It is - it's not distributed, but they direct you to type 'wine iexplore', which opens up a download/install thing.
Steam uses it, I believe - it works great.
And, no - it doesn't look to be actively developed, but I doubt he's fundamentally changing the engine and just hooking into it, so it shouldn't be too hard for a competent programmer to pick it up
If you want to sell a piece of (proprietary) software, well this is a framework that will potentially save you a lot of money. About as much or more as they're charging, they figure.
So - if you don't want to write your own graphics libraries, and don't want to go open source, but want to keep cross-platformness... you go with Qt. At least they give you the option of the dual-license, eh?
Or you could code only for Windows/Mac/Linux, write your own library, or go open source. Notice all those or's.
The veneration is for a fully-capable, nice, easy-to-use (or so I've heard) graphics library that runs across platforms with very little application code changes. And it's better than free, it's GPL. So if you're coding open-source and cross-platform (but even if you're not), you can save A LOT of time. Ever tried writing your own graphical framework while retaining all that abstraction?
Not commenting on the validity of any of it (except that I do know that Bush was pretty into coke at one time)
But regardless of how it's said, if Bush did do coke, if Limbaugh did smuggle Viagra, if Barbra did get acquitted for manslaughter on a DUI...
Then it's not libel. It happened, so it's not defamatory. It can be intended to harm or portray someone badly, but if it's true then, well, they can't get all uppity about somebody using it to attack them.
Now if somebody was making stuff up... then it's libel and you can rip their throat out.
Again, not discussing validity of any of the statements.
Eh, it was so obviously false, they'd never give you the prize anyways. Anybody apologizing for a stupid Internet game and getting sued or something for it would get tossed out on its ass
Judge: so what, just don't give him the prize and fix your stuff. Next!
Fair enough. My main point wasn't that this article was stupid and useless - by itself it would be fine, even if most people already knew.
This is the third whole article about it in the last week. One of them (the exoskeleton one) had nothing to do with Iron Man, except that the technology (in development for years now) is somewhat similar to the Iron Man guy.
And it got "Iron Man" in the title, for no substantive reason. I'm just a little suspicious is all.
Listen, the movie sounds interesting, at least.... But, come on - why is this a Slashdot story? This is the THIRD story about it... I'm not suggesting it's a horrible film, but what's the big deal? Haven't seen the movie and am really looking forward to it, just so you know... but slashdot already beat it to death, and now they have to say it was released? The stock iGoogle homepage says the same thing... and anybody who cares already knows.
Just saying. It really wasn't a flame, even if it sounded like one. But this 'story' and Slashdot's obsession with the film (such as shoehorning it into things that aren't related to it) is a little suspicious, to me.
But, come on - why is this a Slashdot story? This is the THIRD story about it - the first was the science of it, OK fine. The exoskeleton thing had nothing to do with Iron Man - it's been in development for years (I've seen videos before I ever heard of the movie).
And now this? Come on.... I'm not suggesting it's a horrible film, but what's the big deal? It's just a movie, ads on TV have been saying the same thing - the movie has been released, yes fine - but on Slashdot?
Like all urban legends, there's just enough truth to make you say 'wow, that makes sense' and ignore the silly/foolish bits.
In that particular myth, it does seem like the sort of thing NASA would do - an engineer creates a problem which is waaay overengineered and the Russians, not bothering with any of that silliness, just uses the simple solution
The fact that it's not what actually happened is irrelevant (to most people) - it could have happened, so why not believe it?
Seriously though, 'girlfriend' in this case is more of a not-incompetent user (younger person, using computers for a while, gets the basics) reacts to the system and its quirks. I don't think it's sexist at all - it could just as easily be a (male) friend who doesn't happen to be a turbonerd
I've explicitly seen them 'look the other way' with regard to music piracy:
Our Policy on Internal Worldnet Newsgroups & MP3s
Posting of MP3 files is a copyright violation. We do not patrol or monitor the public Usenet newsgroups but the local-only newsgroups (the internal Worldnet newsgroups) are our responsibility, and we may be liable for copyright issues.
