Senator Feingold, in an interview on C-SPAN, mentioned that many corporations aren't buying votes, they're being extorted. Once politicians learned just how vulnerable Microsoft was, they started extorting money out of them.
I'm especially interested in the "Optimizing GNOME" presentation because playing these at half-size in Totem on my AMD 2100+ w/ 512MB RAM is so jittery I can't make out the words.
Monkey Island (unless you're talking about the original, which sold quite well for it's day), Dirt Track Racing, Hunting games, NASCAR, are all examples of games that are not new -- the customers who would buy them have usually played the past release. Therefore, people are playing your game, just not your newest release, but the argument that people are playing what is fun still holds.
"It's very difficult to preserve the original purity of your concept because in the end you have to create a game that (1) has to be fun, (2) can be marketed, and (3) that people will buy."
That assertion is redundent and misleading. Any game that is fun can be marketed because people will buy any game that is fun. The primary virtue of a game is it's level of fun. So unless your original concept was not fun, that assertion is false.
Perhaps what you meant is that it's hard to maintain the original purity of your game when management and marketing are putting pressure on you to make it trendy?
I can understand millionaire senators trumpeting globalization as much more than it is -- the interests of millionaires lie with the global corporations more often than with the common man -- but why in the world does the CIA see anti-globalization hackers has the enemy?
Btw, how are they simulating an attack on "The Internet" when they are all in the same state?
As far as I understand, the main reason more worm-cleaning worms aren't written is that the people who would write them find it unethical to 1) infect any machine and 2) clog more networks with the scanning the "good" worms would need to perform. This list could be used to get around #2.
You can do the very same thing under Linux. The convention is _supposed_ to be for ISVs to distribute their software such that it installs itself into/opt/vendor/application. The problem as I see it is that no one has written an intelligent script to merge, at run-time, the existing user environment with the environment needed by the application to run from it's home in/opt. As a result, ISVs take the easy way out and install everything in/usr/local because that's already in the PATH environment, the default library search path, etc.
I would argue that fun is the positive feedback that your brain recieves after successfully predicting a pattern. How many times do you hear people say, about card games, for instance, "It was fun once I got the hang of it."
The possibility is undeniable. The probability is extremely low. Watch "The Power of Nightmares." It's from the BBC. It's downloadable many places on the 'net (ironically, right now, on the front page is an article about the UK being the world leader in TV piracy).
In fact, there is little to no evidence of terrorist ambitions to build a traditional nuclear bomb or a dirty bomb. Similarly, there is no evidence of terrorist ambitions to use small pox as a weapon. Terrorists may be foolish and vile but their long term ambitions don't mesh well with nuclear destruction. They aren't so stupid that they miss this point.
I never could come to grips with creating a Department of Homeland Security when we already had a National Security Agency. It seems more like Bush had more out-of-work friends than he had positions to appoint them to.
On a side note, has anyone else heard that the entrance to the DHS building is in an alley, and the entire office space is about as big is the lobby of the CIA HQ?
It's now almost obligatory for someone to make a racing game for the GBA in which you drive your own car and/or race a in-game car against someone driving your real life car.
The top 10 results for the search "what is a gbic?" returns largely the same pages on both Google and MSN. However, MSN's search results put a product page first, where Google puts a Webopedia page first (not talking about the Web Definitions feature).
MSN's search for "What is a donkey?" yeilds very little information.
Re:Trojans = SPAM, so why won't SpamCop et al play
on
Verizon vs. Europe
·
· Score: 1
If you want to upset the market forces that push ISPs toward ignoring spammers, launch a DoS against their customer service desk. Get on IRC and start recruiting a cadre of 15 year olds whose parents don't pay close attention to the phone bill and have them repeatedly call the ISP with bogus questions -- or just keep calling to say "The machine on your network with IP ###.###.###.### is spewing viruses. Please blackhole it now."
I have to commend the Gizmodo interviewer for trying to argue politely with Bill, but he sure stinks at articulating his point. What he was trying to explain is that a patient pays for the confidentiality of his medical records whereas a content consumer pays for the content and thus should be able to use it as he sees fit.
Here's another, inexact, anology:
Because beer is useful and in demand, we allow people to sell it. However, because it has far more negative effects on children than it does on adults, we restrict people from selling beer to children.
In the same sense, protecting medical records is useful and in demand, so we should allow people to sell DRM technology to clinics. However, because DRM has far more negative evvents on content than it does on patient records, we should restrict people from selling harmful DRM technologies to content producers.
"But how could they know that CBS would be so gullible as to fall for some.doc's?"
