Yes, it's theoretically possible that someone stole your bandwidth to download the songs that just happened to be on your computer, but that's not reasonable.
If I had a botnet, I'd rather use "conventional piracy protocols" on someone else's box and then transfer the files home via my own proprietary obfuscated encrypted backdoor protocol.
Sure, it's security through obscurity, but if it's not reasonable that this will happen (in the eyes of the court system), I have a neat way of placing the punishment of my freeloading on someone else.
Are you claiming botnet operators don't listen to music? Or they have the moral integrity to not acquire it illegally?
Visual Studio [et al.] is excellent and truly top notch
Last I checked, the only way to move the cursor one unit (line or char) to the left/r/u/d is via the arrow keys.
You can formalize a very simple idea using statically optimal search trees, entropy or what have you, but I'm not gonna. Instead I'm gonna state the simple idea:
In order to minimize total cost, the most common operations should be the cheapest.
An implication: what you do quite often is inserting text; probably you're also a touch typist, so your hands are going to rest on "asdfjkl;" (or "aoeuhtns"). I think it's safe to say that the three most common things are insertion, navigation and deletion (combine all three to get "editing").
If your hands are resting on the letter keys, it makes sense to put navigation and deletion commands on the letters keys too.
Note how (x?)emacs got that right (you hold ctrl), and how vi(m?) got that right (you press escape), and how (to my knowledge) Visual Studio still hasn't gotten that right despite having the benefits of two good role models.
(that they're bad role models in other ways is not terribly important; VS ought to imitate the good parts but not the bad parts, which is possible to a large extent).
Just so that I'm not bashing MS only: GNOME has pretty lame text input boxes as well. They try to imitate emacs key bindings, but they suck: ctrl-t doesn't swap adjacent characters, ctrl-q doesn't quote the next character, ctrl-w doesn't cut the marked region, meh! A little similarity is a dangerous thing, if I'm tricked into pressing "dangerous" keys by accidentally bating out my habitual response.
DLC is like [games with no ending], but a million times worse.
I disagree: it's not like that in all cases. See for instance Guitar Hero.
For those who don't know, (according to my understanding*) in GH you buy packs of three-or-so songs, each typically lasting between three and seven minutes. There's no continuity or connection between the track packs; they can all be played individually, in much they same way you can imagine making expansion holes (or mini-courses) for a golf game.
It's not episodic, the game itself is a complete game (I know, I have the wii version which doesn't have DLC, hence the * above). It works.
And there's so much replay value in GH3 that you don't need the DLC anyways: I've just completed TTFAF on expert, and I'm only half way on my Epic Guitar Quest (registered nerdmark).
Because forcing inherently procedural/algorithmic code into a functional paradigm makes for readable code, AMIRITE?
Of course you're wrong; you want to be.
Stop with the "functional languages are a panacea" bullshit already.
They're definitely not a panacea, and I don't think anybody claimed them to be (and if they did, I don't agree with them). Your parent definitely didn't.
What he's saying is that a particular kind of type system (let's call it the ML-like) has something that works much better than null.
For instance, say you want to factor a number; you may want to return [2, 3, 5] for 30, [] for 1 (that is, the empty list) and some non-list thing for "error". What you can do instead of returning "list of int" is to return "either a list of int or nothing at all". But, and here's the real trick: other functions can be specified as always return a list of int without it being possible to return a non-list value, thus eliminating the possibility of "wrong" null refs.
We were talking about the RIAA. Not evil my ass!;)
I'm perfectly capable of understanding what you say.
I don't like being called a kid in a derogatory tone.
I'd like if you didn't make assumptions about what I've been taught to think.
I feel offended by the notion that I think (only) what I'm taught to think.
If you want to talk badly, please at least CC me so that I know which misconceptions to correct and which correctly observed flaws in my thinking I need to fix.
No. You don't need to look at any code to determine that it's mounting an SD card with a VFAT filesystem. Just look at the card.
In principle there's nothing stopping me from designing a Hypothetical File System such that there exists a bit string S which is both a valid FAT file system and a valid HypoFS file system.