As such, MP3 postings should not be placed in the members-forum.non-text newsgroup, or any Worldnet internal newsgroup, and will be removed. The members-forum.non-text newsgroup newsgroup was not intended for MP3s and should not be used for that purpose.
There are available public Usenet newsgroups dedicated for those types of posts.
From a network standpoint, it's doubtful that they're the originating host. The packets are forged, therefore anybody can forge them (because it's already not from the true source, right?). There are many, many, many routers on the Internet and any one could send a reset.
Perhaps the spillover 5% is from connections to Comcasties? If Comcrap is already willing to forge identities, why wouldn't they just break TCP and send RST's to both?
In any case, the submitter is grossly overrepresenting the Vuze tests (at least Vuze isn't overrepresenting their tests). I'd like to see more controlled tests, like against static servers on a known-good ISP.
Is a RST a normal network behavior? If I send millions of millions of packets, what's the normal RST rate? Or is it only an error condition?
here's the news
Developing service packs for operating systems like Windows XP, which is nearing its end-of-sales period, is a standard practice, and Microsoft does this for the convenience of its customers and partners. Users no longer need to install three to four years worth of updates when installing Windows XP, and partners have a new, updated baseline on which to test their applications and hardware.
Microsoft Kernel Mode Cryptographic Module (Fips.sys) is a FIPS 140-1 Level 1â"compliant, general purpose, software-based, cryptographic module in the kernel mode level of the Windows operating system. In other words, not much new. There's a few new things (this crypto driver, a black-hole router blocker, network management stuff), but it's mostly a big ol' rollup so it's not a pain in the tush to install everything.
Fail. 1. Some browsers do - at least Safari nightlies, probably Konqueror, and I think Opera nightlies. 2. Acid3 was written to fail on every current browser. Are you seriously going to argue that this standard was ratified, expecting that it would fail on every current product??
I'm all for the whole 'don't remove PB sandwiches from schools - just seperate the kids with allergies' bit. But you're just a dick... they're only airline peanuts
Go to Network Connections You either have or should create a new network connection (GSM). The number is *99***3# Security>Advanced>Settings Optional encryption Allow these protocols: All but older MS-CHAP and the bottom check box
Hope this helps.... it might be slightly different. I'm tethering a phone... but the connect is wicked fast. You probably want to up the port speed-default is sloooow, and you can up it to fullspeed.
The 'clit mouse' is the greatest thing in the history of laptop pointing. Ever.
Mainly, you don't need to lift your finger and re-move it. Plus you have the big button beneath the clicker that will scroll the contents under the pointer. Marvelous
Although, touchpads aren't so bad... especially with the side-scrolling
Hmmm. I get your point, but the fact is (outside of, say, China) it's true. If nobody trusted the telco enough to use their DNS and instead used 4.2.2.1 (I think?), this wouldn't be a problem.
Now, even the Great Firewall of China isn't awfully challenging to get around... you just put your life on the line.
I'm going to ignore the second half of your comment.
Why do you say that bipedalism is more efficient? For a completely all-purpose robot (personal assistant?) that needs to scale mountains... I might be able to get behind that.
But most robots are confined to specific environments, where some type of wheel would be more efficient and stable.
Lots of people don't realize the inherent instability of walking. It's basically controlled/broken falling. You lift up your foot to move it and shift your center of gravity in front of your stationary foot, and start to fall forward. But your other foot comes down and stops your fall.
Running is actually an easier movement to emulate, interestingly.
This robot, and all other bipedal robots, isn't really useful. It's a horrible way to move - especially if you have wheels. But it's interesting to be able to see the dynamics of how humans walk, which might help us make better prosthetics and the like.
Slashdot Mirror
It is - it's not distributed, but they direct you to type 'wine iexplore', which opens up a download/install thing.
Steam uses it, I believe - it works great.
And, no - it doesn't look to be actively developed, but I doubt he's fundamentally changing the engine and just hooking into it, so it shouldn't be too hard for a competent programmer to pick it up
Except Qt is open-source (GPL, even)
If you want to sell a piece of (proprietary) software, well this is a framework that will potentially save you a lot of money. About as much or more as they're charging, they figure.