At that level of the media, the social networks are unbelievable. eg. Brit Hume plays tennis with Bush Sr., going all the way back to when he was the ABC Whitehouse correspondent. Perhaps the social bond between the source and a producer, Dan Rather, etc, was strong enough that there was no question of their authenticity -- not knowing that their source was duped, or maybe their source's source. Ever play the game "Telephone?"
Taking your question extremely literally, they didn't have to know that CBS would fall for it. The penalty to the source if CBS caught the forgery is nil, so why not try?
Has anyone else here noticed an extreme lack of scrutiny of the source of the documents? No interview in which he's asked why he did it. He never made a public statement explaining how he created the documents. Ironic that the story about CBS not asking the tough questions is not asking any of the hard questions.
Public opinion at the time the interstate highway system was started favored rail transportation over automobiles. Industrial rail transport was cheaper and faster than it's automobile equivilent . Why didn't the government just build more (and more sophisticated) rail systems?
The interstate highway system was the government doing the bidding of the malicious auto manufacturers. The main reason there was a need for the interstate highway system is because the auto manufacturers bought and dismantled key interstate rail tracks. This eliminated any other choice for the government. They had to either build the interstate highway system or get into a cold-war-esque economic game of chicken with the auto manufacturers, with the auto manufacturers trying to buy and dismantle the rail systems faster than they were built.
What is truely absurd is that we spend more than we do on the military, all social programs other than Social Security, all regulatory enforcement (including the FBI) combined on 1 year's interest on the federal debt.
Why the government social programs vs trusting in individual philanthropy is even a debate in this country is just silly. The only thing more absurd is why _any_ of the previous half century's budgets have been signed by any President much less made it out of the Congress.
The signal to noise ratio was actually lowered by the elimination of primary candidates. That is, the noise was the GOP's rancid populist bigotry. The signal was the de facto mass media coverage of the Democratic primary candidates' platforms. Notice that the GOP began pushing for a ban on gay marraige in late 2003. Yet, it didn't make any headway until after ~March 2004 (when the media stopped covering everyone but Kerry and Bush).
Slashdot Mirror
Just part of the Palladium (or whatever it's called these days) specs, right?
Senator Feingold, in an interview on C-SPAN, mentioned that many corporations aren't buying votes, they're being extorted. Once politicians learned just how vulnerable Microsoft was, they started extorting money out of them.
I'm especially interested in the "Optimizing GNOME" presentation because playing these at half-size in Totem on my AMD 2100+ w/ 512MB RAM is so jittery I can't make out the words.
Monkey Island (unless you're talking about the original, which sold quite well for it's day), Dirt Track Racing, Hunting games, NASCAR, are all examples of games that are not new -- the customers who would buy them have usually played the past release. Therefore, people are playing your game, just not your newest release, but the argument that people are playing what is fun still holds.
Klonoa, FF X-2 I know very little about.
"It's very difficult to preserve the original purity of your concept because in the end you have to create a game that (1) has to be fun, (2) can be marketed, and (3) that people will buy."
That assertion is redundent and misleading. Any game that is fun can be marketed because people will buy any game that is fun. The primary virtue of a game is it's level of fun. So unless your original concept was not fun, that assertion is false.
Perhaps what you meant is that it's hard to maintain the original purity of your game when management and marketing are putting pressure on you to make it trendy?
I can understand millionaire senators trumpeting globalization as much more than it is -- the interests of millionaires lie with the global corporations more often than with the common man -- but why in the world does the CIA see anti-globalization hackers has the enemy?
Btw, how are they simulating an attack on "The Internet" when they are all in the same state?
As far as I understand, the main reason more worm-cleaning worms aren't written is that the people who would write them find it unethical to 1) infect any machine and 2) clog more networks with the scanning the "good" worms would need to perform. This list could be used to get around #2.
Don't forget NT4 for Alpha.
You can do the very same thing under Linux. The convention is _supposed_ to be for ISVs to distribute their software such that it installs itself into /opt/vendor/application. The problem as I see it is that no one has written an intelligent script to merge, at run-time, the existing user environment with the environment needed by the application to run from it's home in /opt. As a result, ISVs take the easy way out and install everything in /usr/local because that's already in the PATH environment, the default library search path, etc.
Torrent at Demonoid (warning: membership required).
I would argue that fun is the positive feedback that your brain recieves after successfully predicting a pattern. How many times do you hear people say, about card games, for instance, "It was fun once I got the hang of it."