If I give different meanings to the same bit strings, I'm not handling the same file system.
So I think that examining the card only works in practice;-)
May Sarkozy get the worst possible treatment allowable under law. I hope he gets all his computer (and other electronic devices) seized and thoroughly examined.
Not out of any hate of Sarkozy, or any need for vengeance for the wrongs committed by the RIAA against innocent people.
The purpose is this: I believe that those in power should be feel the impact of their decisions.
You want greater surveillance? Fine, we'll start around your house. You want to wage a war? Fine, any of your eligible children get "volunteered" for army service. You want to give the police power to search people without a warrant? Fine, you'll get searched daily both near your home and near your workplace.
Then, maybe, just maybe, people would think twice. They tend to when there's something at stake for them.
This is really an extensions of Schneier's idea about security: the one in charge will make the decision that matches their own agenda. We the people have to make it a part of the agenda of the people in power to make sure their decisions are sane. I've proposed a way.
May this makes Sarkozy's life really shitty for a while.
There is simply not enough space in the spectrum for us to do everything that we want to do.
In an ideal world, why not use all of it for Internet connectivity, get everybody on IPv6 (if need be), hand out IP addresses to people, and then let people do whatever wireless communication they need over IP?
Are hardware tcp/ip stacks expensive? Would it get too noisy? Would it require a switch to IPv6 (and if so, what's preventing that)?
802.11* is proof of concept that you can multiplex spectrum. It kinda' sucks, but you can have two laptops talk to the same access point and things don't break. Wouldn't the same apply to all other spectrum?
but realistically they'd be better off hiring a few designers and letting them fight it out.
I heard someone say that "Nobody ever made statues of committees".
I think the money would be better spent one one good designer and what's left over on doing good usability tests and iterating the design and implementation process.
Competent Linux admins are harder to find than people with at least basic knowledge of Mac and Windows and are likely to cost more too.
It sounds like you're saying that real sysadmins cost more than tape monkeys. Or at least, lest I be accused of calling Windows/Mac admins tape monkeys, you're comparing apples to oranges.
Competent Linux admins are going to cost more than half-competent windows admins. So are competent Windows admins.
Now, a like-vs-like comparison would be interesting. I have no data. How about you?
Let's say half the managers manage programmers (three each), and the other half manages managers (two each). Assume with loss of generality that 20000 is a power of two. Then the numbers add up.
How the fuck can it take one manager per three programmers? Can't MS managers handle a wider tree than three? Apparently not, or you'd have more programmers...
Then what are the managers doing? Programming part-time?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it's theoretically possible that someone stole your bandwidth to download the songs that just happened to be on your computer, but that's not reasonable.
If I had a botnet, I'd rather use "conventional piracy protocols" on someone else's box and then transfer the files home via my own proprietary obfuscated encrypted backdoor protocol.
Sure, it's security through obscurity, but if it's not reasonable that this will happen (in the eyes of the court system), I have a neat way of placing the punishment of my freeloading on someone else.
Are you claiming botnet operators don't listen to music? Or they have the moral integrity to not acquire it illegally?
I game system. System fail. I win ;-)
Hey, that should have been a numbered list ending in "Profit!".
When you imitate the RIAA's business strategy, there's no profit step :p
Wait, is that proof by wishful citation, proof by mutual reference or proof by vehement assertion? ;-)
To get your pretty blue screens back, change the recovery settings to disable automatic rebooting: [list of steps]
Couldn't you just have posted a command I can copy-paste into my shell? Clicking around seems like a waste of time...
(no, I'm not blaming you for the faults of windows; or rather, only ironically) ;-)
Visual Studio [et al.] is excellent and truly top notch
Last I checked, the only way to move the cursor one unit (line or char) to the left/r/u/d is via the arrow keys.
You can formalize a very simple idea using statically optimal search trees, entropy or what have you, but I'm not gonna. Instead I'm gonna state the simple idea:
In order to minimize total cost, the most common operations should be the cheapest.