So - if you don't want to write your own graphics libraries, and don't want to go open source, but want to keep cross-platformness... you go with Qt. At least they give you the option of the dual-license, eh?
Or you could code only for Windows/Mac/Linux, write your own library, or go open source. Notice all those or's.
The veneration is for a fully-capable, nice, easy-to-use (or so I've heard) graphics library that runs across platforms with very little application code changes. And it's better than free, it's GPL. So if you're coding open-source and cross-platform (but even if you're not), you can save A LOT of time. Ever tried writing your own graphical framework while retaining all that abstraction?
I prefer SWT, but meh. To each his own.
http://www.iol.ie/~locka/mozilla/mozilla.htm
Wine uses it. It's as standards-compliant as Gecko, which is probably enough for you (unless it's an evangelical thing)
In any case, it's better than Internet Explorer's ActiveX (where standards are concerned)
NOTE: That link's a bit old, but should be more than adequate.
Not commenting on the validity of any of it (except that I do know that Bush was pretty into coke at one time)
But regardless of how it's said, if Bush did do coke, if Limbaugh did smuggle Viagra, if Barbra did get acquitted for manslaughter on a DUI...
Then it's not libel. It happened, so it's not defamatory. It can be intended to harm or portray someone badly, but if it's true then, well, they can't get all uppity about somebody using it to attack them.
Now if somebody was making stuff up... then it's libel and you can rip their throat out.
Again, not discussing validity of any of the statements.
It also happened with (IIRC) Green Day - they had to re-record American Idiot from scratch, which made it much more political in nature.
Eh, it was so obviously false, they'd never give you the prize anyways. Anybody apologizing for a stupid Internet game and getting sued or something for it would get tossed out on its ass
Judge: so what, just don't give him the prize and fix your stuff. Next!
Fair enough. My main point wasn't that this article was stupid and useless - by itself it would be fine, even if most people already knew.
This is the third whole article about it in the last week. One of them (the exoskeleton one) had nothing to do with Iron Man, except that the technology (in development for years now) is somewhat similar to the Iron Man guy.
And it got "Iron Man" in the title, for no substantive reason. I'm just a little suspicious is all.
But, come on - why is this a Slashdot story? This is the THIRD story about it
I'm not suggesting it's a horrible film, but what's the big deal? Haven't seen the movie and am really looking forward to it, just so you know... but slashdot already beat it to death, and now they have to say it was released? The stock iGoogle homepage says the same thing... and anybody who cares already knows.
Just saying. It really wasn't a flame, even if it sounded like one. But this 'story' and Slashdot's obsession with the film (such as shoehorning it into things that aren't related to it) is a little suspicious, to me.
Listen, the movie sounds interesting, at least.
But, come on - why is this a Slashdot story? This is the THIRD story about it - the first was the science of it, OK fine. The exoskeleton thing had nothing to do with Iron Man - it's been in development for years (I've seen videos before I ever heard of the movie).
And now this? Come on.... I'm not suggesting it's a horrible film, but what's the big deal? It's just a movie, ads on TV have been saying the same thing - the movie has been released, yes fine - but on Slashdot?
Or is one of the editors and astroturfer? *gasp*
Because it makes sense.
Like all urban legends, there's just enough truth to make you say 'wow, that makes sense' and ignore the silly/foolish bits.
In that particular myth, it does seem like the sort of thing NASA would do - an engineer creates a problem which is waaay overengineered and the Russians, not bothering with any of that silliness, just uses the simple solution
The fact that it's not what actually happened is irrelevant (to most people) - it could have happened, so why not believe it?
Because every university is going to need a dedicated room to replace their fucking supercomputer every 10 years...
Chill out - in this case, it's easier than any other options. Plus it got them on Slashdot.
uh
this is slashdot. Most people (or at least a significant minority do check every 15 minutes, or have their RSS reader page them
Don't worry, I do that all the time anyway :)
Seriously though, 'girlfriend' in this case is more of a not-incompetent user (younger person, using computers for a while, gets the basics) reacts to the system and its quirks. I don't think it's sexist at all - it could just as easily be a (male) friend who doesn't happen to be a turbonerd
Common Carrier status applies only to phone service. Internet service is excluded
IANAL.