The possibility is undeniable. The probability is extremely low. Watch "The Power of Nightmares." It's from the BBC. It's downloadable many places on the 'net (ironically, right now, on the front page is an article about the UK being the world leader in TV piracy).
In fact, there is little to no evidence of terrorist ambitions to build a traditional nuclear bomb or a dirty bomb. Similarly, there is no evidence of terrorist ambitions to use small pox as a weapon. Terrorists may be foolish and vile but their long term ambitions don't mesh well with nuclear destruction. They aren't so stupid that they miss this point.
I never could come to grips with creating a Department of Homeland Security when we already had a National Security Agency. It seems more like Bush had more out-of-work friends than he had positions to appoint them to.
On a side note, has anyone else heard that the entrance to the DHS building is in an alley, and the entire office space is about as big is the lobby of the CIA HQ?
It's now almost obligatory for someone to make a racing game for the GBA in which you drive your own car and/or race a in-game car against someone driving your real life car.
"Stress test" is the de facto term. The contemporary U.S. torture scandals make this topic quite tasteless to my senses.
The top 10 results for the search "what is a gbic?" returns largely the same pages on both Google and MSN. However, MSN's search results put a product page first, where Google puts a Webopedia page first (not talking about the Web Definitions feature).
MSN's search for "What is a donkey?" yeilds very little information.
Meanwhile "why is george bush an asshole?" returns nothing very useful on MSN, but Google returns this entertaining piece. (flash req)
Get a ThinkPad.
If you want to upset the market forces that push ISPs toward ignoring spammers, launch a DoS against their customer service desk. Get on IRC and start recruiting a cadre of 15 year olds whose parents don't pay close attention to the phone bill and have them repeatedly call the ISP with bogus questions -- or just keep calling to say "The machine on your network with IP ###.###.###.### is spewing viruses. Please blackhole it now."
I have to commend the Gizmodo interviewer for trying to argue politely with Bill, but he sure stinks at articulating his point. What he was trying to explain is that a patient pays for the confidentiality of his medical records whereas a content consumer pays for the content and thus should be able to use it as he sees fit.
Here's another, inexact, anology:
Because beer is useful and in demand, we allow people to sell it. However, because it has far more negative effects on children than it does on adults, we restrict people from selling beer to children.
In the same sense, protecting medical records is useful and in demand, so we should allow people to sell DRM technology to clinics. However, because DRM has far more negative evvents on content than it does on patient records, we should restrict people from selling harmful DRM technologies to content producers.
"But how could they know that CBS would be so gullible as to fall for some .doc's?"
At that level of the media, the social networks are unbelievable. eg. Brit Hume plays tennis with Bush Sr., going all the way back to when he was the ABC Whitehouse correspondent. Perhaps the social bond between the source and a producer, Dan Rather, etc, was strong enough that there was no question of their authenticity -- not knowing that their source was duped, or maybe their source's source. Ever play the game "Telephone?"
Taking your question extremely literally, they didn't have to know that CBS would fall for it. The penalty to the source if CBS caught the forgery is nil, so why not try?
Has anyone else here noticed an extreme lack of scrutiny of the source of the documents? No interview in which he's asked why he did it. He never made a public statement explaining how he created the documents. Ironic that the story about CBS not asking the tough questions is not asking any of the hard questions.
Public opinion at the time the interstate highway system was started favored rail transportation over automobiles. Industrial rail transport was cheaper and faster than it's automobile equivilent . Why didn't the government just build more (and more sophisticated) rail systems?
The interstate highway system was the government doing the bidding of the malicious auto manufacturers. The main reason there was a need for the interstate highway system is because the auto manufacturers bought and dismantled key interstate rail tracks. This eliminated any other choice for the government. They had to either build the interstate highway system or get into a cold-war-esque economic game of chicken with the auto manufacturers, with the auto manufacturers trying to buy and dismantle the rail systems faster than they were built.
What is truely absurd is that we spend more than we do on the military, all social programs other than Social Security, all regulatory enforcement (including the FBI) combined on 1 year's interest on the federal debt.
Why the government social programs vs trusting in individual philanthropy is even a debate in this country is just silly. The only thing more absurd is why _any_ of the previous half century's budgets have been signed by any President much less made it out of the Congress.
What were the generators running on?
The signal to noise ratio was actually lowered by the elimination of primary candidates. That is, the noise was the GOP's rancid populist bigotry. The signal was the de facto mass media coverage of the Democratic primary candidates' platforms. Notice that the GOP began pushing for a ban on gay marraige in late 2003. Yet, it didn't make any headway until after ~March 2004 (when the media stopped covering everyone but Kerry and Bush).