally, but that's a waste of time on a much smaller scale than WoW. I don't spend all my time doing those things, as many WoW players do. Truth be told, I really should cancel my cable TV subscription, I never watch it except occaionsally for the weather.
Well, it's not always a matter of money, of course. I remember when I was little, we were asked in school "what do you want to be when you grow up?" Of course, the most popular answers were those professions that made the most money: a lawyer, a doctor, etc. I personally said lawyer. It didn't take me long to realize that I simply would not have enjoyed a career in law or medicine. Within a few years, I knew I wanted to pursue a career in computing. How much I would be making in that field never really crossed my mind until I was in college. It was simply what I wanted to do.
In general, I've noticed that people who take jobs based solely on the promised income tend to become unhappy with their work very quickly.
Slashdot Mirror
That is an incredibly selfish point of view. I agree with the grandparent. If I'm out of it and my chances aren't looking good, then I want it over, not just for my own sake, but for my loved ones as well. Every day I go on living would be another day of misery for them, not to mention hellacious hospital bills. Do you know how much a single day of intensive care costs? Try spreading that out over several years.
The drug would allow you to control yourself for a brief period, probably even commit suicide if that's what you wanted.
You do realize that the drug in question functions by altering your brain chemistry, and that any testimony or request made (such as the decision to commit suicide) while under the influence of this drug is wide open to attack by the legal system. And that's completely disregarding your previous non-responsive state. At least your "living will" can be protected and honored by virtue of being written while you were in a sane state of mind.
Done, done, and done!
Buy an iToilet!
Pretty close though. This one claims that "lukewarm fusion" is just around the corner.
Software Pirates: Awwww, please let it stay open!
:(
Apple Pirates: We are disinclined to acquiesce to your request.
Software Pirates: ???
Apple Pirates: Means no.
Software Pirates:
Hmm, well, I admit I don't tend to keep up-to-date on all of Microsoft's meanderings. It seems you're at least partially right. I just tried and can't set my clock back to 1900. I can't seem to set it back to 1970 either, though. It will go back as far as 1980.
And besides, there's a certain amount of integrity involved with compliance to a well-known standard, beyond the obvious benefits of tracking down possible bugs.
I know that when I see a website that claims W3C compliance, be it Transitional or Strict (doesn't matter), I think to myself, now here's someone who takes pride in their work, that they would take the time to ensure compliance with a documented standard.
From a developer's viewpoint, too, there's just something that feels nice about seeing "Page successfully validated! 0 Errors" on the W3C validation website.
I'm working on a personal project right now in PHP (a web application for managing bowling leagues, for the interested), and I run the W3C validator page quite often. I'm writing for W3C Strict and thus far everything's going grand.
I don't really think killer pokes are a real enough threat nowadays as to warrant that kind of attention. Though if the person I'm helping does uses a lot of BASIC, I'll be sure to add that to the list of dangers for them. :D
Note to self: buy old C-64 and POKE it. Then POKE it again...with a stick.
Sorry for the double post, I just wanted to add something.
Because going wrong is just something that computers do. I with you on this one. This kind of mentality is something that I try to quash anytime I'm fixing someone's computer. I always tell people that beyond taking a hammer, magnet, or cattle prod to a computer, it is remarkably difficult to truly harm it. As delicate as modern computers may seem, they are remarkably resilient. It's incredibly difficult to truly lose data (provided you're willing to pay the fee at a data recovery lab, in a worst-case scenario).
I always tell people to think of viruses, malware, and spyware as an annoyance, not a plague. The motivation for patching, updating, and scanning for these things should be to prevent their spread, not to protect your own ass. Once people get into a "every man for themselves" mentality, then the malware moves beyond being an annoyance, and the writers of such malware have won.
I remember when Blaster hit. I was working at a real estate office as their only IT guy (small office, about 25 computers total, including servers). Everyone was acting like it was Armageddon. I ended up spending half of my time trying to keep people calm. Time I could have spent solving the problem. Eventually I rounded up everyone (about 10 people) to explain the situation and a give them all a crash course in virus detection and prevention. Still, that particular day I ended up staying long after everyone had left the office so I could unplug every computer from the network, remove all the instances of Blaster (some had upwards of 2000 infected files), and patch the vulnerability.
I think the real problem is that a lot of people don't view computers as flexible, ever-changing tools. They want to see them as embedded devices. Something that performs a small, finite set of tasks, always performs them in the exact same way, does not require any maintenance to function, and will work the same way 10 years from now as it does today. This simply isn't the case. I don't know if this spawns from laziness, computer illiteracy, or some combination of both. I've known people who simply don't want to take the time to get a basic understanding of how their computer works. They don't know and don't care, they just want it to perform a very limited set of tasks, and to hell with everything else. Of course, these same people are likely to buy a car and end up seizing the engine by never having the oil changed.
Heh....yes, I know. And I almost mentioned in my original post that only Dell would benefit from such a situation.
We can change that. All we need to do is modify this virus to delete *.doc, *.xls, and everything in the My Documents folder. Also, it should hijack IE, set his/her clock to January 1, 1900 (Y2K, anyone?), replace his/her desktop wallpaper with Goatse, and delete every link off his/her desktop and start menu.
That should hit Average Joe User hard enough to make them feel like they got raped by a train.