An implication: what you do quite often is inserting text; probably you're also a touch typist, so your hands are going to rest on "asdfjkl;" (or "aoeuhtns"). I think it's safe to say that the three most common things are insertion, navigation and deletion (combine all three to get "editing").
If your hands are resting on the letter keys, it makes sense to put navigation and deletion commands on the letters keys too.
Note how (x?)emacs got that right (you hold ctrl), and how vi(m?) got that right (you press escape), and how (to my knowledge) Visual Studio still hasn't gotten that right despite having the benefits of two good role models.
(that they're bad role models in other ways is not terribly important; VS ought to imitate the good parts but not the bad parts, which is possible to a large extent).
Just so that I'm not bashing MS only: GNOME has pretty lame text input boxes as well. They try to imitate emacs key bindings, but they suck: ctrl-t doesn't swap adjacent characters, ctrl-q doesn't quote the next character, ctrl-w doesn't cut the marked region, meh! A little similarity is a dangerous thing, if I'm tricked into pressing "dangerous" keys by accidentally bating out my habitual response.
DLC is like [games with no ending], but a million times worse.
I disagree: it's not like that in all cases. See for instance Guitar Hero.
For those who don't know, (according to my understanding*) in GH you buy packs of three-or-so songs, each typically lasting between three and seven minutes. There's no continuity or connection between the track packs; they can all be played individually, in much they same way you can imagine making expansion holes (or mini-courses) for a golf game.
It's not episodic, the game itself is a complete game (I know, I have the wii version which doesn't have DLC, hence the * above). It works.
And there's so much replay value in GH3 that you don't need the DLC anyways: I've just completed TTFAF on expert, and I'm only half way on my Epic Guitar Quest (registered nerdmark).
Because forcing inherently procedural/algorithmic code into a functional paradigm makes for readable code, AMIRITE?
Of course you're wrong; you want to be.
Stop with the "functional languages are a panacea" bullshit already.
They're definitely not a panacea, and I don't think anybody claimed them to be (and if they did, I don't agree with them). Your parent definitely didn't.
What he's saying is that a particular kind of type system (let's call it the ML-like) has something that works much better than null.
For instance, say you want to factor a number; you may want to return [2, 3, 5] for 30, [] for 1 (that is, the empty list) and some non-list thing for "error". What you can do instead of returning "list of int" is to return "either a list of int or nothing at all". But, and here's the real trick: other functions can be specified as always return a list of int without it being possible to return a non-list value, thus eliminating the possibility of "wrong" null refs.
That's the benefit.
"If we surgically or electrically modify someone's personality... that raises many questions about personal identity, (of) who we are at our core,"
Really?
If we drug up someone so as to flatten their emotional responses, don't we change their Neuroticism level (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits)? Is that not changing their personality?
We probably don't want to do that for its own sake, but suppose it happens as a side-effect.
How's this different?
If you want to talk badly, please at least CC me so that I know which misconceptions to correct and which correctly observed flaws in my thinking I need to fix.
That is to say, the average, everyday median MD IQ at ~125 is already halfway to official "genius" level.
Mensa accepts applicants with a Henmon-Nelson score (the IQ by which MDs are apparently measured according ah your link) of 132 (see http://www.us.mensa.org/Content/AML/NavigationMenu/Join/SubmitTestScores/QualifyingTestScores/QualifyingScores.htm)
I suspect Henmon-Nelson has sigma=16, based on that observation. Then ~125 is more than "just" halfway to genius.
(Although, to me the bar seems to be at ~121, not ~125. Am I looking at the wrong data or not reading the caption?)
- Jonas
No. You don't need to look at any code to determine that it's mounting an SD card with a VFAT filesystem. Just look at the card.
In principle there's nothing stopping me from designing a Hypothetical File System such that there exists a bit string S which is both a valid FAT file system and a valid HypoFS file system.
If I give different meanings to the same bit strings, I'm not handling the same file system.
So I think that examining the card only works in practice ;-)
The only companies that profit directly from copyright infringement are in China.