Posting of MP3 files is a copyright violation. We do not patrol or monitor the public Usenet newsgroups but the local-only newsgroups (the internal Worldnet newsgroups) are our responsibility, and we may be liable for copyright issues.
As such, MP3 postings should not be placed in the members-forum.non-text newsgroup, or any Worldnet internal newsgroup, and will be removed. The members-forum.non-text newsgroup newsgroup was not intended for MP3s and should not be used for that purpose.
There are available public Usenet newsgroups dedicated for those types of posts.
We appreciate your cooperation, and thank you for your understanding. http://care.att.net/bulletins/general.html#Newsgroups&MP3s
From a network standpoint, it's doubtful that they're the originating host. The packets are forged, therefore anybody can forge them (because it's already not from the true source, right?). There are many, many, many routers on the Internet and any one could send a reset.
Perhaps the spillover 5% is from connections to Comcasties? If Comcrap is already willing to forge identities, why wouldn't they just break TCP and send RST's to both?
In any case, the submitter is grossly overrepresenting the Vuze tests (at least Vuze isn't overrepresenting their tests). I'd like to see more controlled tests, like against static servers on a known-good ISP.
Is a RST a normal network behavior? If I send millions of millions of packets, what's the normal RST rate? Or is it only an error condition?
a standard practice, and Microsoft does this for the convenience of its customers and partners. Users no
longer need to install three to four years worth of updates when installing Windows XP, and partners have a
new, updated baseline on which to test their applications and hardware. Microsoft Kernel Mode Cryptographic Module (Fips.sys) is a FIPS 140-1
Level 1â"compliant, general purpose, software-based, cryptographic
module in the kernel mode level of the Windows operating system. In other words, not much new. There's a few new things (this crypto driver, a black-hole router blocker, network management stuff), but it's mostly a big ol' rollup so it's not a pain in the tush to install everything.
Fail.
1. Some browsers do - at least Safari nightlies, probably Konqueror, and I think Opera nightlies.
2. Acid3 was written to fail on every current browser. Are you seriously going to argue that this standard was ratified, expecting that it would fail on every current product??
Doesn't bother me. At least I'm not getting shot at by a MiG
Well, considering that almost nothing runs Vista....
No
Wow... remind me to never speak to you.
I'm all for the whole 'don't remove PB sandwiches from schools - just seperate the kids with allergies' bit. But you're just a dick... they're only airline peanuts
You should have it installed as a modem.
Go to Network Connections
You either have or should create a new network connection (GSM).
The number is *99***3#
Security>Advanced>Settings
Optional encryption
Allow these protocols: All but older MS-CHAP and the bottom check box
Hope this helps.... it might be slightly different. I'm tethering a phone... but the connect is wicked fast. You probably want to up the port speed-default is sloooow, and you can up it to fullspeed.
The 'clit mouse' is the greatest thing in the history of laptop pointing. Ever.
Mainly, you don't need to lift your finger and re-move it. Plus you have the big button beneath the clicker that will scroll the contents under the pointer. Marvelous
Although, touchpads aren't so bad... especially with the side-scrolling
Hmmm. I get your point, but the fact is (outside of, say, China) it's true. If nobody trusted the telco enough to use their DNS and instead used 4.2.2.1 (I think?), this wouldn't be a problem.
Now, even the Great Firewall of China isn't awfully challenging to get around... you just put your life on the line.
I'm going to ignore the second half of your comment.
Why do you say that bipedalism is more efficient? For a completely all-purpose robot (personal assistant?) that needs to scale mountains... I might be able to get behind that.
But most robots are confined to specific environments, where some type of wheel would be more efficient and stable.
Lots of people don't realize the inherent instability of walking. It's basically controlled/broken falling. You lift up your foot to move it and shift your center of gravity in front of your stationary foot, and start to fall forward. But your other foot comes down and stops your fall.
Running is actually an easier movement to emulate, interestingly.
This robot, and all other bipedal robots, isn't really useful. It's a horrible way to move - especially if you have wheels. But it's interesting to be able to see the dynamics of how humans walk, which might help us make better prosthetics and the like.