This personal browser tool permits users to clip text, images, and links from the pages they're browsing, save them to an online 'notebook' that is accessible from any computer, and share them with others. I'm getting the impression that Google is gonna have to go through some heavy flak to get this one off the ground. They've already been in the spotlight for caching copyrighted images and such.
I know it's trendy to bash George Lucas and Star Wars and all, but I'm getting a little tired of hearing the same arguments against them over and over.
"George Lucas makes a lot of money, therefore he's a sell-out and evil." Well, gee, I never would have guessed that a guy should expect to make money off a venture into which he has poured 32 years of his life and millions upon millions of dollars of his own money. And let's not forget that when he was first starting out, he fully expected failure. He produced ANH with the movie studios laughing in his face. Even the actors working for him thought it was a little silly.
"George Lucas says one thing, then a few years later changes his mind." Such high standards! I know that something I said a few years ago sure doesn't hold much much water with me now. What do you expect him to do? Read the future?
"Star Wars sucks!" Wonderful. It's great that you're outspoken and all. I don't think you're gonna be able to talk Lucas out of releasing this new box set, but you're welcome to try.
So, we've had an original VHS release, a special edition release, and a DVD box set release of the original trilogy. So what if he wants to release the originals again on DVD? No one's forcing you to buy them. If it's really that big a deal to you to see the original cut vs. the remastered/re-edited versions, then buy them. If not, then don't. It's as simple as that. Don't put the blame at Lucas' doorstep.
Me, personally, I'm probably going to hold out and see what the impending 6-DVD box set will be like. I already have the special edition VHS tapes and the remastered box set. If the 6-DVD box set doesn't include the original trilogy as it was before the special edition re-editing, then I'll just buy this set that coming soon.
Well, yeah, but it's also on Running With Scissors, Pretty Fly For A Rabbi.
...the other 20% of spoofable IP addresses are reported to be in the possession of Weird Al Yankovic, who, according to US Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, is capable of spoofing damn near anything.
A full-blown investigation is under way to put an end to Weird Al's wild spoofing. Rap legend Coolio has pledged his support in these investigations.
Weird Al was unavailable for comment, but his assistant did pass along his official response, which was, "Mecha lecha hi, Mecha hiny hiny ho."
More at 11.
not in the US. Jurisdiction
You must be new here.
For future reference:
Flammable vs. Inflammable
Anyways, back on topic. The day I see a mobile HDD survive an 3-story fall onto solid concrete, then I'll be impressed. And yes, I've seen it. Except for the surviving part.
You're absolutely correct, and in the case of Wikipedia, facts are what SHOULD matter. However, the whole situation has gotten caught up in such a battle of POVs that the facts are getting mucked.
It's good for a POV to be based on factual evidence, but when it comes right down to it, a POV really does need to have an opinion behind it. Otherwise, you're just stating facts, not presenting a different way of looking at things. I mean, facts are facts are facts, no matter how you look at them. Deciding how to apply or interpret those facts gives rise to POVs, and those kind of matters are almost always in contention.
That's crazy talk. Online banking isn't the way to go! The real money is in those desperate Nigerian money transfers. Hell, I've won the UK lottery at least 20 times. I should be the richest man in the world by now.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna buy some cheap Viagra and refinance my home.
Greetings from Indy, fellow Hoosier.
I have a true issue with the concept of a "neutral" point of view. No POV is neutral. The belief that such a POV exists is born of the idea that all issues have 2 sides to them, black and white, right and wrong, and that a neutral POV can exist somewhere in the middle. This simply isn't the case.
By definition, in order to have a POV, you have to have observed and formulated an opinion of that which is in question; and any opinion is bound to be offensive to someone.
In my eyes, the only way to remain neutral in any situation is to actively avoid having a POV. "I don't know, I don't wanna know, and I don't care." Anyone that takes the time to write something on Wikipedia doesn't fall under this heading.
Title of the article: "Both Sides of Wii"
Dark Helmet: We can't go in there! Yogurt has the Wii! He's far too powerful!
Sanders: But don't you have the Wii too, sir?
Dark Helmet: Yeah, but he got the upside. I got the downside. See, there's two sides to every Wii.
I'm not sure the monthly cost is really getting that point across to the players though. Other than that, I completely agree, and in that respect, I have but one word for you: Mephisto.
Occasionally, but that's a waste of time on a much smaller scale than WoW. I don't spend all my time doing those things, as many WoW players do. Truth be told, I really should cancel my cable TV subscription, I never watch it except occaionsally for the weather.
That's never a waste of time though. That's time invested, with expected returns. :)
But there are also a lot of smart people with more versatile interests, who would do well in both law or CS.
:D
IP patent lawyers.
Well, it's not always a matter of money, of course. I remember when I was little, we were asked in school "what do you want to be when you grow up?" Of course, the most popular answers were those professions that made the most money: a lawyer, a doctor, etc. I personally said lawyer. It didn't take me long to realize that I simply would not have enjoyed a career in law or medicine. Within a few years, I knew I wanted to pursue a career in computing. How much I would be making in that field never really crossed my mind until I was in college. It was simply what I wanted to do.
In general, I've noticed that people who take jobs based solely on the promised income tend to become unhappy with their work very quickly.