There are some people who'd say you spelled "Sweden" wrong.
That is, if they had a sense of humor ;-)
The officers of a corporation are protected from suits, unless the plaintiff asks a judge to "pierce the corporate evil".
Swapped them letters for you.
May Sarkozy get the worst possible treatment allowable under law. I hope he gets all his computer (and other electronic devices) seized and thoroughly examined.
Not out of any hate of Sarkozy, or any need for vengeance for the wrongs committed by the RIAA against innocent people.
The purpose is this: I believe that those in power should be feel the impact of their decisions.
You want greater surveillance? Fine, we'll start around your house. You want to wage a war? Fine, any of your eligible children get "volunteered" for army service. You want to give the police power to search people without a warrant? Fine, you'll get searched daily both near your home and near your workplace.
Then, maybe, just maybe, people would think twice. They tend to when there's something at stake for them.
This is really an extensions of Schneier's idea about security: the one in charge will make the decision that matches their own agenda. We the people have to make it a part of the agenda of the people in power to make sure their decisions are sane. I've proposed a way.
May this makes Sarkozy's life really shitty for a while.
There is simply not enough space in the spectrum for us to do everything that we want to do.
In an ideal world, why not use all of it for Internet connectivity, get everybody on IPv6 (if need be), hand out IP addresses to people, and then let people do whatever wireless communication they need over IP?
Are hardware tcp/ip stacks expensive? Would it get too noisy? Would it require a switch to IPv6 (and if so, what's preventing that)?
802.11* is proof of concept that you can multiplex spectrum. It kinda' sucks, but you can have two laptops talk to the same access point and things don't break. Wouldn't the same apply to all other spectrum?
E-911 fees
My head just asploded right there.
So let me get this straight: if your house is on fire and you have a phone and no money left on your prepaid card, you can't call the fire department?
You gotta' be fucking frigging kidding me. You Americans have to put up with that shit?
- Jonas
(Oh, well I'm from China^W Denmark, so I have to put up with all ISPs censoring TPB. Thanks, censoring dumbasses of the IFPI.)
but realistically they'd be better off hiring a few designers and letting them fight it out.
I heard someone say that "Nobody ever made statues of committees".
I think the money would be better spent one one good designer and what's left over on doing good usability tests and iterating the design and implementation process.
- Jonas
800,000 pictures of the goatse guy?
We're never gonna' give him up, never gonna' let him down...
(on SEK and SEKS) All you need to know is that one can be used to purchase the other.
Actually, that is illegal in Sweden ;-)
What does that have to do with anything? ;-)
Competent Linux admins are harder to find than people with at least basic knowledge of Mac and Windows and are likely to cost more too.
It sounds like you're saying that real sysadmins cost more than tape monkeys. Or at least, lest I be accused of calling Windows/Mac admins tape monkeys, you're comparing apples to oranges.
Competent Linux admins are going to cost more than half-competent windows admins. So are competent Windows admins.
Now, a like-vs-like comparison would be interesting. I have no data. How about you?
30,000 programmers.
20,000 managers.
I think I've found the problem...
Let's say half the managers manage programmers (three each), and the other half manages managers (two each). Assume with loss of generality that 20000 is a power of two. Then the numbers add up.
How the fuck can it take one manager per three programmers? Can't MS managers handle a wider tree than three? Apparently not, or you'd have more programmers...
Then what are the managers doing? Programming part-time?
THIS SEEMS LIKE CRAZY NUMBERS.
Most people don't notice or care about the DRM until it screws them doing something legitimate.
Like fast forwarding to the movie that's on the DVD they bought?
Like not watching the MPAA tell them to buy the movie they just bought?
- Jonas
Send 2 tea bags to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue on April 15th.
He'll just dump it in the harbor :-)
of uploading
Were those words necessary? ;-)
3 to 2 ... DRM wins. :(
It's "casting vote is for... DRM wins :("
The trick is deciding whether casting vote is that of the people, the politicians or the lobbyists.